Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

f/1.2 side by side comparison
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:48 pm    Post subject: f/1.2 side by side comparison Reply with quote
I've managed to collect a handful of old f/1.2 lens and I plan to post here a side by side comparison of each and every one by using a CANON 6D – something which I missed from any of the internet sites.

The method: several snaps with each lens and then posting the one sharpest in the centre. Photos are processed with the Camera Raw, unsharpened or in any way corrected, unless explicitly mentioned.

Please mind that the test chart is plainly pinned to a cardboard and is by no mean perfectly plain. The yellow pin in the middle of the chart is only a centimetre away and already heavily blurred.

My intention is not to prove anything because I believe the beauty is in the eye of a beholder, however, my posts may help someone to make an informed buy. For the avoidance of doubt, I do not plan to sell any of these precious gems. It took me a while to collect them in a pristine condition. Well, not all of them, the Rokkor is without a diaphragm. Yes, I got screwed by an ebuyer, but honestly, why buying an f/1.2 and then shooting at f/8, lol. Anyway, I decided not to pass it on as the lens is otherwise perfectly in order.






Five MF @ f/1.2:
• Porst 55mm (PK),
• Porst 50mm (FX) (still to be converted to EOS mount,
• Revuenon 55mm TOMIOKA (M42),
• Revuenon 55mm (PK),
• Rokkor PF 58mm (M).

The first comparison using the Revuenons:
Older TOMIOKA first:



and 100% crop:



and 100% crop colour corrected:



and the newer Revuenon, most probably made by Cosina:



and 100% crop:



Last edited by dejmir on Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:50 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:49 pm    Post subject: Re: f/1.2 side by side comparison Reply with quote
dejmir wrote:
I've managed to collect a handful of old f/1.2 lens and I plan to post here a side by side comparison of each and every one by using a CANON 6D – something which I missed from any of the internet sites.

The method: several snaps with each lens and then posting the one sharpest in the centre. Photos are processed with the Camera Raw, unsharpened or in any way corrected, unless explicitly mentioned.

Please mind that the test chart is plainly pinned to a cardboard and is by no mean perfectly plain. The yellow pin in the middle of the chart is only a centimetre away and already heavily blurred.

My intention is not to prove anything because I believe the beauty is in the eye of a beholder, however, my posts may help someone to make an informed buy. For the avoidance of doubt, I do not plan to sell any of these precious gems. It took me a while to collect them in a pristine condition. Well, not all of them, the Rokkor is without a diaphragm. Yes, I got screwed by an ebuyer, but honestly, why buying an f/1.2 and then shooting at f/8, lol. Anyway, I decided not to pass it on as the lens is otherwise perfectly in order.






Five MF @ f/1.2:
• Porst 55mm (PK),
• Porst 50mm (FX) (still to be converted to EOS mount,
• Revuenon 55mm TOMIOKA (M42),
• Revuenon 55mm (PK),
• Rokkor PF 58mm (M).

The first comparison using the Revuenons:
Older TOMIOKA first:



and 100% crop:



and 100% crop colour corrected:



and the newer Revuenon, most probably made by Cosina:



and 100% crop:



PostPosted: Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well, if I look at that "test Chart", my hair stands straight up. What shoudl be taken from that "test" is the target is mounted in a way, that about nothing can be said about the result?

Please redo your setup and make sure the target is really flat and the camer alooking at an 90 degree angle towards it.

Otherwise the results would be not useful and all your time and effort wasted...


PostPosted: Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kds315* wrote:
Well, if I look at that "test Chart", my hair stands straight up. What shoudl be taken from that "test" is the target is mounted in a way, that about nothing can be said about the result?

Please redo your setup and make sure the target is really flat and the camer alooking at an 90 degree angle towards it.

Otherwise the results would be not useful and all your time and effort wasted...


+1

If tests are careless then they are not very useful, at all.

Im sure these lenses also exhibit significant focus shift so this is the first test I would perform with them. Then any other tests should be focused at the working aperture, not wide open and then stopped down.


PostPosted: Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks for the hints guys. Unfortunately, I don’t have a proper gear so set up a laboratory environment. I’m just an amateur with a 15€ tripod Smile
I don’t want to argue, but as I vaguely remember my physic classes a measuring method if repeated in the same way with different samples can oust certain measuring deficiencies. Of course, not all deficiencies can be eliminated. Anyhow, the centre crop should be representative enough to vaguely judge the resolution, colouring and CA. If I were to compare a corner resolution, and even at the perfectly plain test chart, I would probably have to re-focus due to the narrow DOF and the field curvature.
Cheers


PostPosted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I decided to continue posting only centre crops as the resized full frame pics do not bring any added value to the comparison.

100% crop from the Porst 55mm:



and 100% crop from the Rokkor:



and 100% crop from the Rokkor (colour corrected):




When I manage to adapt the Porst 50mm to EOS mount I'll post all corners crops comparison.


PostPosted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 3:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I think that the Rokkor is not focused right.


PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 11:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Very interesting, please keep posting!.

I would like to see samples with bokeh too if posible.

Great job!

This photo was taken with a Fujinon X 50mm f1.2 still not adapted to my D600.



PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 8:14 am    Post subject: 1,2 speedy standard lenses. Reply with quote
Most photographic lenses are developed and designed for the infinity distance! The optical qualities are going down in close distance.

I guess, making photos from test charts are really not proving the real optical qualities of glasses, but making the print firms of these test charts happy!! Wink


PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 11:25 am    Post subject: Re: 1,2 speedy standard lenses. Reply with quote
OPAL wrote:
Most photographic lenses are developed and designed for the infinity distance! The optical qualities are going down in close distance.


No way. Mostly quite the opposite is true.


PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 12:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Opal and Pancolart - hey, steady up there Smile

Both cases can indeed apply, the problem is knowing which philosophy the designer(s) adopted. Whilst it's clear that 'macro' lenses were/are optimised for close ranges, the situation with fast standard lenses isn't so clear. From what I've read, German designers certainly used to compute for infinity performance - at least through to the 1960s or 70s. At the same time, Japanese designers looked for 'best' performance at ranges from around 1.5/2 meters outwards.

I guess this is one situation where empirical methodologies will triumph over theoretical debate. i.e. taking photos will give the answer Very Happy


PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
scsambrook wrote:
Opal and Pancolart - hey, steady up there Smile

Both cases can indeed apply, the problem is knowing which philosophy the designer(s) adopted. Whilst it's clear that 'macro' lenses were/are optimised for close ranges, the situation with fast standard lenses isn't so clear. From what I've read, German designers certainly used to compute for infinity performance - at least through to the 1960s or 70s. At the same time, Japanese designers looked for 'best' performance at ranges from around 1.5/2 meters outwards.

I guess this is one situation where empirical methodologies will triumph over theoretical debate. i.e. taking photos will give the answer Very Happy


+1.

the only truth is reality


PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 9:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
By the way, the Rokkor looks severely yellowed; I would suggest UV treatment.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 11:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
dejmir wrote:
I decided to continue posting only centre crops as the resized full frame pics do not bring any added value to the comparison.

My interest is precisely to know : What have you learned from this kind of test ?
(edit:grammar)

Last edited by Phenix jc on Wed Mar 20, 2013 7:53 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Tue Mar 12, 2013 10:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Arkku wrote:
By the way, the Rokkor looks severely yellowed; I would suggest UV treatment.

+1 Smile UV makes it brighter Smile
simbon4o wrote:
I think that the Rokkor is not focused right.

+1 The Rokkor test shot is out of focus and angled a bit to the right.

I know how focusing with shallow DOF is. Currently working on a test chart for macro photography where DOF is even shallower.
And have a suggestion. What about a linear test chart? Something along the principle of the link at the bottom.
Placed like it, at an angle ( at much smaller one thou), but with appropriately modified content. In this way one segment of the chart will always be in focus, and the development of the blur towards a boke will be apparent. Smile
As I wrote, I am developing a similar chart, but don't have the means to print it yet, at least in your case a laser printer will be sufficient, since you are testing only the center crop of each image a A4 list of paper at the same as you test distance, or may be a bit further back, will be more than OK.
Keep up the good work.

http://kevinblackphotography.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/img_1494.jpg Link


PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 11:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here is something I did couple of days ago, it is laser printed on four pages by a very old machine with again a very old toner, so print quality 2 out of 10. And yet it clearly shows where the depth of field lays, how it develops with the exception of the interesting Moire pattern in the one/third zones up and down focus. And a portion of the image is absolutely sure to be in focus.
This pattern is not the ideal one and I will be working on improvements, but conceptually it is in the wight direction, right?


Shot with Minolta 1,7/50, apparently I deleted the Rokkor 1.4 one. Smile




PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 12:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
So depth of field is wider at the sides than in the middle of the image? Well, you learn something every day! (or at least I do)


PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
SonicScot wrote:
So depth of field is wider at the sides than in the middle of the image? Well, you learn something every day! (or at least I do)

I hope that's not the case and that it just appears so because the thicker lines at the side periphery.
I will produce other test charts and publish results to test that idea.
I am currently waiting on a friend of mines air hokey table to be able to flatten the test charts on it when switch to low vacuum Smile


PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 2:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
randreev wrote:
SonicScot wrote:
So depth of field is wider at the sides than in the middle of the image? Well, you learn something every day! (or at least I do)

I hope that's not the case and that it just appears so because the thicker lines at the side periphery.
I will produce other test charts and publish results to test that idea.
I am currently waiting on a friend of mines air hokey table to be able to flatten the test charts on it when switch to low vacuum Smile

I think you're right, it's a bit of an optical illusion. Wink


PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nice comparison! You should consider getting a Canon FD/FL 1.2. They can be modified to EF with a $150 kit.


PostPosted: Sun Mar 31, 2013 12:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Finally, I managed to adapt the Porst 50mm f/1.2 in Fujica mount to EOS. It will not hit the mirror on my 6D at 30m. I may still shave off some more material to reach the infinity focus – not that I really need that at f/1.2 Very Happy


And now to the promise I made a while ago; I post here the comparison of the centre&corner crops. As I’d suspected I had to slightly refocus when moving from the centre to the corner. Again, I'll refrain from judging the lens performance as the pictures are self-explanatory. The working method is the same as before. However, now the test chart is "perfectly flat".


Centre crops:




Bottom left corner:




Upper left corner:




Upper right corner:




Bottom right corner:




Hope you enjoy the pics Very Happy


PostPosted: Sun Mar 31, 2013 12:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
randreev wrote:
Arkku wrote:
By the way, the Rokkor looks severely yellowed; I would suggest UV treatment.

+1 Smile UV makes it brighter Smile
simbon4o wrote:
I think that the Rokkor is not focused right.

+1 The Rokkor test shot is out of focus and angled a bit to the right.

I know how focusing with shallow DOF is. Currently working on a test chart for macro photography where DOF is even shallower.
And have a suggestion. What about a linear test chart? Something along the principle of the link at the bottom.
Placed like it, at an angle ( at much smaller one thou), but with appropriately modified content. In this way one segment of the chart will always be in focus, and the development of the blur towards a boke will be apparent. Smile
As I wrote, I am developing a similar chart, but don't have the means to print it yet, at least in your case a laser printer will be sufficient, since you are testing only the center crop of each image a A4 list of paper at the same as you test distance, or may be a bit further back, will be more than OK.
Keep up the good work.

http://kevinblackphotography.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/img_1494.jpg Link


As I mentioned in my first post, the Rokkor came without iris blades. God knows what else is wrong with its optics. I confirm that the centre is properly focussed - I took the best out of the three live-preview shots. The centre sharpness is indeed mediocre (I can only guess it is only my sample); however, its corner sharpness is quite decent compared to the rest of the bunch.


PostPosted: Sun Mar 31, 2013 9:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hello.

Regarding the porst 50 f1.2 conversion.

When doing conversions it's better to do the coarse job in a mechanical way (removing material), but lenses have an extra margin using the infinity adjustment that can be very handy when doing conversions to avoid to mess with the mechanical.

In the Porst 50 case there is no need to removing material at all, it's just to attach a mount (M42-EOS or rollei (thinner) adapter), sand the plastic aperture ring and adjust the infinity setting.

If there would be the possibility to get another aperture ring or to use the aperture ring of another fujica-x lens, the Porst 50 conversion would be fully reversible.


PostPosted: Sun Mar 31, 2013 9:45 am    Post subject: Lens tests! Reply with quote
The majority of photo lenses are developed to achieve the best optical results at the "infinity" distance. Tests with any test charts in a closer distance cannot result in the best image quality, so they are to my opinion useless!

A double page of the New York Times newspaper is much cheaper as any special test chart!


PostPosted: Sun Mar 31, 2013 12:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
rafa1981 wrote:
Hello.

Regarding the porst 50 f1.2 conversion.

When doing conversions it's better to do the coarse job in a mechanical way (removing material), but lenses have an extra margin using the infinity adjustment that can be very handy when doing conversions to avoid to mess with the mechanical.

In the Porst 50 case there is no need to removing material at all, it's just to attach a mount (M42-EOS or rollei (thinner) adapter), sand the plastic aperture ring and adjust the infinity setting.

If there would be the possibility to get another aperture ring or to use the aperture ring of another fujica-x lens, the Porst 50 conversion would be fully reversible.


Good news, thanks.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2