Takumar and Yashinon 35mm

[Nesster]

A larger image available at http://www.flickr.com/photos/nesster/2544073769/


Things I already knew: the Tak has more contrast, is tidier overall, and less prone to CA and flare, and would be considered the technically better lens.

The purpose of this shoot (apart from finishing the bottle of wine) was to test the hypothesis that the size of blur is dependent on the max speed of the lens.

Both lenses are stopped down to f/5.6. The Tak is a 3.5, the Yash a 2.8. Even at 5.6, my prediction would be the Yash should have bigger blur.

What I was looking at is the size (not quality or which I like better) of the out of focus blurs. To my eye it seems the Yash has bigger blur.

[kuuan]

the one on top the Tak, the lower the Yash?

[zewrak]

[Nesster]

Yup, the Yash is the first, the Tak the second - I put the other lens in the pic so's I could keep track...

[F16SUNSHINE]

I think your theory could hold true. This test might need to be done again. At 5.6 there is enough DOF to skew the focus and get misleading results. To me it looks like the yashi is at the very back edge of the focus zone with less DOF behind. And the tak is at the front edge of the focus zone with more DOF behind. The chair back to the left of the glass is what leads me to believe this. It would be cool to do this exact test on a tripod, measuring to the film plane, and setting both lenses exactly the same distance on the focus scale.

[Nesster]

You're right about the focus specifics on these two - I noticed that as well. I do plan to do a more rigorous test, as I'm curious. I can get enough depth behind to get good blur in the background even at a smaller aperture.

When my third 28mm arrives I'll do something like what you suggest. There also have a similar impression: a Pentax that's controlled and precise, and a (slightly faster) Vivitar that's more bloozy. I'm thinking/hoping the Hanimex Automatic will split the difference.

[Nesster]

OTH, perhaps it's just a perception thing, both Yash 35 and Viv 28 are simply optimized in (say) two main things: speed and in-focus resolution (for the magazine lens tests), and the other aspects are left to sort themselves out. So there's more flare and CA and other such that creeps in, especially OOF. They just end up looking more bloozy than the Pentaxes, which maybe more corrected in more dimensions.

[F16SUNSHINE]

I look forward to your next trial. This scene looks to be quite appropriate for this sort of thing. That chair back and table top especially will show differences. If you set it up for the wides, maybe you have a batch of 50's to test the same theory

Andy

[Nesster]

I've used this setup in the past to test vintage range finder focus, as well as validate those 'guess focus' folding camera lenses...

So yes, I have a few 50's to try out too.

[poilu]

how was this Californian Cabernet ?
the 2 shots are focused on different place
look the lens and the table behind the glass

[Nesster]

perhaps at that point my three eyes were all focused on different spots.

I like the Coppola wines - all I've tried have been decent and good value.