MFlenses - A new life in a digital age
MFLenses 2026

Manual Focus Lenses Forum

Explore the world of vintage lenses through repair notes, real test shots, and detailed archive threads packed with images.

Explore the world of vintage lenses through repair notes, real test shots, and detailed archive threads packed with images.
DiskFreeVault safely moves Mac apps and data to external storage.
Spotlight

Featured partner placement for the forum front page.

M42 - 55mm 1.4 lens: Sharpness test
Post new topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  


Post
Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 8:19 pm
Post subject: M42 - 55mm 1.4 lens: Sharpness test
Reply
Post
Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 8:19 pm
Post subject: M42 - 55mm 1.4 lens: Sharpness test
Reply
Hello,
At the weekend I played with some 55mm lens. Hope to show some opinions!
Camera: Canon 20D, AF adapter and, focus in center.
Sample picture:


f1.4 - SMC Takumar - AutoChinon - Mamiya/Sekor - Auto Revuonon - Porst


f2.0


f2.8


f4.0


f5.6


f8.0


f11.0


f16.0

.


Post
Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 8:21 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 8:21 pm
Post subject:
Reply
I not see big differences really . Do you ?


Post
Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 8:28 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 8:28 pm
Post subject:
Reply
In my opinion, M/Sekor has similar sharpness as SMC Takumar, Chinon. Surprise but it perfomes sharper pictures between f2-5-6 . Auto Revuonon and Porst is very bad in corners.
I had not time to crop in corner but Takumar performs the best.
.


Post
Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 8:30 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 8:30 pm
Post subject:
Reply
I wonder if your focusing was consistent, because I see some strange things, like the Porst lens performing sharper at f/2.0 than it does at f/4.0 or f/5.6

Also I wonder why you did not compensate the exposure for the smaller apertures for all lenses except one.

I am not a big fan of these "bookshelf" tests - I did them myself some times, but I find that they are not exhaustive. I prefer to compare "real" photographs - not as scientifical (or better said para-scientifical), but in my opinion, comparing "real" photographs tells more about the effective use of a lens.


Post
Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 8:42 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 8:42 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Orio wrote:
I wonder if your focusing was consistent, because I see some strange things, like the Porst lens performing sharper at f/2.0 than it does at f/4.0 or f/5.6

I used AF adapter. I got 3 shots for an f setup. I'd better use the split screen than AF adapter.
Orio wrote:
Also I wonder why you did not compensate the exposure for the smaller apertures for all lenses except one.

I set all in the same setup. The company of the lightmeter of 20D and the adapter may be kidding.
Orio wrote:

I am not a big fan of these "bookshelf" tests - I did them myself some times, but I find that they are not exhaustive. I prefer to compare "real" photographs - not as scientifical (or better said para-scientifical), but in my opinion, comparing "real" photographs tells more about the effective use of a lens.

I agree with you, Orio.
.


Post
Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 8:57 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 8:57 pm
Post subject:
Reply
I guess we are all agree "bookshelf test" just wasting time. I much more enjoyed Iha's photos from flowers and beautiful Chinese kids.Sharpness just one feature from a lens.


Post
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 8:20 am
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 8:20 am
Post subject:
Reply
I agree on the test method, but it tells me that the Takumar is sharp at the whole range.

Guido


Post
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 8:35 am
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 8:35 am
Post subject:
Reply
Hi!

I think you could expect a very good performance from the Tak and the Sekor, maybe even the Chinon. They came near the expectations.

What really surprises me is the rather bad result of the Revuenon. My copy (made by Tomioka) is excellent, even wide open...

From the Porst lens I would have expected such a performance. These lenses are mostly fine from f2.8 on (so is my Porst 1.8/35).

Anyway, I think each of these lenses would be a recommendation, considering the price differences you have to pay!


Post
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 11:08 am
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 11:08 am
Post subject:
Reply
LucisPictor wrote:
Hi!
...What really surprises me is the rather bad result of the Revuenon. My copy (made by Tomioka) is excellent, even wide open...
...

My Auto Rev is made by Tomioka, but I really don't know why it is worse than the other ones. The Porst lens is in very good condition, heavy.
.


Post
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 12:29 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 12:29 pm
Post subject:
Reply
You can see the golden difragma for each lens.

Guido


Post
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 1:07 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 1:07 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Again SMC Takumar 1.4 proves its reputation as one of the sharpest lenses Smile. I very much like my copy of this lens.


Post
Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 5:38 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 5:38 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Having owned and known that my Sekor 1.4 seemed very sharp, I am gratified that it looks like it at least "holds its own" in relationship to the others. I realize that this is an informal test, but it's still fun to see these, at least to me.
Post new topic Reply to topic
Page 1 of 1