| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
revers
Joined: 13 May 2010
Posts: 574
Location: In the country just north of Toronto Canada
|
 Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 12:55 pm Post subject: Four 50s compared. |
 |
|
revers wrote:
Here is a comparison of four 50s I took this morning. All were shot @ f2.8 on my Panasonic G1 in RAW, converted to jpeg & downsized with no other processing. Camera to subject distance was 5'(1.5M).
1. Minolta 50/1.4
2. Sears 50/2.0
3. Takumar 55/1.8
4. Minolta 55/1.7
Anybody care to comment?
I have two more 50s coming, a Minolta Celtic 50/3.5 Macro & a Helios 44-2 58/2. I was expecting the macro this week but I expect another two weeks for the Helios.
_________________
Ron
Olympus OM-D E-M5, 14-42 & 45/1.8.
Panasonic G1, GF1, 14-45, 45-200 & various legacy lenses.
Canon S5, Sony 1.7 Tele-converter & Raynox DCR 150 Macro converter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
fish4570
Joined: 06 Jan 2010
Posts: 4514
Location: At the confluence of the Locust Fork of the Warrior River and Black Creek, Alabama
Expire: 2012-03-21
|
| Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 12:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fish4570 wrote:
Tak 1.8 the winner so far, in my view ...
_________________
Paul
I chase Light
http://blackcreekjournal.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Retro
Joined: 02 Feb 2008
Posts: 173
Location: Krautland
|
| Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Retro wrote:
I think, the Sears 50/2.0 is most detailed and has the best colors and bokeh.
_________________
Cameras: Sigma SA300 - Sigma SD9 - Sigma SD10
Lenses: Sigma 15-30/3.5-4.5 - Vivitar 28/2.5 - Carl Zeiss Jena Pancolar 50/1.8 - Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar 58/2.0 (black) - Carl Zeiss Jena Triotar 135/4 - Sigma 28-70/2.8 - Sigma 70-300/4.0-5.6 - Vivitar 28-210/3.5-5.6
Equipment: Lightmeter Gossen Lunasix - Tripod Linhof/Schiansky Kugelkopf-Panorama-Stativ, Modell 161 - Rightangle Viewfinder Minolta VN - B+W Greygradientfilter BWG 501 - B+W Circular-Pol-Filter 52E - Photo Bag Crumpler Ben's Pizza XL
Portfolio: http://www.fotocommunity.de/pc/pc/mypics/434323/default.aspx?_c02_vws=1/pc/pc?mypics=434323 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 1:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anu wrote:
Well, this test is basicly a bokeh-test (and contrast/colours/distortions, but they can be post processed), therefor I refuce to comment as bokeh quality is in part subjective 
Ok, I'll comment: the Sears bokeh is the worst  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 1:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anu wrote:
| Retro wrote: |
| I think, the Sears 50/2.0 is most detailed and has the best colors and bokeh. |
Really? A hideous bokeh in my opinion
When it comes to details, I am not able to say anything as the images are so much downsized that even a holga-image would look sharp and detailed... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anu wrote:
| fish4570 wrote: |
| Tak 1.8 the winner so far, in my view ... |
I may be wrong, but to my eyes it seems like the Tak has some axial CA. Hard to say from this small image. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fish4570
Joined: 06 Jan 2010
Posts: 4514
Location: At the confluence of the Locust Fork of the Warrior River and Black Creek, Alabama
Expire: 2012-03-21
|
| Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 1:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fish4570 wrote:
I don't even know what CA means; I was going by the raindrops, which seem sharper to me across the frame. I'd say the minolta 1.4 is next ...
_________________
Paul
I chase Light
http://blackcreekjournal.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kram
Joined: 06 Feb 2010
Posts: 1344
Location: Portland, OR
|
| Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 2:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kram wrote:
The Takumar 55/1.8 is the clear winner to my eyes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scheimpflug
Joined: 06 Feb 2010
Posts: 1888
Location: New Zealand / USA
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
| Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Scheimpflug wrote:
Is that a 4-bay UHF antenna? You're either in a fringe area, or really trying to get some distance! 
_________________
Sigma DP1, Nikon D40 (hers ), Polaroid x530, Pentax P30t, Pentax P50, (P30t/P50 K-A to Nikon F body mount conversion)
Nikon: 18-55/3.5-5.6 "G ED II DX" (F) Soligor: 28/2.8 (FL->F converted), 135/3.5 (F), 3x TC (F, modified) Kalimar: 28-85/3.5 (F)
Vivitar: 70-210/2.8-4.0 Version 3 (F), Tele 500/6.3 Preset (F), 19/3.8 (F) Minolta: 300/5.6 (SR/MC/MD pending F conversion)
Tamron: 28/2.8 (Adaptall) Panagor: 28/2.5 (FD) Aetna: 300/5.6 (F) Osawa: MC 28/2.8 (F)
Vintage Lenses: Dallmeyer: 1940s A.M. 14in 356mm f4 (ULF->M42) 1930s Adon Telephoto Taylor, Taylor & Hobson: 1880s Rapid Rectilinear 8 1/2 x 6 1/2 11.31in f/8 (LF->?)
Parts Lenses: Nikon 35-135/3.5-4.5 (F), Sigma 70-210/4.5 (F), Nikon 50/1.8 Series E (F) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anu wrote:
| fish4570 wrote: |
| I don't even know what CA means; I was going by the raindrops, which seem sharper to me across the frame. I'd say the minolta 1.4 is next ... |
Chromatic Aberrations.
If there are differences in resolution, it's because of differences in focus points and such. All half decent 50mm lenses give absolute sharpness corner-to-corner on the camera used when the images are resized into such small size. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
revers
Joined: 13 May 2010
Posts: 574
Location: In the country just north of Toronto Canada
|
| Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
revers wrote:
I agree the Sears is the poorest performer but I find little difference in the other three. That said, I prefer the Minolta 50/1.4 out of them all. Here is a shot with the Minolta 50/1.4 wide open that I took this morning. I focused on the yellow flower lower left.
_________________
Ron
Olympus OM-D E-M5, 14-42 & 45/1.8.
Panasonic G1, GF1, 14-45, 45-200 & various legacy lenses.
Canon S5, Sony 1.7 Tele-converter & Raynox DCR 150 Macro converter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
revers
Joined: 13 May 2010
Posts: 574
Location: In the country just north of Toronto Canada
|
| Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 4:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
revers wrote:
| Scheimpflug wrote: |
| Is that a 4-bay UHF antenna? You're either in a fringe area, or really trying to get some distance! |
A 4-bay HDTV antenna for both VHF & UHF.
_________________
Ron
Olympus OM-D E-M5, 14-42 & 45/1.8.
Panasonic G1, GF1, 14-45, 45-200 & various legacy lenses.
Canon S5, Sony 1.7 Tele-converter & Raynox DCR 150 Macro converter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fish4570
Joined: 06 Jan 2010
Posts: 4514
Location: At the confluence of the Locust Fork of the Warrior River and Black Creek, Alabama
Expire: 2012-03-21
|
| Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 4:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fish4570 wrote:
Now I understand CA. And I see what you're taking about, but could it not be one side of the antenna is slanted sufficiently away from the other to drop out of DOF?
_________________
Paul
I chase Light
http://blackcreekjournal.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
luke cern
Joined: 09 May 2010
Posts: 24
|
| Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 5:42 pm Post subject: Bokeh appreciation |
|
|
luke cern wrote:
Yes: its very subjective but I'm looking for my first MF this week and this test opens my eyes to some additional possibilities. The Takumar was top of my list but I do quite like the Minolta and it looks like it could be pretty effective on more colourful subjects in the backround.
Thanks for posting..
Offers from UK welcome:
BTW: I gave up aerials and short-wave listening 45 years ago! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 6:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anu wrote:
| revers wrote: |
I agree the Sears is the poorest performer but I find little difference in the other three. That said, I prefer the Minolta 50/1.4 out of them all. Here is a shot with the Minolta 50/1.4 wide open that I took this morning. I focused on the yellow flower lower left.
|
Very nice shot! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arkku
Joined: 28 Feb 2007
Posts: 1416
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
| Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 8:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Arkku wrote:
The Minolta 50mm f/1.4 looks best to me in the test. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hemmo
Joined: 30 Mar 2010
Posts: 504
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Expire: 2016-12-17
|
| Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hemmo wrote:
| Arkku wrote: |
| The Minolta 50mm f/1.4 looks best to me in the test. |
+1
_________________
500px l ¿ .. ? l Jalbum |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
francotirador
Joined: 17 Sep 2009
Posts: 894
|
| Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
francotirador wrote:
| Arkku wrote: |
| The Minolta 50mm f/1.4 looks best to me in the test. |
+1
the boqueh of Sears is very distracting, and Takumar has the typical CA.
_________________
Canon 5D II-Sony nex 6
Canon L 80-200 f 2.8 - Canon L 135 f2 - Canon FD 135/2.5 convert to EOS - Yashica 50 1.4 ML - Canon FD 50 1.2 - Distagon 35mm 2.8 T AEJ - Minolta MC 24mm f 2.8 - Canon LTM 85 1.9- Canon LTM 85mm 1.9 convert to EOS - Rodenstock Heligon 50 1.9 - Color Skopar 50 2.8 & MAte Box & filters 4X4
Contax RTS II y Minolta SRT 303 - 28-135 3.6 Tokina - Minolta MD 45 f2.0 - Minolta Zoom 80 200 4.5 (Leica)
www.isgleasphoto.com
The life is more easy with this forum .... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010
Posts: 4060
Location: Charleston
|
| Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 10:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
Which Minolta 50 f/1.4 was that? I have the MC-Rokkor-PG.
_________________
Regards,
Woodrim |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
a20010494
Joined: 15 Feb 2010
Posts: 396
Location: Perú.
|
| Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 10:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
a20010494 wrote:
| Anu wrote: |
| revers wrote: |
I agree the Sears is the poorest performer but I find little difference in the other three. That said, I prefer the Minolta 50/1.4 out of them all. Here is a shot with the Minolta 50/1.4 wide open that I took this morning. I focused on the yellow flower lower left.
|
Very nice shot! |
Excellent shot. Great glass.
Off topic:
YES, ITS IRRITATING!
But sometimes, only sometimes, funky colors are good..
_________________
www.estudiocaleidoscopio.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
revers
Joined: 13 May 2010
Posts: 574
Location: In the country just north of Toronto Canada
|
| Posted: Sat May 15, 2010 1:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
revers wrote:
| woodrim wrote: |
| Which Minolta 50 f/1.4 was that? I have the MC-Rokkor-PG. |
This one:
_________________
Ron
Olympus OM-D E-M5, 14-42 & 45/1.8.
Panasonic G1, GF1, 14-45, 45-200 & various legacy lenses.
Canon S5, Sony 1.7 Tele-converter & Raynox DCR 150 Macro converter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
djmike
Joined: 01 Apr 2009
Posts: 930
Location: Taiwan
|
| Posted: Sat May 15, 2010 7:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
djmike wrote:
Lovely bokeh. I also expect Tak 1.8 should have better but it looks slightly out of focus. Mike
_________________
DSLR: Canon 400D
SLR: Nikon FM2 + Canon A-1 + Canon AE1-P + Praktica MTL-5B + Pentax Spotmatic F + Fujica ST801 + Voigtlander Bassematic + Voigtlander Vito + Rollei 35S + Rolleiflex SL35 ME + Canon QL17 GIII + Olympus Pen EE-3
Lenses
M42: CZJ Flektogon 35/2.4 + CZJ Flektogon Zebra 35/2.8 + CZJ Pancolar 50/1.8 + CZJ Sonnar 135/3.5 + CZJ Tessar 50/2.8 Chrome + Pentacon 135/2.8 + Pentacon 50/1.8 + SMC Takumar 50/1.4 + SMC Takumar 55/2 + SMC Takumar 135/3.5 + Fujinon 55/1.8 + Jupiter-9 85/2 + Jupiter-37A 135/3.5 + Helios 44-6 58/2
Nikor: Nikkor 50/1.4 + Nikkor 28/3.5 + Nikkor 35-105 Zoom + 36-72 Series E Zoom
Canon: Canon FD + 28/2.8 + 50/1.8 + Canon 35-105 Macro Zoom
Other: Rollei Planar HFT 50/1.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
revers
Joined: 13 May 2010
Posts: 574
Location: In the country just north of Toronto Canada
|
| Posted: Sat May 15, 2010 8:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
revers wrote:
| djmike wrote: |
| Lovely bokeh. I also expect Tak 1.8 should have better but it looks slightly out of focus. Mike |
I assure you they were all very accurately focused on the exact same spot using the expanded view with the lens wide open & then stopped down.
_________________
Ron
Olympus OM-D E-M5, 14-42 & 45/1.8.
Panasonic G1, GF1, 14-45, 45-200 & various legacy lenses.
Canon S5, Sony 1.7 Tele-converter & Raynox DCR 150 Macro converter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dsmlogger
Joined: 14 Apr 2010
Posts: 178
Location: Athens, Greece
|
| Posted: Sat May 15, 2010 8:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dsmlogger wrote:
Minolta 50mm f1.4 seems the bese to my eyes too.
I reget I sold it... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arkku
Joined: 28 Feb 2007
Posts: 1416
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
| Posted: Sat May 15, 2010 9:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Arkku wrote:
| revers wrote: |
I assure you they were all very accurately focused on the exact same spot using the expanded view with the lens wide open & then stopped down. |
There can be focus shift when stopping down. |
|
| 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
