| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Posts: 3225
Location: The Netherlands
|
 Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2024 10:41 am Post subject: Minolta MD 100mm f/4 macro vs SMC Pentax 100mm f/4 macro |
 |
|
caspert79 wrote:
First, an overview of the image:
 overviewklein by devoscasper, on Flickr
Then, the 100% crops compared:
 MinvsPen1004macro by devoscasper, on Flickr
I would say the differences are not significant.
Of course, this is a very limited comparison.
_________________
For Sale:
Steinheil Auto D Tele Quinar 135mm f/2.8 (Exa)
ISCO Isconar 100mm f/4 (Exa)
Steinheil Cassarit 50mm f/2.8 M39 (Paxette)
I'm always interested in trading lenses! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
blotafton
Joined: 08 Aug 2013
Posts: 1636
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2024 11:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
blotafton wrote:
Really close, I'd be happy with either one.
If the focus was 100% the same the Minolta looks a tiny bit better. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Posts: 3225
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2024 12:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
| blotafton wrote: |
Really close, I'd be happy with either one.
If the focus was 100% the same the Minolta looks a tiny bit better. |
Yeah, I couldn't tell honestly. Both are sharp, as they should be!
_________________
For Sale:
Steinheil Auto D Tele Quinar 135mm f/2.8 (Exa)
ISCO Isconar 100mm f/4 (Exa)
Steinheil Cassarit 50mm f/2.8 M39 (Paxette)
I'm always interested in trading lenses! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 4087
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2024 1:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
Comparing
1) 100mm Macro lenses
2) close to their ideal 1:10 magnification
3) at f11
4) on a 50 MP class camera
5) and taking crops near the center
inevitably will not show any differences. It only proves that under those condition you may choose either lens.
If you want to see the differences between 100mm vintage macro lenses you must check them over their entire range including infinity and at least 1:2. And including wide open and f5.6.
There are differences between those 100mm vintage macro lenses, believe me 
Some are very well suited as allround/portrait/macro lenses, others not so much.
S
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Posts: 3225
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2024 1:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
| stevemark wrote: |
Comparing
1) 100mm Macro lenses
2) close to their ideal 1:10 magnification
3) at f11
4) on a 50 MP class camera
5) and taking crops near the center
inevitably will not show any differences. It only proves that under those condition you may choose either lens.
If you want to see the differences between 100mm vintage macro lenses you must check them over their entire range including infinity and at least 1:2. And including wide open and f5.6.
There are differences between those 100mm vintage macro lenses, believe me
Some are very well suited as allround/portrait/macro lenses, others not so much.
S |
Hence my comment: 'Of course, this is a very limited comparison.'
_________________
For Sale:
Steinheil Auto D Tele Quinar 135mm f/2.8 (Exa)
ISCO Isconar 100mm f/4 (Exa)
Steinheil Cassarit 50mm f/2.8 M39 (Paxette)
I'm always interested in trading lenses! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 4087
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2024 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
| caspert79 wrote: |
Hence my comment: 'Of course, this is a very limited comparison.' |
Yeah, I know!
No landscape corner crops today as we have pretty dense fog and some snow here
I have re-done it, showing center crops from the 43 MP Sony A7RII. Pretty interesting results, especially when we look at the MD-III 4.5/75-200mm which has quite visible fungus (all the other lenses are clear and clean) ...
CLICK TWICE ON THE IMAGE TO SEE ITS ORIGINAL RESOLUTION!
Comments?
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 11061
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2024 8:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
@caspert79 While Stephan has points about magnification and (diffraction) aperture, I like the color and texture of the Pentax lens. Evidence the table scuffings and the upper part of the left-hand leaf...although the leaf parts may be focused different.
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX-A ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (151B), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Posts: 3225
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2024 9:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
| stevemark wrote: |
| caspert79 wrote: |
Hence my comment: 'Of course, this is a very limited comparison.' |
Yeah, I know!
No landscape corner crops today as we have pretty dense fog and some snow here
I have re-done it, showing center crops from the 43 MP Sony A7RII. Pretty interesting results, especially when we look at the MD-III 4.5/75-200mm which has quite visible fungus (all the other lenses are clear and clean) ...
CLICK TWICE ON THE IMAGE TO SEE ITS ORIGINAL RESOLUTION!
|
What I find most interesting to see is the difference in moire between the lenses. Can we conclude that more contrast leads to a stronger moire effect?
The results of the fungus infected lens don't surprise me completely, it's incredible ow awful looking glass can sometimes produce good images. But true, stopped down the differences are small.
I'll try to do an infinity test with both lenses, and maybe add the (non-macro) Pentax-M 100/2.8 just for fun.
_________________
For Sale:
Steinheil Auto D Tele Quinar 135mm f/2.8 (Exa)
ISCO Isconar 100mm f/4 (Exa)
Steinheil Cassarit 50mm f/2.8 M39 (Paxette)
I'm always interested in trading lenses! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Posts: 3225
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2024 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
Here a (near) infinity test between the Pentax-M 100mm f/2.8, the SMC (K) 100mm f/4 macro and the Minolta MD 100mm f/4.
 comparison by devoscasper, on Flickr
Conclusions:
Pentax-M 100mm f/2.8: it does a good job @ f/2.8, although it shows some CA's at this setting. Corners very good as well, almost sharp on the A7RII 42+ mp sensor.
At f/4 and f/5.6 it has the sharpest corners out of the three lenses. No problems with CA's here.
SMC Pentax 100mm f/4 macro: this lens needs stopping down until f/8 before is produces properly sharp corners. Apparently the Pentax-M has a flatter focus field? At least at this distance.
Minolta MD 100mm f/4 macro : corner sharpness close to the Pentax-M 100/2.8 @ f/4 and f/5.6. It's corners are slightly superior to the Pentax-M @ f/8, and @f/11 the overall image quality is the best. It doesn't seem to suffer from diffraction yet, whereas the Pentax-M does. A good characteristic for a macro lens.
_________________
For Sale:
Steinheil Auto D Tele Quinar 135mm f/2.8 (Exa)
ISCO Isconar 100mm f/4 (Exa)
Steinheil Cassarit 50mm f/2.8 M39 (Paxette)
I'm always interested in trading lenses! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
connloyalist
Joined: 22 Jul 2020
Posts: 345
Location: the Netherlands
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 08, 2024 1:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
connloyalist wrote:
Somewhat older thread, but it applies.
I just took delivery of a Minolta MD 100mm f/4. This is an MDII version. Wow, I am blown away this is so good. Wide open at f/4 it is very sharp, contrasty (my focus peaking shows plenty) and I don't see any CA's. None. This is on a M4/3 camera, so I am only seeing the center of the image, but still. I think this lens just jumped to the top of my "best 100mm lenses" list.
Regards, Christine |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pabeu
Joined: 25 Apr 2018
Posts: 72
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 08, 2024 2:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
pabeu wrote:
| connloyalist wrote: |
Somewhat older thread, but it applies.
I just took delivery of a Minolta MD 100mm f/4. This is an MDII version. Wow, I am blown away this is so good. Wide open at f/4 it is very sharp, contrasty (my focus peaking shows plenty) and I don't see any CA's. None. This is on a M4/3 camera, so I am only seeing the center of the image, but still. I think this lens just jumped to the top of my "best 100mm lenses" list.
Regards, Christine |
It would be interesting if you could share your ranking of your best 100mm lenses.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
connloyalist
Joined: 22 Jul 2020
Posts: 345
Location: the Netherlands
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 08, 2024 2:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
connloyalist wrote:
| pabeu wrote: |
It would be interesting if you could share your ranking of your best 100mm lenses. |
Well, unofficial ranking of my personal favorites. But the top three in no particular order are (now) this MD 100mm f/4, the Olympus PEN-F 100mm f/3.5 and the Meyer Optik Görlitz Orestor 100mm f/2.8 (15 bladed version, mine is an Exakta mount).
The PEN-F has somewhat low contrast but I find it otherwise optically very nice. Also exceptional build quality and small. The Meyer is probably not the best lens I own in any individual category but in the right conditions I really like the results. That being said I don't actually use it that much.
Regards, C. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Posts: 3225
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 08, 2024 6:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
| connloyalist wrote: |
Somewhat older thread, but it applies.
I just took delivery of a Minolta MD 100mm f/4. This is an MDII version. Wow, I am blown away this is so good. Wide open at f/4 it is very sharp, contrasty (my focus peaking shows plenty) and I don't see any CA's. None. This is on a M4/3 camera, so I am only seeing the center of the image, but still. I think this lens just jumped to the top of my "best 100mm lenses" list.
Regards, Christine |
Yeah it is a very good macro, and it handles CA’s very well, delivering very clean images. An absolute bargain. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
