View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
dude163
Joined: 21 Mar 2010 Posts: 726 Location: New Brunswick , Canada
|
Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2011 4:03 pm Post subject: Takumars vs Leica/Zeiss |
|
|
dude163 wrote:
Hi all
Ive been taking lots of shots with my Pentax KX and the cool Takumars from the 60s and 70s, but I was wondering if anyone has a comparison between the Taks and the Leica and Zeiss lenses of the same era?
IE which is *better* or sharper, I know thats a subjective question, but if anyone has any input/advice , feel free to chime in!
d163
Im half hoping someone will say the taks are just as good for 1/25th the price:) _________________ Stormtrooper white Pentax K-X m42 adapter
Soviets: Helios 44m-6 and 40-1 , Pentacon 50mm f1.8
Taks : ST 28mm f3.5 , ST 35mm f3.5, SMC 50mm f1.4 , ST 55mm f2 , SMC 135 f 3.5 , ST 200 f 4
CZJ Tessar 50/2.8 1954 model
Leica m8u : Rigid cron 50/2 Elmar 90/4 Elmarit 135/2.8 Jupiter8 50/2 Serenar 85/2
my flickr : http://www.flickr.com/photos/riverviewfoto/
Vintage lens blog : http://dude163.blogspot.com/
500px : http://500px.com/roberttwilson |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ricardovaste
Joined: 06 Jan 2011 Posts: 19
|
Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2011 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ricardovaste wrote:
Well, as Zeiss lenses are generally made for the charts, they would have to be the "sharper" if you mean higher resolution, higher micro contrast - "generall speaking". That's not personally "better" in my books, I prefer the look you get from Takumars, Rokkors, Minoltas etc. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
LucisPictor
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 Posts: 17633 Location: Oberhessen, Germany / Maidstone ('95-'96)
Expire: 2013-12-03
|
Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2011 4:21 pm Post subject: Re: Takumars vs Leica/Zeiss |
|
|
LucisPictor wrote:
The taks are just as good for 1/25th the price.
Hey, you wanted someone to say that, right?
Seriously, Leitz and Zeiss glass probably is the best you can get. They have a somewhat different character, thus there are Leica fans and Zeiss fans. It's a bit like with Canon and Nikon.
But the Takumar lenses are really close behind. For most of us they are more than just "good enough". _________________ Personal forum activity on pause every now and again (due to job obligations)!
Carsten, former Moderator
Things ON SALE
Carsten = "KAPCTEH" = "Karusutenu" | T-shirt?.........................My photos from Emilia: http://www.schouler.net/emilia/emilia2011.html
My gear: http://retrocameracs.wordpress.com/ausrustung/
Old list: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=65 (Not up-to-date, sorry!) | http://www.lucispictor.de | http://www.alensaweek.wordpress.com |
http://www.retrocamera.de |
|
Back to top |
|
|
koji
Joined: 21 Jul 2008 Posts: 2107 Location: Hiroshima, Japan
Expire: 2012-12-27
|
Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2011 4:58 pm Post subject: Re: Takumars vs Leica/Zeiss |
|
|
koji wrote:
LucisPictor wrote: |
The taks are just as good for 1/25th the price.
Hey, you wanted someone to say that, right?
.... |
Hahaha, quite good one. Someone at FMiranda BBS measured Raw file
sizes, this chart may discourage some but take it a grain of salt.
_________________ Our Home Page has 18,200 photos in 575 directories today.
Lenses: https://www.pbase.com/kkawakami/top_level_my_lenses |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2011 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
I find that points like "sharpness" or "bokeh" are devoided of any meaning when they are not related to a subject.
I can have the sharpest lens in the world, but if my subject does not call for sharpness, it is useless. And I can have the best bokeh in the world, but if my subject does not need it, it is useless.
In other words, "sharpness for the sake of it" and "bokeh for the sake of it", are useless. A photographer should be driven by a concept, a need, a composition, or all of these components, and after that, all the elements (lighting, sharpness, bokeh, colours, et c.) must fall into place - or clash.
ricardovaste wrote: |
Well, as Zeiss lenses are generally made for the charts, they would have to be the "sharper" if you mean higher resolution, higher micro contrast - "generall speaking". That's not personally "better" in my books, I prefer the look you get from Takumars, Rokkors, Minoltas etc. |
Ricardo, don't you think this is a hasty generalization?
This picture has been taken with a Zeiss lens, and no postwork has been applied:
and I am sure that Pentax users can show pictures taken with Takumars that are surgically sharp.
Yes, in the world of saxophones, the brass, reed, mouthpiece, all have a character and play a role, but ultimately, it's in the throat and lips of the player. Give any saxophone assembly to David Sanborn, and he will make it sound magic; give it to me, and I will make you regret to have been born ... _________________ 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 |
|
|
ricardovaste
Joined: 06 Jan 2011 Posts: 19
|
Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2011 5:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ricardovaste wrote:
"Ricardo, don't you think this is a hasty generalization? "
Yes, hence I put "generally speaking" in quotation marks |
|
Back to top |
|
|
AhamB
Joined: 22 Jun 2008 Posts: 733 Location: Germany
|
Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2011 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
AhamB wrote:
ricardovaste wrote: |
Well, as Zeiss lenses are generally made for the charts, they would have to be the "sharper" if you mean higher resolution, higher micro contrast - "generall speaking". |
I don't know how you got that idea. Many of Zeiss' lenses are optimized for infinity and logically perform worse on bench tests. Takumars tend to perform better up close so and not as well as Zeiss lenses at infinity.
koji wrote: |
Someone at FMiranda BBS measured Raw file
sizes, this chart may discourage some but take it a grain of salt.
|
Do you have a link to that thread, or is it in the archives (which are disabled now)? I would definitely take that chart with a grain of salt, because it's only valid for one scene (one focus distance) and the specific camera that was used. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
karabud
Joined: 11 Apr 2009 Posts: 843 Location: Lodz
|
Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2011 6:01 pm Post subject: Re: Takumars vs Leica/Zeiss |
|
|
karabud wrote:
dude163 wrote: |
Hi all
Ive been taking lots of shots with my Pentax KX and the cool Takumars from the 60s and 70s, but I was wondering if anyone has a comparison between the Taks and the Leica and Zeiss lenses of the same era?
|
Hi!
I tested Taks vs Zeiss vs Rokkor and from close-up 45cm to 0,8-1m tak is sharpest wide open(rokkor is sharper when stopped down to f1.4) at 1-3m are equal(rokkor sharpest wo, at f1.4 clear advantage) at infinity leads rokkor and zeiss. Btw tak seems to be little darker than planar wo and rokkor is a lot lighter than both evenit still visible at f2(maybe is caused by little vignietting). Rokk is about 1/2 stop faster than tak and more than 1/3 than z50/1.4 _________________ http://www.flickr.com/photos/atheist_lenses/
old
http://www.flickr.com/photos/piotr_p/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
koji
Joined: 21 Jul 2008 Posts: 2107 Location: Hiroshima, Japan
Expire: 2012-12-27
|
Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2011 6:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
koji wrote:
AhamB wrote: |
......
koji wrote: |
Someone at FMiranda BBS measured Raw file
sizes, this chart may discourage some but take it a grain of salt.
|
Do you have a link to that thread, or is it in the archives (which are disabled now)? I would definitely take that chart with a grain of salt, because it's only valid for one scene (one focus distance) and the specific camera that was used. |
I do not have the link, but I downloaded them all to my computer. If you want them I can upload them to here,
but the originals are not big as the above, I enlarged it. _________________ Our Home Page has 18,200 photos in 575 directories today.
Lenses: https://www.pbase.com/kkawakami/top_level_my_lenses |
|
Back to top |
|
|
LucisPictor
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 Posts: 17633 Location: Oberhessen, Germany / Maidstone ('95-'96)
Expire: 2013-12-03
|
Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2011 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LucisPictor wrote:
Orio wrote: |
In other words, "sharpness for the sake of it" and "bokeh for the sake of it", are useless. |
Bravo! Very well put! This sums up many looooong discussions. _________________ Personal forum activity on pause every now and again (due to job obligations)!
Carsten, former Moderator
Things ON SALE
Carsten = "KAPCTEH" = "Karusutenu" | T-shirt?.........................My photos from Emilia: http://www.schouler.net/emilia/emilia2011.html
My gear: http://retrocameracs.wordpress.com/ausrustung/
Old list: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=65 (Not up-to-date, sorry!) | http://www.lucispictor.de | http://www.alensaweek.wordpress.com |
http://www.retrocamera.de |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BRunner
Joined: 29 Jul 2009 Posts: 705 Location: Czech Republic
|
Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2011 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
BRunner wrote:
It's hard to generalize. All three manufacturers have better and worse lenses.
Overall in my eyes Pentax lenses favor overall contrast, but the resolvance isn't on pair with Zeiss and Leica. _________________ .: APO-Maniac :. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dude163
Joined: 21 Mar 2010 Posts: 726 Location: New Brunswick , Canada
|
Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2011 7:14 pm Post subject: Re: Takumars vs Leica/Zeiss |
|
|
dude163 wrote:
dude163 wrote: |
IE which is *better* or sharper, I know thats a subjective question, but if anyone has any input/advice , feel free to chime in!
d163
|
Just to remind a few that I already know its not a quantative question with a simple answer , but I knew that some of the gang here have used them all.
The reason for my question is that I'm kind of at a junction here with my photography, its a great hobby, but Im not so sure where I want to go next, I'd [refer less collecting and more shooting to be honest , and I already have a tak 50 thats a bit yellowed, so I was thinking sending it off for a CLA would be a lot cheaper than grabbing an M8 Leica + lens _________________ Stormtrooper white Pentax K-X m42 adapter
Soviets: Helios 44m-6 and 40-1 , Pentacon 50mm f1.8
Taks : ST 28mm f3.5 , ST 35mm f3.5, SMC 50mm f1.4 , ST 55mm f2 , SMC 135 f 3.5 , ST 200 f 4
CZJ Tessar 50/2.8 1954 model
Leica m8u : Rigid cron 50/2 Elmar 90/4 Elmarit 135/2.8 Jupiter8 50/2 Serenar 85/2
my flickr : http://www.flickr.com/photos/riverviewfoto/
Vintage lens blog : http://dude163.blogspot.com/
500px : http://500px.com/roberttwilson |
|
Back to top |
|
|
timo832000
Joined: 09 Jun 2008 Posts: 544 Location: Germany / Cologne
|
Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2011 9:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
timo832000 wrote:
Keep your tak, and get some Zeiss and Leica lenses. I know you don`t want to hear that but owning different lenses even with the same focal length gives you the opportunity to choose the right one for every purpose
I alredy tried to compare Zeiss, Leitz and Pentax lenses a few times but I can`t tell which are the best in general. For sure Leitz & Zeiss are known to be world`s best but some taks and SMC Pentax are very good too.
Think about your 1,4/50 tak, the SMC 1,7/50 and the SMC 3,5/28 they are very good lenses and the best is you still could get them for a small fee.
I often change between SMC 1,7/50 and Summicron-R 2/50 many of my pics don`t really show the difference, because both of them give a very good IQ.
Timo _________________ I love Leica ! But I need Pentax
Last edited by timo832000 on Sat Jan 08, 2011 9:40 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57865 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2011 9:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
timo832000 wrote: |
Keep your tak, and get some Zeiss and Leica lenses. I know you don`t want to hear that but owning different lenses even with the same focal length gives you the opportunity to choose the right one for every purpose
Timo |
+1 and I am pretty sure sure most TAK will left at home if you able to pickup up a Zeiss or Leica at least this did happen with me. I have pretty good experience with Taks and Zeiss and very limited with Leica. _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
rbelyell
Joined: 13 Oct 2009 Posts: 4269 Location: somewhere in the mountains of central NY
Expire: 2014-01-31
|
Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2011 11:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
rbelyell wrote:
what i did was that i took a lot of time to look at the pictures on this forum and decide what i personally liked. to me, comparing work on this forum, it was no contest, the zeiss 50/1.4 beat the tak hands down. there is a 3d quality i personally see in the zeiss, a 'pop' that i do not see in the tak.
i was able to pick up a tak 50/1.4 cheap so i did, when i personally compared them on my 5d it just confirmed what i saw on this forum.
having said that, there are people on this forum who do great work with taks, really beautiful stuff. but to my eye, for sharpness, color and 3d its zeiss. take a look around and see what suits your eye! _________________ Epson RD1 + Elmarit 21/2.8; Summarit 50/1.5; Summarit 75/2.5; Elmar-c 90/4; Sankyo Komura 135/2.8, Hektor 135/4.5; Braun Paxina 29 6x6; Photax Boyer Paris; Holga 120 Pano
GREAT STUFF FOR SALE:
Contax T
Hasselblad XPan + 45/4, 90/4
Kodak Retina Reflex IV + full set of Schneider Krueznach lenses
Mercury 2 half frame 35mm
Kodak Pro slr/n
Fuji GM670+100/3.5+65/8!
Praktisix 6x6 medium format + ZeissBiometar 120/2.8
Bessa T 101 Anniversary Edition in Navy Blue
Mamiya Six Folder with Zuiko 75/3.5
Adaptall: Tamron SP 28-85 macro
Cameras: Canon IX
PM for more complete descriptions/pix. All in great shape!
_________________________
'buy me a drink, sing me a song,
take me as i come 'cause i can't stay long' |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mo
Joined: 27 Aug 2009 Posts: 8979 Location: Australia
Expire: 2016-07-30
|
Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2011 3:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
mo wrote:
Sometimes I think the answer only comes in using the lenses in question. I have used the the Macro tak and the Biotar 2/58 and I love them equally for what they do...sure they are not the same focal range but one is Carl Zeiss and one is Pentax...and I like them both....If I ever get a leica I will be able to try that and see what it can do. and no doubt I will love it as well. _________________ Moira, Moderator
Fuji XE-1,Pentax K-01,Panasonic G1,Panasonic G5,Pentax MX
Ricoh Singlex TLS,KR-5,KR-5Super,XR-10
Lenses
Auto Rikenon's 55/1.4, 1.8, 2.8... 50/1.7 Takumar 2/58 Preset Takumar 2.8/105 Auto Takumar 2.2/55, 3.5/35 Super Takumar 1.8/55...Macro Takumar F4/50... CZJ Biotar ALU M42 2/58 CZJ Tessar ALU M42 2.8/50
CZJ DDR Flektogon Zebra M42 2.8/35 CZJ Pancolar M42 2/50 CZJ Pancolar Exakta 2/50
Auto Mamiya/Sekor 1.8/55 ...Auto Mamiya/Sekor 2/50 Auto Mamiya/Sekor 2.8/50 Auto Mamiya/Sekor 200/3.5 Tamron SP500/8 Tamron SP350/5.6 Tamron SP90/2.5
Primoplan 1.9/58 Primagon 4.5/35 Telemegor 5.5/150 Angenieux 3.5/28 Angenieux 3,5/135 Y 2
Canon FL 58/1.2,Canon FL85/1.8,Canon FL 100/3.5,Canon SSC 2.8/100 ,Konica AR 100/2.8, Nikkor P 105/2.5
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
LucisPictor
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 Posts: 17633 Location: Oberhessen, Germany / Maidstone ('95-'96)
Expire: 2013-12-03
|
Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2011 10:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
LucisPictor wrote:
Very often a preference does not only depend on optical performance.
Haptics, look, feel, forum influence ... all those aspects play an important role.
And I also think that you can easily become a "fan-boy" if you have shot some very special shots with a certain brand. Suddenly, you transfer all positive character traits on those lenses which leaves no room for others. _________________ Personal forum activity on pause every now and again (due to job obligations)!
Carsten, former Moderator
Things ON SALE
Carsten = "KAPCTEH" = "Karusutenu" | T-shirt?.........................My photos from Emilia: http://www.schouler.net/emilia/emilia2011.html
My gear: http://retrocameracs.wordpress.com/ausrustung/
Old list: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=65 (Not up-to-date, sorry!) | http://www.lucispictor.de | http://www.alensaweek.wordpress.com |
http://www.retrocamera.de |
|
Back to top |
|
|
poilu
Joined: 26 Aug 2007 Posts: 10472 Location: Greece
Expire: 2019-08-29
|
Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2011 11:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
poilu wrote:
I tried the tak s-m-c 135:3.5 on the 5DII and the lens is sharp
but at infinite I found I could move the barrel quite a lot without differences in the viewfinder
that's a difference with a Zeiss, the focus is surgical and it show in the % of in focus shots
I had a lot of missed with the tak
same experience with the tak s-m-c 50:4 macro vs other macros _________________ T* |
|
Back to top |
|
|
AhamB
Joined: 22 Jun 2008 Posts: 733 Location: Germany
|
Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2011 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
AhamB wrote:
koji wrote: |
I do not have the link, but I downloaded them all to my computer. If you want them I can upload them to here, but the originals are not big as the above, I enlarged it. |
Ah, no thanks then. I was more interested to read the discussion around it because many times there are people with some interesting input there.
LucisPictor wrote: |
And I also think that you can easily become a "fan-boy" if you have shot some very special shots with a certain brand. Suddenly, you transfer all positive character traits on those lenses which leaves no room for others. |
On the other hand it's possible that you see the same characteristics of a lens in a great variety of shots taken with the same lens, logically making you a fan of that lens if you like those characteristics a lot... It's not unthinkable. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
LucisPictor
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 Posts: 17633 Location: Oberhessen, Germany / Maidstone ('95-'96)
Expire: 2013-12-03
|
Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2011 4:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LucisPictor wrote:
AhamB wrote: |
LucisPictor wrote: |
And I also think that you can easily become a "fan-boy" if you have shot some very special shots with a certain brand. Suddenly, you transfer all positive character traits on those lenses which leaves no room for others. |
On the other hand it's possible that you see the same characteristics of a lens in a great variety of shots taken with the same lens, logically making you a fan of that lens if you like those characteristics a lot... It's not unthinkable. |
Of course not. And I am somewhat of a Leica fan-boy myself. They are just a little too expensive to built up a complete set of Leitz (had four, now have two).
What I meant is that sometimes, some guys are so convinced by a certain brand that they do not accept anything else any more. But this means restricting yourself and your possibilities too much IMHO. _________________ Personal forum activity on pause every now and again (due to job obligations)!
Carsten, former Moderator
Things ON SALE
Carsten = "KAPCTEH" = "Karusutenu" | T-shirt?.........................My photos from Emilia: http://www.schouler.net/emilia/emilia2011.html
My gear: http://retrocameracs.wordpress.com/ausrustung/
Old list: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=65 (Not up-to-date, sorry!) | http://www.lucispictor.de | http://www.alensaweek.wordpress.com |
http://www.retrocamera.de |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dude163
Joined: 21 Mar 2010 Posts: 726 Location: New Brunswick , Canada
|
Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2011 5:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dude163 wrote:
Hmm
the problem with lenses and photography Ive discovered is that its not binary , there is nothing to say that you cant have a good mix, because certain manufacturers have excellent lenses and they also make mediocre ones too, I think that once you get to the high dollar items, the chance of a mediocre lens becomes less
In addition, I have also come to the realisation that the most important lens is the one in the photographers eyeball!
( more foto less LBA!) _________________ Stormtrooper white Pentax K-X m42 adapter
Soviets: Helios 44m-6 and 40-1 , Pentacon 50mm f1.8
Taks : ST 28mm f3.5 , ST 35mm f3.5, SMC 50mm f1.4 , ST 55mm f2 , SMC 135 f 3.5 , ST 200 f 4
CZJ Tessar 50/2.8 1954 model
Leica m8u : Rigid cron 50/2 Elmar 90/4 Elmarit 135/2.8 Jupiter8 50/2 Serenar 85/2
my flickr : http://www.flickr.com/photos/riverviewfoto/
Vintage lens blog : http://dude163.blogspot.com/
500px : http://500px.com/roberttwilson |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dude163
Joined: 21 Mar 2010 Posts: 726 Location: New Brunswick , Canada
|
Posted: Fri Jan 14, 2011 8:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dude163 wrote:
Phew , my LBA has abated
Takumars will be around for a while with the odd zeiss lens too, maybe a leica in the future _________________ Stormtrooper white Pentax K-X m42 adapter
Soviets: Helios 44m-6 and 40-1 , Pentacon 50mm f1.8
Taks : ST 28mm f3.5 , ST 35mm f3.5, SMC 50mm f1.4 , ST 55mm f2 , SMC 135 f 3.5 , ST 200 f 4
CZJ Tessar 50/2.8 1954 model
Leica m8u : Rigid cron 50/2 Elmar 90/4 Elmarit 135/2.8 Jupiter8 50/2 Serenar 85/2
my flickr : http://www.flickr.com/photos/riverviewfoto/
Vintage lens blog : http://dude163.blogspot.com/
500px : http://500px.com/roberttwilson |
|
Back to top |
|
|
peterm1
Joined: 06 Dec 2007 Posts: 224
|
Posted: Tue Jan 18, 2011 7:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
peterm1 wrote:
I love my Taks but dont think they are quite in the same leaugue as zeiss or Leica. But they are very good. They tend to lack flatness of field (and so have less definition in the corners) Either that or you need to stop down to get optimal results. The more expensive German lenses are better in this respect and can be shot wide open with better results. BUt for me that does not matter in 90% of my shots.
Have a look at the following thread where I have posted some results (scanned from old 1970s era magazines) showing test results for various loenses including Takumars. They are not to be sneezed at although in general not quite up to Leitz level.
http://forum.mflenses.com/lens-tests-for-you-leitz-lenses-pentax-takumars-and-nikkors-t4468.html _________________ PeterM |
|
Back to top |
|
|
thePiRaTE!!
Joined: 31 Oct 2008 Posts: 416 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Wed Jan 19, 2011 8:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
thePiRaTE!! wrote:
The only reason I don't use my Tak 50/1.4 more is because I paid so much more for everything else. Sad? True? Yes and yes.
I'll be adding a NEX-5 shortly though and have been admiring again how small the Taks are and how nicely I believe this will compliment the body. If I go out with the A900, I'm using the big glass. It's more about ergonomics and balance for me in the absence of glaring performance discrepancies. Sad? True? Maybe and yes, heh.
K. _________________ kellysereda.com
Sony A7ii, A900, NEX-5
_______________________
Helios: 1.5/85 40-2.
Meyer-Optik: Trioplan 2.8/100, Oreston 1.8/50.
Minolta: Rokkor-PG 1.2/58.
Porst: 1.2/55 Color Reflex.
Sony: 4-5.6/70-400 G.
Takumar: Super Takumar 3.5/135, Super Takumar 1.4/50, SMC Takumar 3.5/28.
Topcon: Topcor 1.4/58.
Voigtländer: Nokton Classic SC 1.4/35.
Zeiss: Planar T*1.2/85 "60 jahre" C/Y, Vario-Sonnar T*3.4/35-70 C/Y, Vario-Sonnar T*2.8/16-35 ZA, Distagon T*2/24 ZA.
lenses for sale here |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dude163
Joined: 21 Mar 2010 Posts: 726 Location: New Brunswick , Canada
|
Posted: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dude163 wrote:
Kelly
have you tried any Leica glass at all? _________________ Stormtrooper white Pentax K-X m42 adapter
Soviets: Helios 44m-6 and 40-1 , Pentacon 50mm f1.8
Taks : ST 28mm f3.5 , ST 35mm f3.5, SMC 50mm f1.4 , ST 55mm f2 , SMC 135 f 3.5 , ST 200 f 4
CZJ Tessar 50/2.8 1954 model
Leica m8u : Rigid cron 50/2 Elmar 90/4 Elmarit 135/2.8 Jupiter8 50/2 Serenar 85/2
my flickr : http://www.flickr.com/photos/riverviewfoto/
Vintage lens blog : http://dude163.blogspot.com/
500px : http://500px.com/roberttwilson |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|