| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
trifox
Joined: 14 May 2008
Posts: 3614
Location: UK
Expire: 2014-05-29
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 10:41 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
trifox wrote:
| DSG wrote: |
| trifox wrote: |
so the Canon FD 55 f1.2 is the third best among them? 
that's good news then! |
No, I think you will find that the total figures at the bottom of the chart (in four digits) clearly show the Canon FD 55mm f1.2 SSC is the best lens of the bunch, then its the Canon AL version, then the Minolta Rokkor 50mm f1.2, then the Noct-Nikkor 58mm f1.2 and then the Pentax 55mm f1.2, with the others trailing behind.
The worst of the bunch is the Konica Hexanon 57mm f1.2.
I'm supprised at how poor the Leica Noctilux performed, at second worst, given the huge premiums they ask for their lenses!
|
Cool!
So, let's celebrate the Canon's first place from this test then!
shot taken at f1.2 (I think that the bokeh is simply great ...)
tf
_________________
Flickr.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nixland
Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Posts: 577
Expire: 2012-07-29
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 23, 2011 12:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
nixland wrote:
| kuuan wrote: |
...
bloom at high contrast ( at night exposures )
coma
reflections against light and against light
...
|
Just to make sure,
bloom at high contrast = CA/Purple Fringing ?
reflections against light = Flare ?
Well, we dont know if the test is very realiable or not, but as our friend DSG said, any test data is always welcome and I want to rewrite the table in English, based on kuuan translation help
_________________
Carl Zeiss Jena: Biotar 58/2 1Q, DDR Pancolar 80/1.8 MC, Biotar 75/1.5, Biotar 10cm/2, DDR Sonnar 135/3.5 MC
Carl Zeiss C/Y: Planar 50/1.4 T*, Planar 85/1.4 T*, Planar 100/2 T*, Sonnar 135/2.8 T*
Leica: Summicron-R 35/2 v1, Summicron-R 50/2, Summilux-R 80/1.4, Summicron-R 90/2
Pentax: A 50/1.2
Minolta: Rokkor MC 58/1.2, Rokkor MC 85/1.7, Rokkor MC 100/2, MD 200/2.8
Olympus: Zuiko MC Auto-W 21/2, Zuiko 50/1.2, Zuiko MC Auto-T 85/2, Zuiko Auto-T 100/2
Nikon: Nikkor 28/2.8 Ais, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikkor 105/1.8, 300/2.8 ED (Ais)
Canon: FD 50/1.2 L, FD 85/1.2 L
Sony: 135/2.8 STF
Jupiter: 85/2 Alu
Cyclop: 85/1.5
Meyer-Optic: Trioplan 100/2.8, Orestor 100/2.8, Primotar 135/3.5
Samyang: 8/3.5 FE, 14/2.8, 85/1.4, 85/1.4 UMC
FOR SALE
Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar 10cm/2 || Carl Zeiss ZE Distagon 28/2 || Minolta Rokkor MD 35/1.8 || Rokkor-X MC 85/1.7 || Rokkor MD 85/1.7 || Olympus Zuiko MC Auto-W 21/2 || Olympus 100/2 || Nikon Nikkor 35/1.4 || Canon: FD 55/1.2 || Vivitar 90/2.5 Series 1 VMC || Tamron: 90/2.5 SP
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
berraneck
Joined: 24 May 2009
Posts: 972
Location: prague, czech republic
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 23, 2011 2:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
berraneck wrote:
according to this test, my lovely zuiko 55/1.2 would be crappy against the other.. well, despite that it makes great photos 
_________________
equipment doesn´t count, good photographs do |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kuuan
Joined: 14 Jan 2008
Posts: 4569
Location: right now: Austria
Expire: 2014-12-26
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 23, 2011 4:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
kuuan wrote:
| nixland wrote: |
Just to make sure,
bloom at high contrast = CA/Purple Fringing ?
reflections against light = Flare ?
|
'Überstrahlungen' bei hohen Kontrasten = bloom at high contrast:
I believe that this is light at borders from very bright to very dark bleeding into the dark
Reflexe bei Nacht und Gegenlichtaufnahmen = reflections when taken at night and against light = I guess that's above all flare
I hope someone else, more experienced, can correct or confirm.
note: I had made a typo earlier, it said: 'reflections against and light and against light' correct is: 'reflections at night and against light'
| DSG wrote: |
No, I think you will find that the total figures at the bottom of the chart (in four digits) clearly show the Canon FD 55mm f1.2 SSC is the best lens of the bunch, then its the Canon AL version, then the Minolta Rokkor 50mm f1.2, then the Noct-Nikkor 58mm f1.2 and then the Pentax 55mm f1.2, with the others trailing behind.
The worst of the bunch is the Konica Hexanon 57mm f1.2.
I'm supprised at how poor the Leica Noctilux performed, at second worst, given the huge premiums they ask for their lenses!
|
These total figures are obtained by multiplying the individual scores by factors between 2 and 12, weighing them to obtain a total score for how each lens performs
at the 4 applications / circumstances described at the bottom of the chart.
An other way to get to totals scores would be to simply add the individual scores.
that would make an order: Canon 625, Minolta 634, Canon Al 637, Nikkor 647, Pentax 652, Oly 659, Yashica 681, Nikkor Noct. 692, Konica 818, Leica 852 ( well, if my fast adding is correct )
Anyhow I believe that best to weigh the individual scores according to one's own application / preferences.
_________________
my photos on flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections
Last edited by kuuan on Sat Apr 23, 2011 5:51 am; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nixland
Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Posts: 577
Expire: 2012-07-29
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 23, 2011 5:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
nixland wrote:
Thanks again Kuuan.
By the way I wonder about Hexanon. I just went to this site that said Konica Hexanon 57/1.2 "said to be one of the sharpest f/1.2 legacy lenses wide open". But the test tells otherwise.
http://www.ayton.id.au/wp02/?page_id=3631
| berraneck wrote: |
| according to this test, my lovely zuiko 55/1.2 would be crappy against the other.. well, despite that it makes great photos |
Because the man behind the camera & lens that matters
Besides, all the lenses above are more than good lens.
_________________
Carl Zeiss Jena: Biotar 58/2 1Q, DDR Pancolar 80/1.8 MC, Biotar 75/1.5, Biotar 10cm/2, DDR Sonnar 135/3.5 MC
Carl Zeiss C/Y: Planar 50/1.4 T*, Planar 85/1.4 T*, Planar 100/2 T*, Sonnar 135/2.8 T*
Leica: Summicron-R 35/2 v1, Summicron-R 50/2, Summilux-R 80/1.4, Summicron-R 90/2
Pentax: A 50/1.2
Minolta: Rokkor MC 58/1.2, Rokkor MC 85/1.7, Rokkor MC 100/2, MD 200/2.8
Olympus: Zuiko MC Auto-W 21/2, Zuiko 50/1.2, Zuiko MC Auto-T 85/2, Zuiko Auto-T 100/2
Nikon: Nikkor 28/2.8 Ais, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikkor 105/1.8, 300/2.8 ED (Ais)
Canon: FD 50/1.2 L, FD 85/1.2 L
Sony: 135/2.8 STF
Jupiter: 85/2 Alu
Cyclop: 85/1.5
Meyer-Optic: Trioplan 100/2.8, Orestor 100/2.8, Primotar 135/3.5
Samyang: 8/3.5 FE, 14/2.8, 85/1.4, 85/1.4 UMC
FOR SALE
Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar 10cm/2 || Carl Zeiss ZE Distagon 28/2 || Minolta Rokkor MD 35/1.8 || Rokkor-X MC 85/1.7 || Rokkor MD 85/1.7 || Olympus Zuiko MC Auto-W 21/2 || Olympus 100/2 || Nikon Nikkor 35/1.4 || Canon: FD 55/1.2 || Vivitar 90/2.5 Series 1 VMC || Tamron: 90/2.5 SP
Last edited by nixland on Sat Apr 23, 2011 7:52 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aleksanderpolo
Joined: 24 Jan 2010
Posts: 684
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 23, 2011 6:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
aleksanderpolo wrote:
| nixland wrote: |
Thanks again Kuuan.
By the way I wonder about Hexanon. I just went to this site that said Konica Hexanon 57/1.2 "said to be one of the sharpest f/1.2 legacy lenses wide open". But the test tells otherwise. |
+1 Ask whether a specific lens is sharp or not you will probably get completely different replies from different people, depending on what lens they have used. So unless I see a measured MTF and use it myself I am no longer placing much weight on others opinion, except for those who have used many lenses.
And I am wondering how they get the number in this chart.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hinnerker
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Posts: 929
Location: Germany near Kiel
Expire: 2015-08-09
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2011 7:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
hinnerker wrote:
In summary I own/did own the following 5 Lenses..
Here is my personal ranking after compairing them
1.
Canon FD 55mm AL f/1.2
Me i love the Bokeh better compaired to second placed Non AL Version
2.
Canon FD 55mm f/1.2
3.
Yashica ML 55mm f/1.2
4.
Minolta MD Rokkor 50mm f/1.2
5.
Pentax SMC 50mm f/1.2
I do have both Canon SSC Versions converted to Canon EF Mount..
Me, i clearly prefer the AL Version, but unfortunately this lenses are not usable in a regular way on a 5D MKII without losing infinity.
or shaving the mirror. Because of the protruding fixed rear element on the AL Version, its also neccesary to get rid of the small metal piece, sitting in front of the focussing screen and holding the foam for mirror damping (if you want to get infinity)..
The depth of indentation is to high and the diameter of the rear lens is physical wider as the mirror box-part itself, so the rear part stays in physical contact/hit the inner part of the Camera - Body...
If you try to reach infinity with the AL Version and take the old FD rearpart of the lens because of the "lens holder", (i have seen this in many conversion stories, max 10 meters will be possible)..
Most modification are done this bad way.. because of the limitations i wrote..
They simply did take the old FD rear part with the rear lens holder and transplant to a new EF Adapter, because they need to use the original holder for the rear glass, which is tightly mounted on the FD part!!..
But this old part of the mount will catch the mirror at about <10 meters... and in addition to that, this is "hard limited" because of the large diameter of the FD rear part which will shorten the contacts on EF Lenses contact block on camera hole of the Canon EOS Cams if you trying to come closer to infinity !
A better way is a new machined part together with an M42 or M39 Adaptor.. the rear lens can intrude better, without shorten the contacts on the inner contact block of the camera !! An the rear glass is the only limiting factor and not the old FD Part !
OK, its a bit Off topic... but maye an interesting hint for some of you..
My conclusion after converting lots of Non AL Versions and the AL Version:
The AL Version is one of the best lenses i've ever seen in my life.. sharpness, bokeh, contrast, rendering etc.. are top of the notch..
For a long time I loved the Canon 1.2/55mm SSC Non AL as the best of the bunch, until i converted the 1.2/55mm SSC AL !!
Or like i stated in our german forum..
Le roi est mort, vive le roi !
Cheers
Henry
_________________
some light-painting lens stuff.. 
... and an EOS 5D MKII
www.digicamclub.de
Last edited by hinnerker on Tue Apr 26, 2011 10:11 am; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nixland
Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Posts: 577
Expire: 2012-07-29
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2011 9:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
nixland wrote:
| aleksanderpolo wrote: |
| nixland wrote: |
Thanks again Kuuan.
By the way I wonder about Hexanon. I just went to this site that said Konica Hexanon 57/1.2 "said to be one of the sharpest f/1.2 legacy lenses wide open". But the test tells otherwise. |
+1 Ask whether a specific lens is sharp or not you will probably get completely different replies from different people, depending on what lens they have used. So unless I see a measured MTF and use it myself I am no longer placing much weight on others opinion, except for those who have used many lenses.
And I am wondering how they get the number in this chart. |
Well, my "too-quick & naive" assumption is that the test was done by an expert or done in very measured condition So even if the test is a little bit hit and mis, the sharpness level of Hexanon, if the lens is really sharp, was not decreased drastically like in the chart.
But you right, we dont know how the tester get the number
Let's call it a 'mysterious chart' ... haha
_________________
Carl Zeiss Jena: Biotar 58/2 1Q, DDR Pancolar 80/1.8 MC, Biotar 75/1.5, Biotar 10cm/2, DDR Sonnar 135/3.5 MC
Carl Zeiss C/Y: Planar 50/1.4 T*, Planar 85/1.4 T*, Planar 100/2 T*, Sonnar 135/2.8 T*
Leica: Summicron-R 35/2 v1, Summicron-R 50/2, Summilux-R 80/1.4, Summicron-R 90/2
Pentax: A 50/1.2
Minolta: Rokkor MC 58/1.2, Rokkor MC 85/1.7, Rokkor MC 100/2, MD 200/2.8
Olympus: Zuiko MC Auto-W 21/2, Zuiko 50/1.2, Zuiko MC Auto-T 85/2, Zuiko Auto-T 100/2
Nikon: Nikkor 28/2.8 Ais, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikkor 105/1.8, 300/2.8 ED (Ais)
Canon: FD 50/1.2 L, FD 85/1.2 L
Sony: 135/2.8 STF
Jupiter: 85/2 Alu
Cyclop: 85/1.5
Meyer-Optic: Trioplan 100/2.8, Orestor 100/2.8, Primotar 135/3.5
Samyang: 8/3.5 FE, 14/2.8, 85/1.4, 85/1.4 UMC
FOR SALE
Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar 10cm/2 || Carl Zeiss ZE Distagon 28/2 || Minolta Rokkor MD 35/1.8 || Rokkor-X MC 85/1.7 || Rokkor MD 85/1.7 || Olympus Zuiko MC Auto-W 21/2 || Olympus 100/2 || Nikon Nikkor 35/1.4 || Canon: FD 55/1.2 || Vivitar 90/2.5 Series 1 VMC || Tamron: 90/2.5 SP
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nixland
Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Posts: 577
Expire: 2012-07-29
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2011 9:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
nixland wrote:
| hinnerker wrote: |
My conclusion after converting lots of Non AL Versions and the AL Version:
The AL Version is one of the best lenses i've ever seen in my life.. sharpness, bokeh, contrast, rendering etc.. are top of the notch..
For a long time I loved the Canon 1.2/55mm SSC Non AL as the best of the bunch, until i converted the 1.2/55mm SSC AL !!
Or like i stated in our german forum..
Le roi est mort, vive le roi !
Cheers
Henry |
Wow, I should try the AL then And Yashica too.
About hitting 5D mirror, I have to use live view when using my 55 non AL, beyond 1.5 - 2 meters.
By the way since the AL version is radioactive, is there any yellowing effects you've seen on the lens?
_________________
Carl Zeiss Jena: Biotar 58/2 1Q, DDR Pancolar 80/1.8 MC, Biotar 75/1.5, Biotar 10cm/2, DDR Sonnar 135/3.5 MC
Carl Zeiss C/Y: Planar 50/1.4 T*, Planar 85/1.4 T*, Planar 100/2 T*, Sonnar 135/2.8 T*
Leica: Summicron-R 35/2 v1, Summicron-R 50/2, Summilux-R 80/1.4, Summicron-R 90/2
Pentax: A 50/1.2
Minolta: Rokkor MC 58/1.2, Rokkor MC 85/1.7, Rokkor MC 100/2, MD 200/2.8
Olympus: Zuiko MC Auto-W 21/2, Zuiko 50/1.2, Zuiko MC Auto-T 85/2, Zuiko Auto-T 100/2
Nikon: Nikkor 28/2.8 Ais, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikkor 105/1.8, 300/2.8 ED (Ais)
Canon: FD 50/1.2 L, FD 85/1.2 L
Sony: 135/2.8 STF
Jupiter: 85/2 Alu
Cyclop: 85/1.5
Meyer-Optic: Trioplan 100/2.8, Orestor 100/2.8, Primotar 135/3.5
Samyang: 8/3.5 FE, 14/2.8, 85/1.4, 85/1.4 UMC
FOR SALE
Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar 10cm/2 || Carl Zeiss ZE Distagon 28/2 || Minolta Rokkor MD 35/1.8 || Rokkor-X MC 85/1.7 || Rokkor MD 85/1.7 || Olympus Zuiko MC Auto-W 21/2 || Olympus 100/2 || Nikon Nikkor 35/1.4 || Canon: FD 55/1.2 || Vivitar 90/2.5 Series 1 VMC || Tamron: 90/2.5 SP
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DSG
Joined: 04 Mar 2007
Posts: 544
Location: London, UK.
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 9:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
DSG wrote:
| nixland wrote: |
| hinnerker wrote: |
My conclusion after converting lots of Non AL Versions and the AL Version:
The AL Version is one of the best lenses i've ever seen in my life.. sharpness, bokeh, contrast, rendering etc.. are top of the notch..
For a long time I loved the Canon 1.2/55mm SSC Non AL as the best of the bunch, until i converted the 1.2/55mm SSC AL !!
Or like i stated in our german forum..
Le roi est mort, vive le roi !
Cheers
Henry |
Wow, I should try the AL then And Yashica too.
About hitting 5D mirror, I have to use live view when using my 55 non AL, beyond 1.5 - 2 meters.
By the way since the AL version is radioactive, is there any yellowing effects you've seen on the lens? |
I recommend the Canon FL 55m f1.2...Much, much easier to convert than any of the FD versions, cheaper to buy and its better than my Carl Zeiss 50mm f1.7 Planar T* when stopped down a little.
In fact its the sharpest 50(ish)mm lens I have ever used.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hinnerker
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Posts: 929
Location: Germany near Kiel
Expire: 2015-08-09
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2011 6:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
hinnerker wrote:
| nixland wrote: |
| hinnerker wrote: |
My conclusion after converting lots of Non AL Versions and the AL Version:
The AL Version is one of the best lenses i've ever seen in my life.. sharpness, bokeh, contrast, rendering etc.. are top of the notch..
For a long time I loved the Canon 1.2/55mm SSC Non AL as the best of the bunch, until i converted the 1.2/55mm SSC AL !!
Or like i stated in our german forum..
Le roi est mort, vive le roi !
Cheers
Henry |
Wow, I should try the AL then And Yashica too.
About hitting 5D mirror, I have to use live view when using my 55 non AL, beyond 1.5 - 2 meters.
By the way since the AL version is radioactive, is there any yellowing effects you've seen on the lens? |
Hello,
i can see the yellowing in the glass of the lens, but not in the pictures!
So i dont know, if its a part of the coating or because of the thorium..
Here are some links to high resolution pictures, taken with the Canon 1.2/55mm SSC Aspherical at f1.2 in sunny daylight condition.. no further processing.. taken with the old EOS 400D.. so you cant see any yellowing effect.. and keep in mind, pictures taken at f1.2 on an old crappy 400D with his very small viewfinder.... (mice cinema!.. )
http://dunkelnetz.de/images/objektivtests/canon_ef__fd__1.2_55mm_aspherical/img_2811.JPG
http://dunkelnetz.de/images/objektivtests/canon_ef__fd__1.2_55mm_aspherical/img_2822.JPG
http://dunkelnetz.de/images/objektivtests/canon_ef__fd__1.2_55mm_aspherical/img_2819.JPG
http://dunkelnetz.de/images/objektivtests/canon_ef__fd__1.2_55mm_aspherical/img_2826.JPG
http://dunkelnetz.de/images/objektivtests/canon_ef__fd__1.2_55mm_aspherical/img_2814.JPG
On a later stage, the conversion will allow to work with that Lens near infinity on a 5D.. at the moment only possible in LiveView mode of the
5D MKII
Cheers
Henry
_________________
some light-painting lens stuff..
... and an EOS 5D MKII
www.digicamclub.de |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tf
Joined: 29 Sep 2017
Posts: 162
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2018 9:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
tf wrote:
Theme up! After 7 years of pause
I've done another review - Canon FDn 50mm 1:1.2 with some tests
Still can be actual for today |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tf
Joined: 29 Sep 2017
Posts: 162
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 6:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tf wrote:
battle - Canon New FD 50mm 1:1.4 versus New FD 50mm 1:1.2 - comparison on infinity and close distances |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
