Mamiya EF 50mm f/1.4 vs Petri auto CC 55mm f/1.4

[caspert79]

The Petri auto CC 55mm f/1.4 was introduced in 1967, and the CS version of the Mamiya quite a bit later (in 1978), although it's not entirely clear to me if the lens didn't undergo an optical update for the later Z-series. There's at least 12 years in between years of introduction, and perhaps a few years more. Just curious how both lenses compare, although I would not easily take a fast lens from the sixties as my preferred landscape lens. So one could question the usefulness of a comparison @ infinity, especially when it comes to the corners. Still fun to do though, and hopefully it gives an idea how the Petri renders. BTW: I consider the Mamiya to be one of the best f/1.4 vintage standard lenses. There were lot of clouds this morning so not the ideal situation.

OK, infinity test:
comparison by devoscasper, on Flickr

Wide open, the Petri already shows a good amount of detail centrally just like the Mamiya, more than I would expect of such an old lens.
Corners of the Mamiya are about perfect @ f/5.6; but the Petri has almost perfect corners @ f/8; at f/11 they improve some more.
The Petri's center image suffers a bit from glare; consider this my fault: I don't have a proper hood to fit the lens. Here it's easier to see:
petri11glare by devoscasper, on Flickr

Then a bokeh test. Distance to subject is approximately 60cm:
Bokehcomparisonbloem by devoscasper, on Flickr

Surprisingly poppy images from the old Petri, even wide open. Very good colors and contrast, and pleasing bokeh. The difference in focal length between the two lenses is obviously visible.

Another flower test:
Bloem2comparison by devoscasper, on Flickr

Again, similar results. Bokeh is softer of the Petri, probably due to longer focal length. Very nice results IMO.

[Oldhand]

Thank you for these.
The Petri is renowned for its "painterly" rendering and your samples show it well.
The bokeh from the Petri is also exceptionally pleasing to my eye.
I am pretty sure that it shares a similar layout and configuration as the much sought after Pancolar 55/1.4
I think that it is sometimes referred to as the "poor man's Pancolar" in fact.
For a long time it was also very inexpensive, as there were effectively no adaptors for it available, and most Petri film cameras had long since given up the ghost so using it with film was also not an option.
Tom

[caspert79]

[Alun Thomas]

Interesting comparison, the Petri lens certainly doesn't embarass itself. I am of the belief that all the Petri 'normal' lenses, from the 7-element 50mm F2, through to the final 55mm F/1.7, were Petri designs. Some of their other focal lengths were theirs too, but at times they were supplemented, partly or entirely, by other focal length lenses from other manufacturers, some of which are easy to determine while others are more of a mystery.

When I bought my L-mount Panasonic camera I don't think they were available yet, or, more likely, I didn't want to pay for one. I ended up making one out of a busted camera. I don't have it at hand, but from memory, both removing the mount from the old camera, and using it as an adapter, were very very simple operations. I spaced the mount out from a thin adapter using filters with the glass removed, perhaps with some epoxy for the mount to it's nearest filter, and a MXX to M42 adapter ring to go from the filter thread to the thin adapter.

[caspert79]

The Petri seems to have pretty marvelous bokeh indeed:

Petri5514399 by devoscasper, on Flickr

Petri5514400 by devoscasper, on Flickr

[Oldhand]

[Minolfan]

[Doc Sharptail]

[stevemark]

I usually prefer the older 57mm / 58mm lenses over the later 50mm ones if "character" is more important than "resolution/contrast". Some 55mm normal lenses (especially the Nikkor 1.2/55) are very nice too.

Going from 58mm to 50mm while retaining the typical SLR back focal distance and the image quality was very difficult not only for Nikon (see Nikkor Tales No 40 and No 44), but for any other manufacturer, too. It' pretty telling that the Zeiss Otus f1.4 normal lens is a) a 55mm lens and b) a Distagon construction (not a double gauss derivative) ...

S

[caspert79]

I will post some more test images soon.

[kiddo]

[caspert79]

[Ernst Dinkla]

[sergun]

I had a petri 55/1.4 a long time ago on a crop camera yet. It's still passable on mdf, but at medium and long distances, the software is already quite strong, especially in the sun. Maybe it was my copy like that. Bokeh is really cool, but the software for portraits spoils.

petri 55/1.4
DSCF2690-8 by Сергей Пашнин, on Flickr

[caspert79]

Hi Sergun, what do you mean with 'software'?

[sergun]

[caspert79]