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

Sharpest Lenses
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Jan 29, 2022 3:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ray Parkhurst wrote:
It always seems odd to me when people post a small photo, reduced perhaps 8x or more from the original pixel dimensions, in order to show how "sharp" the lens is that took it. This seems a very common practice on this and other forums. Such an image can indeed show certain qualities of the lens, such as depth of field, bokeh, distortion, and in a small way it can be indicative of certain aberrations, but it shows virtually nothing about sharpness. The images certainly can show how good a photographer someone is, how skilled they are at composition, timing, and critical focusing, and in many cases at image processing, but not lens sharpness. Perhaps folks are showing a "sharp" image and attributing that to lens performance? It baffles me, so I'd appreciate if someone could explain.


Some people worry about their high resolution images getting stolen or they are still using a 1400 baud modem to connect to the internet.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 29, 2022 3:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I will post the links to the full size images later.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
OK, here's my former post, but with the links to the full size image provided under each image.

I'd like to elaborate a bit more on my list.


Samyang 20mm T1.9

In fact, the only modern lens I currently own. Bought it 'new in box' for 219 euro on Ebay in Alpha mount. I guess it was cheap because of the strange combination Alpha mount / Cinema version. The lens is very well built, and quite sharp already wide open. It suffers from some CA's in the extremities, but these disappear when stopped down.

fotosDSC09055 by devoscasper, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/2mYQ6Ch

SMC Pentax 28mm f/3.5

This is my favorite wide angle lens. It's sharp, contrasty, built like a tank, handles flare really good and has great color saturation. For some reason, it renders blue skies particularly well.

_DSC2467 by devoscasper, on Flickr

https://www.flickr.com/gp/55691955@N05/7aQ9uo

Minolta MD 35mm f/2.8
As sharp as modern glass, but in a very compact package. An absolutely steal for the quality.

DSC03784 by devoscasper, on Flickr
https://www.flickr.com/gp/55691955@N05/B18ku5

Mamiya EF 50mm f/1.7

Came out on top of several standard lens tests I did. Very sharp and contrasty, already wide open. A drawback of this lens is the coatings: it doesn't handle direct light sources well. Still an incredibly sharp lens, which can be found very cheap. You need an adapter with built in aperture though in order to adapt it.

DSC04825 by devoscasper, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/2kxjDhv

Mamiya Sekor 50mm f/2
Another absolute steel from Mamiya. Stopped down, this lens is very, very sharp from corner to corner, with no visible CA's.
AutoMamiya50f2DSC07941 by devoscasper, on Flickr
https://flic.kr/p/2mF7ZPB

Mamiya (SX) 55mm f/1.8
Another incredibly sharp Mamiya lens. This image with wide open aperture:

AutoMamiyaSekor5518DSC08208 by devoscasper, on Flickr
https://flic.kr/p/2mKDvdv

Micro-Nikkor ai 55mm f/3.5
Very sharp and very cheap. A must have macro lens. I use it for my E-bay listings.

SB473 by devoscasper, on Flickr
https://flic.kr/p/2mZKWQa

Nikkor ai 85mm f/2 (from f/2.8 on super sharp, also for landscapes)
Underrated portrait lens. Some softness (but great detail) @f/2, but from f/2.8 and smaller this lens is razor sharp.Fits in your pocket.

Sweikhuizen074 by devoscasper, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/2kvWEUT

Tokina at-x 90mm f/2.5 macro (from wide open on).
Very sharp and contrasty from corning to corner, starting from wide open. Great bokeh at most settings. Not entirely free from CA's, but very versatile (macro/portrait/landscapes).

Bokina@25 by devoscasper, on Flickr
https://www.flickr.com/gp/55691955@N05/78396F

CZJ Sonnar MC 135/3.5
Mamiya SX 135mm f/2.8
Hexanon 135mm f/3.2 (unremarkable wide open, stopped down to f/5.6 brilliant).

Comparison 135mm lenses:
Click and scroll down:
http://forum.mflenses.com/leica-elmar-135mm-f-4-compared-with-others-t83362.html


PostPosted: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Like 1 Like 1 Like Dog Very nice examples caspert79!


PostPosted: Sat Jan 29, 2022 7:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
OK, here's my former post, but with the links to the full size image provided under each image.


Thank you for the full size images. They are very nice, and indeed quite sharp at least the ones I scrutinized. I also appreciate when folks do not oversharpen their images and then call them sharp. Yours have obviously had judicious/minimal added sharpening.

In my macro work I find sharpness much easier to define than it is for landscape and portrait photos such as these. In macro, it's usually difficult to avoid diffraction-limitation. At low mags and large apertures as in these photos, the lens is exceeding the resolution of the sensor. If the camera has an AA filter this is especially true. So in reality the lens is probably quite a bit sharper than is being shown in these photos, but it is impossible to tell.

If I am actually testing lens sharpness at low mags for whatever reason, I'll often incorporate a teleconverter to magnify the optical image from the lens so that it can be better analyzed. This is a good way to assess differences between lenses which are otherwise indistinguishable due to the limitations of the camera sensor/filter. Even when a lens is tested at an EA smaller than the DLA of the sensor, and even if that sensor has no AA filter, a teleconverter can still be useful to magnify the image so as to mitigate the Bayer demosaicing effects. By shooting with a 2xTC, then downsizing by 2x, most of the color filter effects can be eliminated, and the actual sharpness of the lens better determined.


PostPosted: Sun Jan 30, 2022 8:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ray, we should assume the writer judges the sharpness of his lens looking at his original photograph. The pic posted should be regarded as the illustration of the one he or she used to make the assesment. And yes, it is subjective and depending on the writer's experience. A 100% crop is certainly more informative for sharpness. In a portrait we know that a tight crop of the eye closest to the camera will tell a lot. Wink


PostPosted: Sun Jan 30, 2022 11:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Received my Zuiko 90/2 macro yesterday, so took it out for a quick sharpness assessment.Camera used: Sony A7Rii.

At f/2:

fotosDSC09160 by devoscasper, on Flickr

100% crop:
fotosDSC09160crop by devoscasper, on Flickr

At f/2:
fotosDSC09159 by devoscasper, on Flickr

100% crop:
fotosDSC09159crop by devoscasper, on Flickr

At f/2:
fotosDSC09153 by devoscasper, on Flickr

100% crop:
fotosDSC09153crop by devoscasper, on Flickr

At f/2:
fotosDSC09173 by devoscasper, on Flickr

100% center crop and far corner crop:
fotosDSC09173crops by devoscasper, on Flickr

Finally, a picture @ f/8:
fotosDSC09143bew by devoscasper, on Flickr

100% crop:
fotosDSC09143Crop by devoscasper, on Flickr

I think it's safe to say this lens is sharp indeed Smile


PostPosted: Sun Jan 30, 2022 1:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ray Parkhurst wrote:
It always seems odd to me when people post a small photo, reduced perhaps 8x or more from the original pixel dimensions, in order to show how "sharp" the lens is that took it. This seems a very common practice on this and other forums. Such an image can indeed show certain qualities of the lens, such as depth of field, bokeh, distortion, and in a small way it can be indicative of certain aberrations, but it shows virtually nothing about sharpness. The images certainly can show how good a photographer someone is, how skilled they are at composition, timing, and critical focusing, and in many cases at image processing, but not lens sharpness. Perhaps folks are showing a "sharp" image and attributing that to lens performance? It baffles me, so I'd appreciate if someone could explain.


I totally agree.

However, members join these forums for different reasons, and not everyone is going to use a scientific approach. I assume this topic was started just to get an idea of what members think their sharpest lenses are and put this up for discussion. Outdoor snaps are a nice discussion aid, but don't really prove much.

If this were truly a quest to find the "sharpest" lens, one would first need to qualify what that means really (format, centre, corners, macro, at infinity, most favourable conditions etc.), and evidence would need to based on an agreed lab-controlled consistent method of testing and things like MTF charts.

Personally, I'm still a little bemused. First the DSLR pixel wars, then the lens sharpness wars. Next cat-eye corner bokeh will be banned. All I can really see happening is that the modern gear is getting much larger to carry around as a result Wink

Besides, if sharpness is the overriding desired quality in a photo, 35mm FF is the wrong format to pick IMHO.


PostPosted: Sun Jan 30, 2022 2:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
Received my Zuiko 90/2 macro yesterday, so took it out for a quick sharpness assessment.Camera used: Sony A7Rii.

...

I think it's safe to say this lens is sharp indeed Smile


That does look like a very sharp lens, yes!

Virtually all of my lenses would struggle to render that "Vollenhovekade" street sign in the corner, never mind at full aperture!


PostPosted: Sun Jan 30, 2022 2:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
This is the Manual Focus sub-forum -- minimal post processing to allow comparison with other lenses.

The Gallery sub-forum are for showing what lenses can do given post processing.

Not all members know or do that.


PostPosted: Sun Jan 30, 2022 3:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Phalbert wrote:
Ray, we should assume the writer judges the sharpness of his lens looking at his original photograph. The pic posted should be regarded as the illustration of the one he or she used to make the assesment. And yes, it is subjective and depending on the writer's experience. A 100% crop is certainly more informative for sharpness. In a portrait we know that a tight crop of the eye closest to the camera will tell a lot. Wink


Yes, I agree, but...conditions are important for making those judgments. What we usually see on these forums are comparisons of Image sharpness masquerading as Lens sharpness. While it is true that a lens must be sharp to produce a sharp image, Image sharpness also depends on many non-lens factors such as sensor pitch, AA filters, focus, aperture, lighting, subject matter, processing, etc.


PostPosted: Sun Jan 30, 2022 3:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
visualopsins wrote:
This is the Manual Focus sub-forum -- minimal post processing to allow comparison with other lenses.

The Gallery sub-forum are for showing what lenses can do given post processing.

Not all members know or do that.


Most photographers are unaware of the extent their camera processes images, even those who do "raw" processing. To make real comparisons it's important to know what was done to the image both in-camera and in post, including "raw development".


PostPosted: Sun Jan 30, 2022 5:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
RokkorDoctor wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
Received my Zuiko 90/2 macro yesterday, so took it out for a quick sharpness assessment.Camera used: Sony A7Rii.

...

I think it's safe to say this lens is sharp indeed Smile


That does look like a very sharp lens, yes!

Virtually all of my lenses would struggle to render that "Vollenhovekade" street sign in the corner, never mind at full aperture!


Yes, that street sign was a lucky coincidence that I noticed after uploading.


PostPosted: Sun Jan 30, 2022 6:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I also recently acquired a long lusted after Oly 90mm f2 macro. Just a fantastic piece of kit. So good I am selling both my 90mm 2.5 Vivitar badged Tokina, and my vivitar badged Kiron 105mm 2.8.


PostPosted: Sun Jan 30, 2022 6:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Congrats to the new Zuiko 90 owners .
Sorry for me being weird, but I trust you didn't get my stolen # 102858? I won't be able to afford another one any time soon and I can't get over it. Covid has hit me hard so bills come first. Like 1 small


PostPosted: Sun Jan 30, 2022 6:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Phalbert wrote:
Congrats to the new Zuiko 90 owners .
Sorry for me being weird, but I trust you didn't get my stolen # 102858? I won't be able to afford another one any time soon and I can't get over it. Covid has hit me hard so bills come first. Like 1 small


No, 104903 here. Where did yours get stolen?


PostPosted: Sun Jan 30, 2022 7:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
jamaeolus wrote:
I also recently acquired a long lusted after Oly 90mm f2 macro. Just a fantastic piece of kit. So good I am selling both my 90mm 2.5 Vivitar badged Tokina, and my vivitar badged Kiron 105mm 2.8.


I’m planning to test both lenses (Zuiko and Bokina) in a comparison. Still have to decide if I hold on to the Bokina, the Zuiko seems to be even better. Still love the Bokina though.


PostPosted: Sun Jan 30, 2022 7:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I must admit that I was not aware of the Oly 90/2 Macro. I've never had much respect for Oly macro lenses after getting the 80mm and 35mm bellows lenses, which were quite disappointing. This 90/2 looks very promising, and fairly available as well.


PostPosted: Sun Jan 30, 2022 7:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ray Parkhurst wrote:
I must admit that I was not aware of the Oly 90/2 Macro. I've never had much respect for Oly macro lenses after getting the 80mm and 35mm bellows lenses, which were quite disappointing. This 90/2 looks very promising, and fairly available as well.


I don’t know how good your German is, but here’s a fairly extensive discussion on the Zuiko 90/2 and 50/2 macro:
https://www.digicamclub.de/showthread.php?t=12456&s=184e215362bd627973d6950345a1821d

Maybe you can use a translation app.


PostPosted: Sun Jan 30, 2022 8:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ray Parkhurst wrote:
visualopsins wrote:
This is the Manual Focus sub-forum -- minimal post processing to allow comparison with other lenses.

The Gallery sub-forum are for showing what lenses can do given post processing.

Not all members know or do that.


Most photographers are unaware of the extent their camera processes images, even those who do "raw" processing. To make real comparisons it's important to know what was done to the image both in-camera and in post, including "raw development".


My experience also. Heartily agree!


PostPosted: Mon Jan 31, 2022 4:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Where did yours get stolen?[/quote]

Namibia. But nowadays stuff travel wide and fast...


PostPosted: Sun Feb 06, 2022 4:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
If modern ones count, then the Noct would probably win. It's razor sharp at f/0.95, absolutely insane.
Other than that, the Sigma Art series are very sharp, Canon RF 28-70mm f/2 L USM might be the sharpest general zoom lens.
Modern macro lenses are very sharp across the board but I think Venus Optics makes some of the finest.


PostPosted: Mon Feb 07, 2022 3:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Fandyus wrote:
If modern ones count, then the Noct would probably win. It's razor sharp at f/0.95, absolutely insane.


How do you know the Noct is razor sharp at f/0.95?


PostPosted: Mon Feb 07, 2022 9:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ray Parkhurst wrote:
Fandyus wrote:
If modern ones count, then the Noct would probably win. It's razor sharp at f/0.95, absolutely insane.


How do you know the Noct is razor sharp at f/0.95?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCb-AIQQjkQ
skip to 7:15


PostPosted: Mon Feb 07, 2022 9:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Fandyus wrote:

As I expected, the testing was completely inadequate to determine if the lens is actually sharp at f/0.95 because the test method is not capable of measuring sharpness properly at that aperture. All the method is testing is if the Z7 camera is capable of resolving the target, so basically this was a camera test, not a lens test.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 5 of 7