View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
RAART
Joined: 10 Oct 2012 Posts: 497 Location: Oakville, ON, Canada
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 2:35 pm Post subject: Super-Takumar 50mm 1:1.4 Serial No. 3166621 |
|
|
RAART wrote:
I am slightly not satisfied with performance of my Super-Takumar 50mm F1.4
I do not know if it is just me or I think that this lens should be sharper wide open at f1.4
I attached few pictures with some of them cropped to 1:1.
All pictures were taken hand-held with fill-in flash (except #4) mostly wide open at f1.4 but few of them stopped down (easily recognizable)
Please let me know what do you guys think!
01.
02.
03.
04.
05.
06.
07.
08.
09.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Here are cropped pictures (1:1)
01.
02.
03. _________________
Camera: Pentax K3
FOR SALE:
Do you have Pentax-A or F or FA primes and like to trade?
Here is the list what I have to trade/sale:
Primes: - Kiron 28mm f2 (C/Y); Vivitar 28mm f2.5 Auto (FD); Minolta MD 50mm f2 (incl. adapter to m4/3); Miranda Auto 35mm f2.8 EC (incl. adapter to m4/3); Miranda Auto 135mm f2.8 EC (incl. adapter to m4/3);
Zoom Lenses:
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
Frontal flash kills shadows and makes a lens look less sharp than it actually is.
Try with a lateral light scheme. _________________ 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 |
|
|
Oreste
Joined: 08 Sep 2012 Posts: 451
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oreste wrote:
Orio wrote: |
Frontal flash kills shadows and makes a lens look less sharp than it actually is.
Try with a lateral light scheme. |
This is largely true, but high-speed lenses are not as sharp close up as slower ones. The Takumar is a fairly good lens, but this application does not suit it best. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
peterqd
Joined: 28 Feb 2007 Posts: 7448 Location: near High Wycombe, UK
Expire: 2014-01-04
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 3:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
peterqd wrote:
Oreste wrote: |
....this application does not suit it best. |
I completely agree. With such a short depth of field, 3D subjects like this are always going to have a lot of out-of-focus areas and it's extremely difficult to focus precisely on the point you intend. The small areas that are in focus in the pictures seem quite sharp. Try a flat 2D subject and come back with the results. _________________ Peter - Moderator |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oreste
Joined: 08 Sep 2012 Posts: 451
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 5:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oreste wrote:
peterqd wrote: |
Oreste wrote: |
....this application does not suit it best. |
I completely agree. With such a short depth of field, 3D subjects like this are always going to have a lot of out-of-focus areas and it's extremely difficult to focus precisely on the point you intend. The small areas that are in focus in the pictures seem quite sharp. Try a flat 2D subject and come back with the results. |
Fast 50mm lenses are best used for intermediate-distance photographs of larger objects where the depth of field is not so shallow, and the lens is performing better.
Last edited by Oreste on Wed Oct 24, 2012 5:41 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008 Posts: 6622 Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
f/1.4 will give a very shallow depth of field. Looking at those photos, the sharp bits look sharp to me. Perhaps they are not the bits you intended to be sharp though _________________ Graham - Moderator
Shooter of choice: Fujifilm X-T20 with M42, PB and C/Y lenses
See my Flickr photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/manualfocus-g |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Aanything
Joined: 27 Aug 2011 Posts: 2187 Location: Piacenza, Italy
Expire: 2014-05-30
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Aanything wrote:
ManualFocus-G wrote: |
f/1.4 will give a very shallow depth of field. Looking at those photos, the sharp bits look sharp to me. Perhaps they are not the bits you intended to be sharp though |
+1
The perfectly focused bits seem to me definitely sharp enough for a 1.4/50 at such close focus distance. _________________ C&C and editing of my pics are always welcome
Samples from my lenses
My gear
My Flickr |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kds315*
Joined: 12 Mar 2008 Posts: 16628 Location: Weinheim, Germany
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kds315* wrote:
Yep, it's not the lens... _________________ Klaus - Admin
"S'il vient a point, me souviendra" [Thomas Bohier (1460-1523)]
http://www.macrolenses.de for macro and special lens info
http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos for UV Images and lens/filter info
https://www.flickr.com/photos/kds315/albums my albums using various lenses
http://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.com/ my UV BLOG
http://www.travelmeetsfood.com/blog Food + Travel BLOG
https://galeriafotografia.com Architecture + Drone photography
Currently most FAV lens(es):
X80QF f3.2/80mm
Hypergon f11/26mm
ELCAN UV f5.6/52mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f4/60mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f2/62mm
Lomo Уфар-12 f2.5/41mm
Lomo Зуфар-2 f4.0/350mm
Lomo ZIKAR-1A f1.2/100mm
Nikon UV Nikkor f4.5/105mm
Zeiss UV-Sonnar f4.3/105mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f1.8/45mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f4.1/94mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f2.8/100mm
Steinheil Quarzobjektiv f1.8/50mm
Pentax Quartz Takumar f3.5/85mm
Carl Zeiss Jena UV-Objektiv f4/60mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha II f1.1/90mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha I f2.8/200mm
COASTAL OPTICS f4/60mm UV-VIS-IR Apo
COASTAL OPTICS f4.5/105mm UV-Micro-Apo
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f4.5/85mm
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f5.6/300mm
Rodenstock UV-Rodagon f5.6/60mm + 105mm + 150mm
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
SonicScot
Joined: 01 Dec 2011 Posts: 2697 Location: Scottish Highlands
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
SonicScot wrote:
Aanything wrote: |
ManualFocus-G wrote: |
f/1.4 will give a very shallow depth of field. Looking at those photos, the sharp bits look sharp to me. Perhaps they are not the bits you intended to be sharp though |
+1
The perfectly focused bits seem to me definitely sharp enough for a 1.4/50 at such close focus distance. |
Agreed. _________________ Gary
Currently active gear....
Sony a7
E-M1 Mkll
Rubinar 1000/10 + 2x matched extender
Tamron 500/8 55BB
Sigma 100-300/4
Vivitar Series 1.... 200/3, 70-210/3.5 (V1 by Kiron), 135/2.3, 105/2.5 macro, 90/2.5 macro (Bokina), 90-180/4.5 Flat Field Macro, 28-90mm f/2.8-3.5
Carl Zeiss.... 180/2.8, 135/3.5, 85/1.4, 35/2.4 Flektagon, 21/2.8 Distagon
Nikon.... 55/3.5 micro, 50/1.2
Elicar 90/2.5 V-HQ Macro
Zhongyi Speedmaster 85/1.2
Jupiter-9 85/2
Helios.... 58/2 44-3
Hartblei 45/3.5 Super-Rotator TS-PC
Zenitar 16/2.8 fisheye
Samyang 8/3.5 fisheye
Nodal Ninja 4, Neewer leveling tripod base
Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/gazsus/ Website http://garianphotography.co.uk/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RAART
Joined: 10 Oct 2012 Posts: 497 Location: Oakville, ON, Canada
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 8:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RAART wrote:
While I was testing the lens, here is explained "point of focus" or where I tried to focus:
Img 01: the last of the bigger petals next to the center
Img 02: the center of the flower
Img 03: in the second row of closest "whatever it is" (counted from left)
Img 04: closest petals to the center of the flower (foreground) (no flash in this photo has been used)
Img 05: This one I tried to get it right for testing purpose and paid attention that I focus on tip of 3 leafs closest to me, tips slightly pointing towards me (group of 3)
Img 06: the stem of the last leaf
Img 07: the leafs on the left (last 3 on the top of the stem)
Img 08: center of the flower and first petals after
Img 09: the center of the flower on the left
Img 10: the center of the flower (green)
Img 11: the crocked ones (yellow) in the center of the flower
Img 12: the green tips closest to me.
Img 13: the same focus point but stopped down (I do not remember exactly how far I stopped down)
While pictures were taken in the evening/midnight I used built-in Olympus Pen E-PL1 flash (not very powerful) but with this lens even low settings of Fill-in was enough to well lit the object. I was always at least 50-60cm (around 2 feet) away from the subject. _________________
Camera: Pentax K3
FOR SALE:
Do you have Pentax-A or F or FA primes and like to trade?
Here is the list what I have to trade/sale:
Primes: - Kiron 28mm f2 (C/Y); Vivitar 28mm f2.5 Auto (FD); Minolta MD 50mm f2 (incl. adapter to m4/3); Miranda Auto 35mm f2.8 EC (incl. adapter to m4/3); Miranda Auto 135mm f2.8 EC (incl. adapter to m4/3);
Zoom Lenses:
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
RAART
Joined: 10 Oct 2012 Posts: 497 Location: Oakville, ON, Canada
|
Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 1:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RAART wrote:
After de-yellowing the super-tak with Ikea Jansjo LED lamp I decided to take some pictures at workplace (anyway need them to make Christmas card for my coworkers) and thought to be a nice idea to post them here.
They are slightly PP with Olympus Master 2 (sharpness: +5 and contrast: +20)
Re-sized with IrfanView to long side set at 1200pix.
All hand-held (forget tripod at home) wide open with ISO1000, around 03:00am.
_________________
Camera: Pentax K3
FOR SALE:
Do you have Pentax-A or F or FA primes and like to trade?
Here is the list what I have to trade/sale:
Primes: - Kiron 28mm f2 (C/Y); Vivitar 28mm f2.5 Auto (FD); Minolta MD 50mm f2 (incl. adapter to m4/3); Miranda Auto 35mm f2.8 EC (incl. adapter to m4/3); Miranda Auto 135mm f2.8 EC (incl. adapter to m4/3);
Zoom Lenses:
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
peterqd
Joined: 28 Feb 2007 Posts: 7448 Location: near High Wycombe, UK
Expire: 2014-01-04
|
Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
peterqd wrote:
I just don't understand why you would want to judge the performance of a lens wide open. It looks pretty good to me, but it would be miles better closed down a little. _________________ Peter - Moderator |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RAART
Joined: 10 Oct 2012 Posts: 497 Location: Oakville, ON, Canada
|
Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 3:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RAART wrote:
peterqd wrote: |
I just don't understand why you would want to judge the performance of a lens wide open. It looks pretty good to me, but it would be miles better closed down a little. |
While I like to experiment with low light photography... or maybe better to say photos taken overnight.
Looking for a sharp lens wide-open. _________________
Camera: Pentax K3
FOR SALE:
Do you have Pentax-A or F or FA primes and like to trade?
Here is the list what I have to trade/sale:
Primes: - Kiron 28mm f2 (C/Y); Vivitar 28mm f2.5 Auto (FD); Minolta MD 50mm f2 (incl. adapter to m4/3); Miranda Auto 35mm f2.8 EC (incl. adapter to m4/3); Miranda Auto 135mm f2.8 EC (incl. adapter to m4/3);
Zoom Lenses:
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
RAART
Joined: 10 Oct 2012 Posts: 497 Location: Oakville, ON, Canada
|
Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RAART wrote:
While I just walked to local supermarket and had the camera with me, here are some samples at F4 without any PP just resizing with IrfanView.
_________________
Camera: Pentax K3
FOR SALE:
Do you have Pentax-A or F or FA primes and like to trade?
Here is the list what I have to trade/sale:
Primes: - Kiron 28mm f2 (C/Y); Vivitar 28mm f2.5 Auto (FD); Minolta MD 50mm f2 (incl. adapter to m4/3); Miranda Auto 35mm f2.8 EC (incl. adapter to m4/3); Miranda Auto 135mm f2.8 EC (incl. adapter to m4/3);
Zoom Lenses:
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
dnas
Joined: 14 Nov 2008 Posts: 488 Location: Japan
|
Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dnas wrote:
peterqd wrote: |
I just don't understand why you would want to judge the performance of a lens wide open. It looks pretty good to me, but it would be miles better closed down a little. |
In my view, if you have a fast lens, you may WANT to use it a maximum aperture at some stage. Therefore, it makes sense to test its capabilities and find its strengths and weaknesses.
e.g. F1.4 is not ideal for macro, as can be seen from those photos. F5.6-F8 is more useful for macro.
As for the Super Tak itself, I have quite a few of these (repairing and reselling) and they are reasonably sharp in the centre, and a little soft in the corners. Generally a nice lens, the SMC Takumar is the same optical formula, but but the coatings improve the contrast quite a lot. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
peterqd
Joined: 28 Feb 2007 Posts: 7448 Location: near High Wycombe, UK
Expire: 2014-01-04
|
Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 11:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
peterqd wrote:
dnas wrote: |
In my view, if you have a fast lens, you may WANT to use it a maximum aperture at some stage. |
I would never WANT to (unless I was after a special shallow DOF effect). There could feasibly be a situation where I was FORCED to, but I've never come across it yet. That would be my final option after running out of slow shutter speeds and higher ISO settings. _________________ Peter - Moderator |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RAART
Joined: 10 Oct 2012 Posts: 497 Location: Oakville, ON, Canada
|
Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 11:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RAART wrote:
shallow DOF effect? I was looking for sharpness at 1.4...
No PP at all in this sample... not re-sized either.
_________________
Camera: Pentax K3
FOR SALE:
Do you have Pentax-A or F or FA primes and like to trade?
Here is the list what I have to trade/sale:
Primes: - Kiron 28mm f2 (C/Y); Vivitar 28mm f2.5 Auto (FD); Minolta MD 50mm f2 (incl. adapter to m4/3); Miranda Auto 35mm f2.8 EC (incl. adapter to m4/3); Miranda Auto 135mm f2.8 EC (incl. adapter to m4/3);
Zoom Lenses:
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
tromboads
Joined: 29 May 2012 Posts: 1655 Location: Melbourne AU
Expire: 2015-10-01
|
Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 11:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tromboads wrote:
Pentax K10D, s1/20th iso800 f1.4 Super Tak
I took a pimple out from under her nose otherwise It's outa-da-camera.
Sharp, couldn't really call it sharp, but for the subject I wouldn't want it to be
She plays with her hair a lot |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dnas
Joined: 14 Nov 2008 Posts: 488 Location: Japan
|
Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
dnas wrote:
peterqd wrote: |
dnas wrote: |
In my view, if you have a fast lens, you may WANT to use it a maximum aperture at some stage. |
I would never WANT to (unless I was after a special shallow DOF effect). There could feasibly be a situation where I was FORCED to, but I've never come across it yet. That would be my final option after running out of slow shutter speeds and higher ISO settings. |
But then by that logic, YOU would not buy an F1.4 lens. But if you personally DO HAVE an F1.4 lens, then wouldn't it be better to test the lens, so you know its exact capabilities if you are FORCED to use it at F1.4? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lightshow
Joined: 04 Nov 2011 Posts: 3666 Location: Calgary
|
Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lightshow wrote:
For wide open sharpness, My Topcor RE 58/1.8 is my best, but it can produce glow and CA in high contrast lighting. _________________ A Manual Focus Junky...
One photographers junk lens is an artists favorite tool.
My lens list
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RAART
Joined: 10 Oct 2012 Posts: 497 Location: Oakville, ON, Canada
|
Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 2:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RAART wrote:
I just tried tonight a Canon FD 50mm 1.8 and I like it better...
ISO: 1600 at 2.8 taken hand-held with some minimal PP during RAW development (less then Pentax)
Re-sized with IrfanView, long side set to 1200pix
Some samples here that can be compared (same subject)...
_________________
Camera: Pentax K3
FOR SALE:
Do you have Pentax-A or F or FA primes and like to trade?
Here is the list what I have to trade/sale:
Primes: - Kiron 28mm f2 (C/Y); Vivitar 28mm f2.5 Auto (FD); Minolta MD 50mm f2 (incl. adapter to m4/3); Miranda Auto 35mm f2.8 EC (incl. adapter to m4/3); Miranda Auto 135mm f2.8 EC (incl. adapter to m4/3);
Zoom Lenses:
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
peterqd
Joined: 28 Feb 2007 Posts: 7448 Location: near High Wycombe, UK
Expire: 2014-01-04
|
Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
peterqd wrote:
dnas wrote: |
peterqd wrote: |
dnas wrote: |
In my view, if you have a fast lens, you may WANT to use it a maximum aperture at some stage. |
I would never WANT to (unless I was after a special shallow DOF effect). There could feasibly be a situation where I was FORCED to, but I've never come across it yet. That would be my final option after running out of slow shutter speeds and higher ISO settings. |
But then by that logic, YOU would not buy an F1.4 lens. But if you personally DO HAVE an F1.4 lens, then wouldn't it be better to test the lens, so you know its exact capabilities if you are FORCED to use it at F1.4? |
That's a jump too far, I can't follow you. A 1.4 lens is still faster than a 2.8 when they're both stopped down 1 stop? I don't understand why you're arguing with me, what's your angle? And can we stop shouting please? _________________ Peter - Moderator |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Aanything
Joined: 27 Aug 2011 Posts: 2187 Location: Piacenza, Italy
Expire: 2014-05-30
|
Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Aanything wrote:
I think I lost myself during the running of this thread.
I'm not sure what the op is trying to say/ask.
The wide open pics look decently sharp to me (especially considering the max aperture vs price of this lens); the stopped down ones are sharper, but that happened with every single lens I tried, so I don't think it's an issue.
That behavior reflects perfectly my experience with various versions of this lens: It is unarguably from usable to quite sharp wide open, so you will get decent pics even in those situations in which you are forced to shoot at f1.4 (you have to be really careful with focus, though, I always miss some when I shoot that open), and if you want to get the best from this, just find a way to shoot stopped down a little. _________________ C&C and editing of my pics are always welcome
Samples from my lenses
My gear
My Flickr |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RAART
Joined: 10 Oct 2012 Posts: 497 Location: Oakville, ON, Canada
|
Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RAART wrote:
Sorry people, I tried something but I think I just confused everyone... I will try to explain...
While Pentax is faster I was surprised when at the same focal length and f-stop the Canon was having faster aperture time. To compensate for this I just closed 1 stop but boosted ISO to have same aperture time but somehow escaped my attention that sharpness will change.
Anyway, I simulated at home in a dark corner, low-light situation on some decorative chrome metal flowers.
Pictures were taken hand-held and during RAW Development I had following settings:
Exp. Comp: 0.2EV
Sharpness: +1
Contrast: +5
then I had them re-seized with IrfanView.
Pentax pictures:
1. at 1.4; ISO1600; 1/40 sec
2. add half-stop (I guess, just dot there); ISO1600; 1/20 sec
3. at 2.8; ISO1600; 1/15 sec
Canon pictures:
1. at 1.8; ISO1600; 1/30 sec
2. add half-stop; ISO1600; 1/25 sec
3. at 2.8; ISO1600; 1/20 sec
here can be seen variation in exposure time, and what I tried to achieve.
here are the samples (first Pentax, then Canon):
----------
_________________
Camera: Pentax K3
FOR SALE:
Do you have Pentax-A or F or FA primes and like to trade?
Here is the list what I have to trade/sale:
Primes: - Kiron 28mm f2 (C/Y); Vivitar 28mm f2.5 Auto (FD); Minolta MD 50mm f2 (incl. adapter to m4/3); Miranda Auto 35mm f2.8 EC (incl. adapter to m4/3); Miranda Auto 135mm f2.8 EC (incl. adapter to m4/3);
Zoom Lenses:
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
RAART
Joined: 10 Oct 2012 Posts: 497 Location: Oakville, ON, Canada
|
Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RAART wrote:
peterqd wrote: |
dnas wrote: |
peterqd wrote: |
dnas wrote: |
In my view, if you have a fast lens, you may WANT to use it a maximum aperture at some stage. |
I would never WANT to (unless I was after a special shallow DOF effect). There could feasibly be a situation where I was FORCED to, but I've never come across it yet. That would be my final option after running out of slow shutter speeds and higher ISO settings. |
But then by that logic, YOU would not buy an F1.4 lens. But if you personally DO HAVE an F1.4 lens, then wouldn't it be better to test the lens, so you know its exact capabilities if you are FORCED to use it at F1.4? |
That's a jump too far, I can't follow you. A 1.4 lens is still faster than a 2.8 when they're both stopped down 1 stop? I don't understand why you're arguing with me, what's your angle? And can we stop shouting please? |
Hey, slow down... You are too aggressive, or have anger management issues... He just try to highlight some of the words you said and he used CAPITOL letters instead of "quotation marks"...
IMO his logic is perfectly fine, otherwise why people should purchase fast lens or please explain why you purchased F1.4 lens if you don't use it? For shallow depth of field? Everyone knows that fast lenses are generally made for low-light condition/photography.
Do you agree with this? _________________
Camera: Pentax K3
FOR SALE:
Do you have Pentax-A or F or FA primes and like to trade?
Here is the list what I have to trade/sale:
Primes: - Kiron 28mm f2 (C/Y); Vivitar 28mm f2.5 Auto (FD); Minolta MD 50mm f2 (incl. adapter to m4/3); Miranda Auto 35mm f2.8 EC (incl. adapter to m4/3); Miranda Auto 135mm f2.8 EC (incl. adapter to m4/3);
Zoom Lenses:
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|