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

Mamiya EF 50mm f/1.4 vs Zuiko 50mm f/1.4
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2023 4:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I've just been comparing the three following lenses on 43 MP FF Sony A7RII (infinity / landscape):

Mamiya Sekor CS 1.4/50mm
Mamiya Sekor EF 1.4/50mm
Olympus Zuiko OM 1.4/50mm "silver nose" (SN about 450'000)

The result is clear - neither the earlier Sekro CS nor the Olympus 1.4/50 "silver nose" can match the superior infinity perfomance of the Sekor CS. I don't know how the the above measurements were made (infinity? close range?), and they don't say anything about the contrast. Visual judgement of the image files shows a very clear advantage for the Sekor EF, though.

S

EDIT
I have several Mamiya Sekor CS 1.4/50mm lenses and may look into sample variation later, but I'm pretty sure Mamiya has updated its computation when changing from the CS 1.4/50 to the EF 1.4/50mm.


PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2023 5:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I've been looking on the center right corner leaves on the tree are a lot more sharper , lots more definition, even the grass on the front has more details , probably the corners might be behind of the zuiko's , I am sure these kind of tests are not easy to do at all at infinity


PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2023 5:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Mamiya EF was also available as the Auto Revuenon MCF EF 1.4 50mm. It looks a lot like my Chinon Multi-Coated 50/1.4 (PK) as well, like from the same factory (Cosina I think) but a longer lens barrel. The Chinon is more compact.


PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2023 9:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have the revuenon version EF mount , thanks to Caspert, just as the yashica ML macro 55mm , his reviews helped me out make some great purchases (going straight for some of the best of that time lenses).
I am not sure where chinon stands comparing it with mamiya, that would be interesting to see.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2023 12:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
I've just been comparing the three following lenses on 43 MP FF Sony A7RII (infinity / landscape):

Mamiya Sekor CS 1.4/50mm
Mamiya Sekor EF 1.4/50mm
Olympus Zuiko OM 1.4/50mm "silver nose" (SN about 450'000)

The result is clear - neither the earlier Sekro CS nor the Olympus 1.4/50 "silver nose" can match the superior infinity perfomance of the Sekor CS. I don't know how the the above measurements were made (infinity? close range?), and they don't say anything about the contrast. Visual judgement of the image files shows a very clear advantage for the Sekor EF, though.

S

EDIT
I have several Mamiya Sekor CS 1.4/50mm lenses and may look into sample variation later, but I'm pretty sure Mamiya has updated its computation when changing from the CS 1.4/50 to the EF 1.4/50mm.


There is a typo CS where you mean EF I guess.
Neither Casper's samples nor the following site tests give me the impression of EF's superiority so far.

He tested about 50 standard lenses extensively on different aspects and with different test methods:

https://theothersideofbokeh.wordpress.com/2018/01/06/50-fifties-measuring-sharpness-and-contrast/
More recent test with the graphs I put in the last message. The text explains the method there. Portrait distance it says.
Drop of contrast with increasing resolution, MTF10 and 50 Ranking list: best at the top.

https://theothersideofbokeh.wordpress.com/2017/08/04/fifty-fifties/#more-365
first page of older tests showing cropped images of a landscape and his ranking lists based on the center and edges
Ranking alphabetical order, ranking number near the right per entry.
It is a more elaborate version of what is done in this forum from time to time. Some lenses less than in the test above.

Other pages on bokeh etc. More subjective of course.

I tend to agree with his rankings based on my lenses that overlap with his. Not that many do though and the serial numbers differ but I am a bit skeptical about the web praises for some serial number ranges where any other range of the same lens type is seen as inferior. Vintage lenses have way wider variations due to age and handling. Pity there is no Mamiya-Sekor SX 55mm 1.8 in his list.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2023 12:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kiddo wrote:
I have the revuenon version EF mount , thanks to Caspert, just as the yashica ML macro 55mm , his reviews helped me out make some great purchases (going straight for some of the best of that time lenses).
I am not sure where chinon stands comparing it with mamiya, that would be interesting to see.


Don't know either, but they are both 49mm filter, .45m cfd. Distance scales almost identical (Chinon/Revuenon K-mount have an extra marking at .55m but all the other numbers are the same) IR mark is oin the exact same spot. My guess is same formula for different systems. The barrel of the EF lenses seems longer but that is optical because of the lower placement of the aperture ring on the barrel. Absence of serial number on the name ring (it is on the aperture ring) points to Cosina lens manufacturing, where the EF mount version was more complicated mechanically than K-mount.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2023 2:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ernst Dinkla wrote:

I tend to agree with his rankings based on my lenses that overlap with his. Not that many do though and the serial numbers differ but I am a bit skeptical about the web praises for some serial number ranges where any other range of the same lens type is seen as inferior. Vintage lenses have way wider variations due to age and handling. Pity there is no Mamiya-Sekor SX 55mm 1.8 in his list.


I did a test earlier including the SX 55mm f/1.8. The EF 50/1.4 was slightly better (corner performance), but the SX is very good as well.
http://forum.mflenses.com/4-mamiya-standard-lenses-at-infinity-t83703.html


PostPosted: Thu Sep 21, 2023 11:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
An interesting article with some some sound comments on the origins of lens designs, not everything was first invented in Germany. Why in this thread; some speculation that the Mamiya-Sekor CS/E/EF 50mm 1.4 could have been made by Olympus. Whether the lens diagram of the Olympus patent of 1972 can be compared to the 1977 Mamiya lens diagram is another matter. The first Olympus Om G-Zuiko Auto-S 50mm 1.4 (Silver Nose) had a radioactive front element, the Mamiya is not radioactive as far as I know.

https://lenslegend.com/mamiya-sekor-55mm-f1-4-review/


PostPosted: Fri Sep 22, 2023 11:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ernst Dinkla wrote:

Neither Casper's samples nor the following site tests give me the impression of EF's superiority so far.


I have checked and compared around 100 different normal lenses - from the first Elmar 3.5/5cm to the Otus series.
I can tell you the the EF 1.4/50mm is probably the best vintage normal lens I have ever seen ("best" for me means: landscape / detail resolution). If you - without having ever used the EF 1.4/50mm - claim the contrary, well: so be it.

Ernst Dinkla wrote:
He tested about 50 standard lenses extensively on different aspects and with different test methods.


... using the original Sony A7 which is notorious for its wobbling bayonet (plastic part under the metal bayonet). You easily and reversibly can move (=tilt) the bayonet for 0.5mm. I leave it to you what that means for lens testing. I myself immediately stopped using the A7 for tests when I discovered the problem.

Ernst Dinkla wrote:
Not that many do though and the serial numbers differ but I am a bit skeptical about the web praises for some serial number ranges where any other range of the same lens type is seen as inferior. Vintage lenses have way wider variations due to age and handling. Pity there is no Mamiya-Sekor SX 55mm 1.8 in his list.


I have different versions of the Mamiya Sekor Auto 1.8/55mm, and they clearly behave differently (several samples tested). Sometimes serial number ranges do say something about performace. We know also from Nikon that they quite often did adapt their optical calculation to the actual needs of the time. Usually not advertised, but nevertheless real.

Ernst Dinkla wrote:
An interesting article with some some sound comments on the origins of lens designs, not everything was first invented in Germany. Why in this thread; some speculation that the Mamiya-Sekor CS/E/EF 50mm 1.4 could have been made by Olympus. Whether the lens diagram of the Olympus patent of 1972 can be compared to the 1977 Mamiya lens diagram is another matter. The first Olympus Om G-Zuiko Auto-S 50mm 1.4 (Silver Nose) had a radioactive front element, the Mamiya is not radioactive as far as I know.

https://lenslegend.com/mamiya-sekor-55mm-f1-4-review/


In the above article there is NO speculation at all that the Mamiya CS/E/EF 1.4/50mm could have been made by Mamyia. In fact, the Sekor CS/E/EF 1.4/50mm are not even mentioned in that article!

Mamiya certainly didn't have any need to outsorce their normal lenses. In fact Mamiya was well known for their excellent normal lenses even back in the 1960s, be it for 35mm cameras or medium format cameras.

S


PostPosted: Fri Sep 22, 2023 12:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Read under the header "Drawing parallels with the Mamiya CS 50mm f1.4" in that article https://lenslegend.com/mamiya-sekor-55mm-f1-4-review/.

Also 3 lens diagrams in that part, OM 50mm 1.4, CS 50mm 1.4, Planar 50mm 1.4

The quote there "For a short time, Mamiya also bought lenses from Olympus Optical. – http://herron.50megs.com/history.htm" is misleading as AFAIK the only lenses Mamiya ever bought from Olympus are some that were put on the very early Mamiya 6x6 folders.

To me that part in the article sounded as wild speculation and I mentioned that. Where I am to blame is that I wrote "made" which should have been "designed".


PostPosted: Sat Sep 23, 2023 8:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Another infinity comparison of both lenses:
infitinitycomparison by devoscasper, on Flickr

Note: light conditions were changing in favor of the Zuiko. Nevertheless, the superiority of the Zuiko's corners is evident (@ infinity).


PostPosted: Sat Sep 23, 2023 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
wow, this test put mamiya´s corner in very bad place, honestly; what version of zuiko do you have? thanks for the test, never seen zuiko performing as good before (not 1.4 version)


PostPosted: Sat Sep 23, 2023 4:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kiddo wrote:
wow, this test put mamiya´s corner in very bad place, honestly; what version of zuiko do you have? thanks for the test, never seen zuiko performing as good before (not 1.4 version)


This is a late version (s/n > 1.100.000), I guess that’s the latest series. According to Stephan, the silvernose should be not nearly as good. Let’s wait for the results.

There could be some variability at play when it comes to this line of Mamiya lenses. It could be that Stephan’s sample is better when it comes to corner performance. Mamiya center crops seem a bit better at most apertures in this test though. Also, my sample is very good with closeby subjects though, better than any other vintage f/1.4 I ever tried.


PostPosted: Sat Sep 23, 2023 6:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
kiddo wrote:
wow, this test put mamiya´s corner in very bad place, honestly; what version of zuiko do you have? thanks for the test, never seen zuiko performing as good before (not 1.4 version)


This is a late version (s/n > 1.100.000), I guess that’s the latest series. According to Stephan, the silvernose should be not nearly as good. Let’s wait for the results.

There could be some variability at play when it comes to this line of Mamiya lenses. It could be that Stephan’s sample is better when it comes to corner performance. Mamiya center crops seem a bit better at most apertures in this test though. Also, my sample is very good with closeby subjects though, better than any other vintage f/1.4 I ever tried.


There is as much variation in vintage OM lenses in my opinion.

While I like the nearly all metal construction of the Olympus OM 50mm 1.4 barrels, they are quite open to allow dust etc to accumulate internally. Cleaning the two last versions, type 5 and type 2-3-4, is difficult as the retaining ring of the front element has no slots. I had to make slots myself + some tools to open my 2-3-4 type lens there. Tiny flies to wipe out.
Up to the serial number 500K the front element(s) with Lanthanum/Thorium can be yellowed, better clean them with UV light.
Above serial number 700.000 multi coating is applied but later versions got another multi coating.
In the last test I gave a link for, there are two OM lenses taking part, the older Silver Nose scored better on Landscape than the +1million version, the last a bit better on portrait. Quite an arbitrary way the MTF numbers were interpreted for these two tasks though. Anyway both ended above the Mamiya EF lens.
Whether the in that test used Sony A7 camera is insufficient for testing is debatable, the original mount should be able to carry a standard lens. One might argue that the thicker filter glass on the sensor handicaps any lens on achieving good corner IQ, nevertheless the OM Silver Nose did a good job on that 24.7MP sensor, scoring second after a good modern lens.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2