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

Battle of the 50mm: 6 lenses compared on Canon 5D Mark II
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 1:02 pm    Post subject: Battle of the 50mm: 6 lenses compared on Canon 5D Mark II Reply with quote
Hi,

I just did a comprehensive comparison at nearly all stops of the following lenses:

    - Pentax 50mm f/1,4 Super-Takumar 8-elements design
    - Pentax 50mm f/1,4 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 7-elements design
    - Pentax 50mm f/4 M Macro
    - Contax 60mm f/2,8 Zeiss Makro S-Planar
    - Minolta 50mm f/1,7 Rokkor MD
    - Olympus 50mm f/1,8 OM Zuiko


I thought it may be interesting fore someone else, so here we are:

www.addicted2light.com/2012/12/08/battle-of-the-50s-contax-60-vs-minolta-vs-olympus-vs-pentax-takumars/

Happy pixel peeping everyone! Very Happy


PostPosted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
It's always nice to see lenses compared. Thanks.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 6:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well done, interesting.
Biggest news here is the later Takumars have rather poor corner sharpness, and the 7-element design involved some significant compromises. A similar comparison of the popular 1.4 lenses would be interesting.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 6:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Are you sure the 50/1.4 Tak hits the mirror? They will do this when allowed to focus past infinity. I've shimmed mine with tape to ensure it only goes as far as infinity and it misses the mirror.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 9:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank you for good reading and work well done, I love seeing actual comparisons. Especially on FF cameras.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 11:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
First tanks to all of you for the appreciation Smile

martinsmith99 wrote:
Are you sure the 50/1.4 Tak hits the mirror? They will do this when allowed to focus past infinity. I've shimmed mine with tape to ensure it only goes as far as infinity and it misses the mirror.


The S-M-C does not hit the mirror, only the 8 elements does. Thanks for the suggestion, but I'm pretty sure that it not focus past infinity because:
> when used with a - supposedly better - adapter it does not reach infinity at all.
> I tested it even at infinity against the SMC (I did not show the result because it mirrored the one of the 50x distance test) and both hit the infinity mark exactly at the same spot

Please keep in mind that the mirror box of the Canon 5D & mark II are said to have quite a bit of sample variation; the one in my camera seems to be a tricky one, and it hits the back of many lenses declared "safe" on the various list published on the net, but only in the "descending" fase. I never found this a big deal, though, aside for the fact that the first few times scared the **** out of me Laughing because my camera doesn't lock and I never seen damages on the mirror, so I use even lenses that touch the mirror routinely without a trouble.

Last edited by fotoreporter1975 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 11:40 am; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 11:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
luisalegria wrote:
Well done, interesting.
Biggest news here is the later Takumars have rather poor corner sharpness, and the 7-element design involved some significant compromises. A similar comparison of the popular 1.4 lenses would be interesting.


You're right, but given that I do this tests with my own gear I think that 6 different lenses for a single focal length for now are enough Laughing

The only other two I may wish to add in a distant future are an Olympus 55/1,2 (I've seen a test in which trashed pretty much all the competition) and, if I ever should end up trading the house, the car and everything I own for a lens Smile , a Summilux Asph.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 11:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
It is a very interesting comparison and helpful if I decide to spend time shooting test charts from a near distance. Sharpness is important, of course, but so is colour rendition, contrast, micro contrast, flare and how the lens performs at various focus distances. Oh! Let's not forget bokeh!


PostPosted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
skida wrote:
It is a very interesting comparison and helpful if I decide to spend time shooting test charts from a near distance. Sharpness is important, of course, but so is colour rendition, contrast, micro contrast, flare and how the lens performs at various focus distances. Oh! Let's not forget bokeh!


...and "pop" Cool IMO it improves a shot if you can get it.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
skida wrote:
It is a very interesting comparison and helpful if I decide to spend time shooting test charts from a near distance. Sharpness is important, of course, but so is colour rendition, contrast, micro contrast, flare and how the lens performs at various focus distances. Oh! Let's not forget bokeh!


50x the nominal focal distance is a gold standard for lens testing for a reason, in fact I tested all the lenses but the Pentax Macro at infinity too and at 100x, and I get the exact same results. I did not post them because in real - not test charts - pictures the differences are less visible, especially when you factor in the jpg compression necessary for reasonable download times.

And I made all the shot, like I explain in the post, with the Canon set to "daylight" white balance precisely to show the difference in color rendition between the lenses. You can almost equalize them with a custom or automatic white balance, the operative word here being "almost" because quite a bit on nuances remain.

The problem with "real world" testing, if you want to compare more that a couple of lenses, is that you can rarely have the same exact light between shots, even on a overcast day, and this make the whole test pretty much useless because then differences in micro contrast or color can be due the change in illumination…

Last: bokeh is important for the kind of pictures I take. I did not bother testing specifically for it because all the lenses I buy have to perform at the very least very good in this department, or I will return them immediately. I actually value more bokeh and tonality than sharpness, if I have to choose (but I prefer not too Wink ). More, the bokeh can be much different depending on the background. For example the Contax has a beautiful bokeh generally speaking, but with branches in the background its bokeh becomes a little too nervous. The Minolta does not have this problem, and that is the reason I still have it, along with the beautiful rendering of the color shades.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 1:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I understand your reasoning and I guess I am a bit biased against comparative testing in lab conditions. Statistical information doesn't really give the reader a true impression of user experience. I have seen the same in car and motorbike tests too. My best ever motorbike was reckoned to be "top heavy" in a comparison test, but I enjoyed every minute when I was riding it. It had "character", which can't really be tested for.

When I read users' assessments of lenses they have owned, the criticisms aren't normally about lines per mlllimeter, but more about something they didn't like about the shots they have been getting.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 2:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
skida wrote:
...It had "character", which can't really be tested for.


I couldn't agree more!

For example I bought an old 180/4 Elmar, only because it was a real bargain and I planned to re-sell should I not like it. It is probably one of the few Leica that doesn't have a cult following Smile and yes, it has quite a bit of ca at the borders. But it has a spark, a way to render the pictures that is unmistakable. Bottom line: I kept it!


PostPosted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
skida wrote:
It is a very interesting comparison and helpful if I decide to spend time shooting test charts from a near distance. Sharpness is important, of course, but so is colour rendition, contrast, micro contrast, flare and how the lens performs at various focus distances. Oh! Let's not forget bokeh!


And I would add that while "bookshelf" tests are made at short focusing distance, most lenses that are not macro are optimized for infinity,
so the bookshelf test does not give an useful indication really.
And in any case most lenses provide different results when used at infinity vs. close up (and to counter this effect, floating elements
were introduced in the top of the line prime lenses since the 60s)


PostPosted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 11:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
...so the bookshelf test does not give an useful indication really.


If we're talking about traditional landscape photography you're right (but again, I tested those lenses at infinity too with the exact same results).

If you're into portraits, reportage, non traditional landscape photography and the like, instead, your "normal" focus distance will be exactly in the ballpark of the one used for a bookshelf test. As always is a matter of everyone making his own decisions knowing his tools and what he does.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 1:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
skida wrote:
I enjoyed every minute when I was riding it. It had "character", which can't really be tested for.


And did I mention it was an interesting colour? Shocked

http://www.flickr.com/photos/16818095@N08/7154589641/sizes/l/in/set-72157630053985768/


PostPosted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 9:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
skida wrote:
skida wrote:
I enjoyed every minute when I was riding it. It had "character", which can't really be tested for.


And did I mention it was an interesting colour? Shocked

http://www.flickr.com/photos/16818095@N08/7154589641/sizes/l/in/set-72157630053985768/


No, but you didn't mention it was a Triumph Speed Triple either! I love this one, and it was meant to be my next toy, but since I changed home I had to give up the bike due the absence of a garage Evil or Very Mad
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1