View previous topic :: View next topic |
Which one would you prefere? |
lens A (file 6160) |
|
59% |
[ 19 ] |
lens B (file 6198) |
|
40% |
[ 13 ] |
|
Total Votes : 32 |
|
Author |
Message |
no-X
Joined: 19 Jul 2008 Posts: 2495 Location: Budejky, Czech Republic
|
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 12:59 pm Post subject: Simple test of two 50mm lenses - help me decide |
|
|
no-X wrote:
Here are two simple shots taken by two 50mm lenses at f/4 as an comparision of sharpness, contrast and CA.
I took more than 10 shots for each lens and picked up the sharpest for each one, so missfocus is not possible. They were processed in exactly the same way. Please don't compare the file-size - despite shot B has slightly bigger file size in jpeg format, it was in fact smaller than shot A in RAW - so file size says nothing about quality
Both are well known quality lenses (so difference is subtle) and many forum members use them, but I will not reveal it yet.
Which lens would you prefere?
lens A
lens B
_________________ (almost) complete list of Helios lenses |
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 11012 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 1:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
Tough tough tough decision! (I didn't vote yet)
'A' has more contrast, but 'B' is sharper -- see string on middle window, right side.
Also slightly different magnifications, some maybe due some to change in taking position? _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ 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 |
|
|
std
Joined: 09 Feb 2010 Posts: 1826 Location: Bulgaria
|
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
std wrote:
To me lens 'A' looks slightly sharper on border and with lower CA than lens 'B'. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ylyad
Joined: 01 Jun 2010 Posts: 476 Location: Zentralschweiz
Expire: 2013-12-05
|
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 2:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ylyad wrote:
B seems slighty sharper in the center, but softer on the edges. A is more balanced in my mind from sharpness point of view, and that's why I vote A - the differences being very subtle anyway both are definitely quite OK _________________
Camera: Fuji X-E2, Fuji X100T
MF: Canon nFD 50/1.4, Canon nFD 100/2.8, Tokina RMC 135/2.8
Tamron SP 24-48/3.5-3.8
http://www.flickr.com/derdide/
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Nesster
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 Posts: 5883 Location: NJ, USA
Expire: 2014-02-20
|
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 2:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nesster wrote:
A is more evenly sharp, B sharper in center and less so at the edge, though this is very subtle. B is a tiny bit warmer, or yellower. A maybe does shade gradations more gracefully than B, in this sample, and actually may hold onto highlights a bit further into the bright end as well.
I'd pick A on balance. _________________ -Jussi
Camera photos
Print Photographica
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 2:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
I prefer sdim6198hrokjs, it seems a little bit more resolvant, although I can not be sure that is is for real or isn't perhaps a slightest difference in the focus.
However on the practical side (=daily use) I'd consider these lenses equivalent. _________________ Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
symphonic
Joined: 23 May 2010 Posts: 550 Location: SE Europe, Croatia
|
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
symphonic wrote:
I'd pick A for slightly better contrast, but there's really almost no difference, perhaps a different scene would reveal more. _________________ Toni,
EOS 450D
CZJ Sonnar 135/3.5 MC | Pancolar 50/1.8 MC
Contax Planar 50/1.4 AEJ | Contax Sonnar 135/2.8 AEJ
Yashica ML 28/2.8 | Zuiko 28/3.5
Vivitar Series1 105/2.5 OM
AF: Tokina 12-24 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
metallaro1980
Joined: 10 Sep 2009 Posts: 385 Location: West Emilia - Fidenza (PR) 43036 - Italy
|
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
metallaro1980 wrote:
the picture sdim6198hrokjs.jpg is more warm
the sdim6160hrrmv4.jpg has a green cast in the right....
am i right?
i prefer sdim6198hrokjs.jpg _________________
Olympus OM: 28 2.8, 35 2.8, 50 1.8 Made in Japan
Contax: 50 1.4, 85 1.4
Zeiss: 135 2.0 Apo-Sonnar ZE
Leica-R: 180 3.4 Apo-Telyt-R (Leitax)
Rollei QBM: 135 2.8 Rolleinar (Leitax), 50 1.4 HFT
Canon: 50 1.8, 40 2.8
M42: Helios 50 2.0, Jupiter-37A, Jupiter-21 200 4.0
Binocular: Hensoldt & Wetzlar DF 8x30
http://andreaverdi.altervista.org/ Vivaldi lives in my lenses....
Last edited by metallaro1980 on Tue Sep 21, 2010 3:49 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
timo832000
Joined: 09 Jun 2008 Posts: 544 Location: Germany / Cologne
|
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 3:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
timo832000 wrote:
look at the moiree in pic B so I think B is sharper.
Did you compare Leica Summicron 50 with Zeiss Planar 50 ?? _________________ I love Leica ! But I need Pentax |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Arkku
Joined: 28 Feb 2007 Posts: 1416 Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 5:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Arkku wrote:
Orio wrote: |
I prefer sdim6198hrokjs, it seems a little bit more resolvant, although I can not be sure that is is for real or isn't perhaps a slightest difference in the focus.
However on the practical side (=daily use) I'd consider these lenses equivalent. |
I came to the same conclusion, both on the lens and the fact that these are practically equivalent (based on this comparison). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
aleksanderpolo
Joined: 24 Jan 2010 Posts: 684
|
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 6:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
aleksanderpolo wrote:
I picked A, and am I seeing more distortion on B or am I "seeing things"? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BRunner
Joined: 29 Jul 2009 Posts: 705 Location: Czech Republic
|
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
BRunner wrote:
Both lens are very close... But I slightly prefer lens A because of lower CA. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MF-addicted
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 Posts: 803 Location: Stuttgart (Germany)
|
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 6:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
MF-addicted wrote:
BRunner wrote: |
Both lens are very close... But I slightly prefer lens A because of lower CA. |
+1
Pancolar-Planar sisters ? _________________
EOS 5D MK II, EOS 5D Classic, EOS 400D --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Canon FD to EOS converted: FD 1,4/24 asph, FD 2,8/300 L
Carl Zeiss Jena:Pancolar 2/50, black Biotar 2/5,8cm 17bl., slim Biotar 1,5/7,5cm 18bl., Pancolar 1,8/80mm, Sonnar 3,5/135, Triotar 4/135
Carl Zeiss: Distagon 4/18T*, Distagon 1,4/35 HFT, Planar 1,4/50 T*, Vario-Sonnar 3,4/35-70 T*,Vario-Sonnar 4,5-5,6/100-300 T*
Leitz: Elmarit-R 2.8/28 E55 II, Summicron-R 35 I, Elmarit-R Wetzlar 2.8/35 E55 II, Summicron-R 2/50 Wetzlar I, Macro Elmarit-R 2.8/60 I, Summicron-R 2/90 E55 I, Elmarit-R 2,8/90 I, Elmarit-R Wetzlar 2,8/135 I, Elmarit-R 2.8/180 Wetzlar E67 II, Vario Elmar 4/70-210 E60, MR Telyt-R 8/500
Schneider: Xenar 2.8/50
Russian: Industar 50-2, Industar 61,Helios-44-1 2/58mm,Helios-44-2 2/58mm, MC 3M-5CA 8/500
Meyer: Pentacon 3,5/30, Domiplan 2,8/50, Trioplan 2,9/50, Trioplan 3,5/75, Trioplan 2,8/100, Orestor 2,8/135mm, Orestegon 4/200
ISCO: Westron 2,8/35, Westron 3,5/35, Tele-Westanar 3,5/135, Tele-Westanar 4/180
Yashica: ML 15, ML 21, ML 24, ML 28, ML 35, ML 100/3.5 Macro,
Nikon: Nikkor AI 2,0/24, Nikkor AIS 2,0/28, Nikkor Ai 1,8/50, Nikkor-P (Sonnar) 2,5/105 silver, Nikkor-P (Gauss) 2,5/105 black
Steinheil Cassar 3,5-4,5/75 VL, Quinar 3,5/85, Culminar 4,5/105, Culminar 4,5/135, Auto-D Tele Quinar 2,8/135
Tomioka Tomioka - Cosinon 1,2/55, Tomioka - Revuenon 1,4/55
Voigtländer: Septon 2/50
Others: Officine Galileo Ingra 3,5/5cm, Wilon 4,5/75, Dallmeyer 4,5/4", Bonotar 4,5/105,
Lenses for sale, please contact via PM: None at the moment
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Geoff C. Bassett
Joined: 05 Sep 2010 Posts: 157 Location: Chatham, MA
Expire: 2012-06-18
|
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 6:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Geoff C. Bassett wrote:
Prefer B for center sharpness. But both lenses are so close that I would just pick what costs less.
Lens B also somehow seems to have a wider FOV. _________________ Opticlust.com |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Joosep
Joined: 25 Jan 2010 Posts: 305 Location: Estonia, Tallinn
|
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joosep wrote:
6198 here too. _________________ The future is analogue.
23 cameras, 25 lenses and counting. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DiegoV
Joined: 06 Feb 2010 Posts: 91 Location: Mira, Portugal
|
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 8:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DiegoV wrote:
I also picked A because of the edge-to-edge sharpeness, which I think is better than the B lens. B seems to be a little less sharp on the edges and has more CA than A.
However I also agree with Orio... the differences are very subtle and on a daily use I'd be happy with any of the two. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MF-addicted
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 Posts: 803 Location: Stuttgart (Germany)
|
Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 10:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
MF-addicted wrote:
So any new comments or will you tell us the names of the lenses used. _________________
EOS 5D MK II, EOS 5D Classic, EOS 400D --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Canon FD to EOS converted: FD 1,4/24 asph, FD 2,8/300 L
Carl Zeiss Jena:Pancolar 2/50, black Biotar 2/5,8cm 17bl., slim Biotar 1,5/7,5cm 18bl., Pancolar 1,8/80mm, Sonnar 3,5/135, Triotar 4/135
Carl Zeiss: Distagon 4/18T*, Distagon 1,4/35 HFT, Planar 1,4/50 T*, Vario-Sonnar 3,4/35-70 T*,Vario-Sonnar 4,5-5,6/100-300 T*
Leitz: Elmarit-R 2.8/28 E55 II, Summicron-R 35 I, Elmarit-R Wetzlar 2.8/35 E55 II, Summicron-R 2/50 Wetzlar I, Macro Elmarit-R 2.8/60 I, Summicron-R 2/90 E55 I, Elmarit-R 2,8/90 I, Elmarit-R Wetzlar 2,8/135 I, Elmarit-R 2.8/180 Wetzlar E67 II, Vario Elmar 4/70-210 E60, MR Telyt-R 8/500
Schneider: Xenar 2.8/50
Russian: Industar 50-2, Industar 61,Helios-44-1 2/58mm,Helios-44-2 2/58mm, MC 3M-5CA 8/500
Meyer: Pentacon 3,5/30, Domiplan 2,8/50, Trioplan 2,9/50, Trioplan 3,5/75, Trioplan 2,8/100, Orestor 2,8/135mm, Orestegon 4/200
ISCO: Westron 2,8/35, Westron 3,5/35, Tele-Westanar 3,5/135, Tele-Westanar 4/180
Yashica: ML 15, ML 21, ML 24, ML 28, ML 35, ML 100/3.5 Macro,
Nikon: Nikkor AI 2,0/24, Nikkor AIS 2,0/28, Nikkor Ai 1,8/50, Nikkor-P (Sonnar) 2,5/105 silver, Nikkor-P (Gauss) 2,5/105 black
Steinheil Cassar 3,5-4,5/75 VL, Quinar 3,5/85, Culminar 4,5/105, Culminar 4,5/135, Auto-D Tele Quinar 2,8/135
Tomioka Tomioka - Cosinon 1,2/55, Tomioka - Revuenon 1,4/55
Voigtländer: Septon 2/50
Others: Officine Galileo Ingra 3,5/5cm, Wilon 4,5/75, Dallmeyer 4,5/4", Bonotar 4,5/105,
Lenses for sale, please contact via PM: None at the moment
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 11012 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 11:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
MF-addicted wrote: |
So any new comments or will you tell us the names of the lenses used. |
and which you choose please? _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ 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 |
|
|
MF-addicted
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 Posts: 803 Location: Stuttgart (Germany)
|
Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 12:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
MF-addicted wrote:
visualopsins wrote: |
MF-addicted wrote: |
So any new comments or will you tell us the names of the lenses used. |
and which you choose please? |
Look at my post on page 1 please
MF-addicted wrote: |
BRunner wrote: |
Both lens are very close... But I slightly prefer lens A because of lower CA. |
+1
Pancolar-Planar sisters ? |
_________________
EOS 5D MK II, EOS 5D Classic, EOS 400D --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Canon FD to EOS converted: FD 1,4/24 asph, FD 2,8/300 L
Carl Zeiss Jena:Pancolar 2/50, black Biotar 2/5,8cm 17bl., slim Biotar 1,5/7,5cm 18bl., Pancolar 1,8/80mm, Sonnar 3,5/135, Triotar 4/135
Carl Zeiss: Distagon 4/18T*, Distagon 1,4/35 HFT, Planar 1,4/50 T*, Vario-Sonnar 3,4/35-70 T*,Vario-Sonnar 4,5-5,6/100-300 T*
Leitz: Elmarit-R 2.8/28 E55 II, Summicron-R 35 I, Elmarit-R Wetzlar 2.8/35 E55 II, Summicron-R 2/50 Wetzlar I, Macro Elmarit-R 2.8/60 I, Summicron-R 2/90 E55 I, Elmarit-R 2,8/90 I, Elmarit-R Wetzlar 2,8/135 I, Elmarit-R 2.8/180 Wetzlar E67 II, Vario Elmar 4/70-210 E60, MR Telyt-R 8/500
Schneider: Xenar 2.8/50
Russian: Industar 50-2, Industar 61,Helios-44-1 2/58mm,Helios-44-2 2/58mm, MC 3M-5CA 8/500
Meyer: Pentacon 3,5/30, Domiplan 2,8/50, Trioplan 2,9/50, Trioplan 3,5/75, Trioplan 2,8/100, Orestor 2,8/135mm, Orestegon 4/200
ISCO: Westron 2,8/35, Westron 3,5/35, Tele-Westanar 3,5/135, Tele-Westanar 4/180
Yashica: ML 15, ML 21, ML 24, ML 28, ML 35, ML 100/3.5 Macro,
Nikon: Nikkor AI 2,0/24, Nikkor AIS 2,0/28, Nikkor Ai 1,8/50, Nikkor-P (Sonnar) 2,5/105 silver, Nikkor-P (Gauss) 2,5/105 black
Steinheil Cassar 3,5-4,5/75 VL, Quinar 3,5/85, Culminar 4,5/105, Culminar 4,5/135, Auto-D Tele Quinar 2,8/135
Tomioka Tomioka - Cosinon 1,2/55, Tomioka - Revuenon 1,4/55
Voigtländer: Septon 2/50
Others: Officine Galileo Ingra 3,5/5cm, Wilon 4,5/75, Dallmeyer 4,5/4", Bonotar 4,5/105,
Lenses for sale, please contact via PM: None at the moment
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 11012 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 1:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
MF-addicted wrote: |
visualopsins wrote: |
MF-addicted wrote: |
So any new comments or will you tell us the names of the lenses used. |
and which you choose please? |
Look at my post on page 1 please
|
not your choice, no-X choice! _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ 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 |
|
|
metallaro1980
Joined: 10 Sep 2009 Posts: 385 Location: West Emilia - Fidenza (PR) 43036 - Italy
|
Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 1:48 am Post subject: Cut it out. Even fun games must end! |
|
|
metallaro1980 wrote:
are we to the "Guess Who" quiz-show ?
_________________
Olympus OM: 28 2.8, 35 2.8, 50 1.8 Made in Japan
Contax: 50 1.4, 85 1.4
Zeiss: 135 2.0 Apo-Sonnar ZE
Leica-R: 180 3.4 Apo-Telyt-R (Leitax)
Rollei QBM: 135 2.8 Rolleinar (Leitax), 50 1.4 HFT
Canon: 50 1.8, 40 2.8
M42: Helios 50 2.0, Jupiter-37A, Jupiter-21 200 4.0
Binocular: Hensoldt & Wetzlar DF 8x30
http://andreaverdi.altervista.org/ Vivaldi lives in my lenses.... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
a20010494
Joined: 15 Feb 2010 Posts: 396 Location: Perú.
|
Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 2:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
a20010494 wrote:
I picked B because looks slightly sharper in the center, which is what i like .
There's no C: Foveon? _________________ www.estudiocaleidoscopio.com |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Arkku
Joined: 28 Feb 2007 Posts: 1416 Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 4:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Arkku wrote:
I looked at the images again and was wondering: am I just imagining or does A have a strange colour cast to the right edge? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
AhamB
Joined: 22 Jun 2008 Posts: 733 Location: Germany
|
Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
AhamB wrote:
Arkku wrote: |
I looked at the images again and was wondering: am I just imagining or does A have a strange colour cast to the right edge? |
Metallaro1980 mentioned that already, and I notice it too. Lens A has a green cast/color shift to the right. Pretty ugly IMO.
I like the background rendition (on the left) much more on lens A, btw. On lens B it looks strangely blurred/smeared. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Riku
Joined: 23 May 2007 Posts: 1059 Location: Finland
Expire: 2017-04-30
|
Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 9:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Riku wrote:
Lens A is better |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|