| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Boris_Akunin
Joined: 22 Aug 2013
Posts: 392
Location: Bremen, Germany
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 1:09 am Post subject: Comparison:Canon nFD50/1.4 vs Minolta MC 50/1.4 & 58/1.2 |
 |
|
Boris_Akunin wrote:
I'm getting used to testing my new arrivals like this... (Canon nFD300/5.6 vs Minolta MD300/4.5 is in the works)
Scene - Center:
Scene - Midfield:
Scene - Edge:
Sharpening:
Minolta 58mm - f/1.2
  
Canon 50mm - f/1.4
  
Minolta 50mm - f/1.4
  
Canon 50mm - f/1.7
  
Minolta 58mm - f/2
  
Canon 50mm - f/2
  
Minolta 50mm - f/2
  
Minolta 58mm - f/2.4
  
Canon 50mm - f/2.4
  
Minolta 50mm - f/2.4
  
Minolta 58mm - f/2.8
  
Canon 50mm - f/2.8
  
Minolta 50mm - f/2.8
  
Minolta 58mm - f/3.4
  
Canon 50mm - f/3.4
  
Minolta 50mm - f/3.4
  
Minolta 58mm - f/4
  
Canon 50mm - f/4
  
Minolta 50mm - f/4
  
Minolta 58mm - f/4.8
  
Canon 50mm - f/4.8
  
Minolta 50mm - f/4.8
  
Minolta 58mm - f/5.6
  
Canon 50mm - f/5.6
  
Minolta 50mm - f/5.6
  
Minolta 58mm - f/6.7
  
Canon 50mm - f/6.7
  
Minolta 50mm - f/6.7
  
Minolta 58mm - f/8
  
Canon 50mm - f/8
  
Minolta 50mm - f/8
  
Minolta 58mm - f/9.5
  
Canon 50mm - f/9.5
  
Minolta 50mm - f/9.5
  
Minolta 58mm - f/11
  
Canon 50mm - f/11
  
Minolta 50mm - f/11
  
_________________
Sony: A7 | Samyang FE 35/2.8 | Sony FE 85/1.8
Pentax: K-5 | K28/3.5 | M50/1.7 | DA18-135/3.5-5.6 | F35-70/3.5-4.5
Minolta: X-500 | XD | MD35/2.8 | MC50/1.4 | MD200/4 | MD75-150/4
Canon: nFD24/2.8 | nFD35/2 | nFD50/1.4 | nFD300/5.6 | nFD35-105/3.5
Last edited by Boris_Akunin on Fri Sep 09, 2016 10:19 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jamaeolus
Joined: 19 Mar 2014
Posts: 2965
Location: Eugene
Expire: 2015-08-20
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 1:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
jamaeolus wrote:
Great test. The difference between the 50mm 1.4 is miniscule. I can't really say why but I like the look of the minolta a bit more. Thanks for the hard work!
_________________
photos are moments frozen in time |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Boris_Akunin
Joined: 22 Aug 2013
Posts: 392
Location: Bremen, Germany
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 2:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Boris_Akunin wrote:
I fear I might have misfocused the 58/1.2 bit...
_________________
Sony: A7 | Samyang FE 35/2.8 | Sony FE 85/1.8
Pentax: K-5 | K28/3.5 | M50/1.7 | DA18-135/3.5-5.6 | F35-70/3.5-4.5
Minolta: X-500 | XD | MD35/2.8 | MC50/1.4 | MD200/4 | MD75-150/4
Canon: nFD24/2.8 | nFD35/2 | nFD50/1.4 | nFD300/5.6 | nFD35-105/3.5
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
miran
Joined: 01 Aug 2012
Posts: 1364
Location: Slovenia
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 5:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
miran wrote:
Good test. Canon is clearly sharper and/or contrastier and Minolta more... "vintage". 
Btw, how are these tests supposed to look? When I open the thread all test shots are displayed in a vertical sequence one after the other (center on top, midframe in the middle, corner at the bottom). But when I type this and look at the "topic review" window below, the center/midframe/corner comparison shots are displayed in a horizontal sequence left to right, which looks much better.
_________________
my flickr stream |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Boris_Akunin
Joined: 22 Aug 2013
Posts: 392
Location: Bremen, Germany
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 12:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Boris_Akunin wrote:
| miran wrote: |
| Btw, how are these tests supposed to look? When I open the thread all test shots are displayed in a vertical sequence one after the other (center on top, midframe in the middle, corner at the bottom). But when I type this and look at the "topic review" window below, the center/midframe/corner comparison shots are displayed in a horizontal sequence left to right, which looks much better. |
They're supposed to be horizontal... I should probably have used smaller crops so that this works on smaller display resolutions.
_________________
Sony: A7 | Samyang FE 35/2.8 | Sony FE 85/1.8
Pentax: K-5 | K28/3.5 | M50/1.7 | DA18-135/3.5-5.6 | F35-70/3.5-4.5
Minolta: X-500 | XD | MD35/2.8 | MC50/1.4 | MD200/4 | MD75-150/4
Canon: nFD24/2.8 | nFD35/2 | nFD50/1.4 | nFD300/5.6 | nFD35-105/3.5
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
devinw
Joined: 19 Aug 2016
Posts: 207
Location: Portland, OR
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 4:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
devinw wrote:
Very cool. Thanks for the test!
Seems the nFD 50 is a teeny bit sharper than the Minolta wide open, but the gap closes in stopped down. Both are quite good.
The 58... I don't know. Seems like it should do better than that.
_________________
Camera: Sony a6300
E-Mount: Zeiss/Sony 16-70 f/4, Samyang 12mm f/2
Rokkor: MD PG 50mm f1.4, MD 100mm Macro f3.5, MD 135mm f2.8, MD Zoom 35-70mm f3.5, MD Zoom 75-150 f4
Canon FD: nFD 50mm f1.4, Tokina AT-X 100-300mm f4
My Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/westonde/
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Boris_Akunin
Joined: 22 Aug 2013
Posts: 392
Location: Bremen, Germany
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 5:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Boris_Akunin wrote:
| devinw wrote: |
| The 58... I don't know. Seems like it should do better than that. |
Yeah, I need to reshoot those...
It looks like my new Canon nFD 35/2 will arrive tomorrow (EDIT: nope). I've got a comparison with the Minolta MD35/2.5 and MD35/1.8 planned, I can give the 58 another go while I'm at it.
_________________
Sony: A7 | Samyang FE 35/2.8 | Sony FE 85/1.8
Pentax: K-5 | K28/3.5 | M50/1.7 | DA18-135/3.5-5.6 | F35-70/3.5-4.5
Minolta: X-500 | XD | MD35/2.8 | MC50/1.4 | MD200/4 | MD75-150/4
Canon: nFD24/2.8 | nFD35/2 | nFD50/1.4 | nFD300/5.6 | nFD35-105/3.5
Last edited by Boris_Akunin on Sat Sep 10, 2016 9:33 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
miran
Joined: 01 Aug 2012
Posts: 1364
Location: Slovenia
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
miran wrote:
| Boris_Akunin wrote: |
| They're supposed to be horizontal... I should probably have used smaller crops so that this works on smaller display resolutions. |
What do you mean? My display is at 1920x1200. How much more do I need? 
_________________
my flickr stream |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Boris_Akunin
Joined: 22 Aug 2013
Posts: 392
Location: Bremen, Germany
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 8:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Boris_Akunin wrote:
| miran wrote: |
| Boris_Akunin wrote: |
| They're supposed to be horizontal... I should probably have used smaller crops so that this works on smaller display resolutions. |
What do you mean? My display is at 1920x1200. How much more do I need? |
It looks alright for me (1920x1080):
_________________
Sony: A7 | Samyang FE 35/2.8 | Sony FE 85/1.8
Pentax: K-5 | K28/3.5 | M50/1.7 | DA18-135/3.5-5.6 | F35-70/3.5-4.5
Minolta: X-500 | XD | MD35/2.8 | MC50/1.4 | MD200/4 | MD75-150/4
Canon: nFD24/2.8 | nFD35/2 | nFD50/1.4 | nFD300/5.6 | nFD35-105/3.5
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
miran
Joined: 01 Aug 2012
Posts: 1364
Location: Slovenia
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 9:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
miran wrote:
To me it looks like this:
And the "Topic review" in the "Post a reply" page looks like this:
The same is true for all your lens test comparison posts. Seen in Firefox on different computers, always the same behaviour.
_________________
my flickr stream |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Boris_Akunin
Joined: 22 Aug 2013
Posts: 392
Location: Bremen, Germany
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 10:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Boris_Akunin wrote:
I've tested in a few browsers, Firefox & Chrome show the crops in horizontal sequence, IE & Vivaldi in vertical sequence.
Here's the BBCode, the crops should be horizontal:
[size=14][b]Canon 50mm - f/1.4[/b][/size]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20169/big_7252_001_F014_50MM_CANON__CENTER_1.jpg][img]http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20169/7252_001_F014_50MM_CANON__CENTER_1.jpg[/img][/url][url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20169/big_7252_014_F014_50MM_CANON__MIDFIELD_1.jpg][img]http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20169/7252_014_F014_50MM_CANON__MIDFIELD_1.jpg[/img][/url][url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20169/big_7252_027_F014_50MM_CANON__EDGE_1.jpg][img]http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20169/7252_027_F014_50MM_CANON__EDGE_1.jpg[/img][/url]
_________________
Sony: A7 | Samyang FE 35/2.8 | Sony FE 85/1.8
Pentax: K-5 | K28/3.5 | M50/1.7 | DA18-135/3.5-5.6 | F35-70/3.5-4.5
Minolta: X-500 | XD | MD35/2.8 | MC50/1.4 | MD200/4 | MD75-150/4
Canon: nFD24/2.8 | nFD35/2 | nFD50/1.4 | nFD300/5.6 | nFD35-105/3.5
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Boris_Akunin
Joined: 22 Aug 2013
Posts: 392
Location: Bremen, Germany
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2016 2:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Boris_Akunin wrote:
I found the issue, it depends on the chosen "Board Style". The "mflenses" style (which is the default if you're not logged in) inserts a line break for some reason, the other 3 styles don't.
_________________
Sony: A7 | Samyang FE 35/2.8 | Sony FE 85/1.8
Pentax: K-5 | K28/3.5 | M50/1.7 | DA18-135/3.5-5.6 | F35-70/3.5-4.5
Minolta: X-500 | XD | MD35/2.8 | MC50/1.4 | MD200/4 | MD75-150/4
Canon: nFD24/2.8 | nFD35/2 | nFD50/1.4 | nFD300/5.6 | nFD35-105/3.5
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
miran
Joined: 01 Aug 2012
Posts: 1364
Location: Slovenia
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2016 11:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
miran wrote:
Well, that sucks. I liked the normal bright colour scheme. Now I'm going to have to get used to dark gray. 
And those silly new smiley icons look terrible on dark gray.
 
EDIT: Thank dog! The oldmflenses scheme looks normal and seems to work well. Problem solved.
_________________
my flickr stream |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Boris_Akunin
Joined: 22 Aug 2013
Posts: 392
Location: Bremen, Germany
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2016 12:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Boris_Akunin wrote:
Since the nFD35/2 didn't arrive after all, I took the time to reshoot the comparison (at a distance this time), you can find the new one over here.
_________________
Sony: A7 | Samyang FE 35/2.8 | Sony FE 85/1.8
Pentax: K-5 | K28/3.5 | M50/1.7 | DA18-135/3.5-5.6 | F35-70/3.5-4.5
Minolta: X-500 | XD | MD35/2.8 | MC50/1.4 | MD200/4 | MD75-150/4
Canon: nFD24/2.8 | nFD35/2 | nFD50/1.4 | nFD300/5.6 | nFD35-105/3.5
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3953
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2016 10:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
| devinw wrote: |
Very cool. Thanks for the test!
Seems the nFD 50 is a teeny bit sharper than the Minolta wide open, but the gap closes in stopped down. Both are quite good.
The 58... I don't know. Seems like it should do better than that. |
The nFD 50mm is roughly one decade "newer" than the MC 1.4/50mm. If you would compare the nFD 1.4/50mm to the Minolta MD-III 1.4/50mm, you would get very similar results.
Ah yes, i did compared them (along with another maybe 25 "normal" primes, on both NEX-5N and A7). Sadly i did not yet have the time to publish all these results...
Stephan
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| 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
