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

Your favourite 50mm?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 11:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have just noticed that I did not reply to the question, which is my preferred 50mm lens.

Tough question as I have many of them.

I'll try to give a three-part answer:

- If I want to obtain the maximum sharpness, I pick either the Nikkor AI 1.4/50 or the Summicron-R 50 (I am not sure which is the sharpest, should make a test one of these days)

- If I want to obtain some "magic" in the pictures, a special atmosphere, a depth effect, I pick the CZ Planar 1.4/50

- If I don't mind much about performance and just want to have fun while shooting, and get great colours, I choose the Helios-44 or 44-2, without any doubt one of the most fun lenses that I know (yes I love preset lenses!) - don't know really if it qualifies as it's a 58mm lens not a real 50mm.


PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 1:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
This is an excellent thread for me as I am currently looking for that illusive 'perfect 50' lens.

So far I have:
- CZJ Tessar 50/2.8 - I have a bad Crying or Very sad copy. Sad
- Petacon auto MC 50/1.8 - Okay but the focussing ring plays Sad
- Pentax super takumar 55/1.8 - so far the best I have Very Happy
- Canon EF 50/1.8 II - plastic Sad

After reading the past MFL threads I have purchased these and they are on their way home Laughing
- Helios 44-4 and 44-6 - I have to test both, don't I Wink CHEAP!
- Pentax SMC 50/1.4 - looking forward to this one Very Happy

After reading this thread, I have a few more to order ... Wink

Cheers
Ed

PS - We are talking about 50s (50, 55, & 58mm), right? Wink


PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 1:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Try Nikon 50mm f2 one of the sharpest 50mm lens and CHEAP!!
Also one of the best 50mm lens Olympus OM 50mm f1.8 CHEAP too.


PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 1:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
esrods wrote:

So far I have:
- CZJ Tessar 50/2.8 - I have a bad Crying or Very sad copy. Sad


At what f/stop do you usually use it?
Because it is common for Tessar 50mm to be believed a bad copy. Fact is, the lens really performs from f/8 onwards, becoming excellent at f/11 in spite of diffraction.
That is just the Tessar design, also tele Tessars are the same, a letdown when used wide open, very sharp at narrow apertures.

Since many people want a 50mm lens to perform well wide open, they are let down by the Tessars.
There are other people however, like the Group f/64
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_f/64
that photograph always at the smallest available aperture. For such use, Tessar is a very good lens, because diffraction seems to affect it's performance less than other faster lens schemes.


PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 1:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/german/zeiss/tessar/tessar_50mm_mc/

These pictures are captured beetween f2.8 and f5.6.


PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 1:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
At what f/stop do you usually use it?


I generally shoot between f5.6 and f8. I will try with f8 and below.
Thanks heaps, Orio. I was going to get rid of this Wink

Attila, yes these are on my list too Wink

cheers
Ed


PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 10:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well, while you people are sleeping on the other side of the earth Wink I tested CZJ Tessar with its perture choked to f11 to f16.
Image quality has improved for sure, but still soft and lacked contrast. Sad
It is going to find a new home.

cheers
Ed


PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 10:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
My sharpest one

Mamiya/Sekor 2/50



and I like this Zuiko OM MC 1.8/50



and another copy of Zuiko OM (non MC) 1.8/50




PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 11:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
To Orio:

I read your message about LEICA Summicron-R 50/2 and CZ Planar 50/1.4, so:
If the LEICA costs 150 EURO and the the Planar costs 100 EURO, which lens you advise to buy?
.


PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 12:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Very nice, Pilant!


PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 12:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iha wrote:
To Orio:

I read your message about LEICA Summicron-R 50/2 and CZ Planar 50/1.4, so:
If the LEICA costs 150 EURO and the the Planar costs 100 EURO, which lens you advise to buy?
.


They are different in character, so it depends on personal liking. Summicron is sharper stopped down. It is a lens that will probably please more people because of that. Sharpness of Summicron between f/4 and f/8 is really remarkable. Planar gives the "Zeiss look" to images: depth, saturation, "air" between objects; some people love it some people don't. Summicron has cooler "Leica-type" colours, Planar is more balanced. What serial number is the Summicron? Summicron-R exists in two versions. The older is less sharp but (they say) has better bokeh. Newer is sharper. Both Summicron and Planar tend to vignette wide open, but Summicron can be worse for that.
I suggest to make some lens search e.g. in Photosig and look at the examples, to see which style you prefer.
As a closing line I would say, if you look for sharpness, go for Summicron, if you look for moody shots, go for Planar.


PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 12:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The dog picture is beautiful!


PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 12:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:

There are other people however, like the Group f/64
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_f/64
that photograph always at the smallest available aperture. For such use, Tessar is a very good lens, because diffraction seems to affect it's performance less than other faster lens schemes.


That Group f/64 sound like a right bunch of sticklers. Long since dead, I assume, but I certainly wouldn't want to sit in the pub with them and argue about 'pure photography'.

I can just imagine them... dragging their clunky old house-sized cameras up hills on horseback and pointing them at the view. "With no composition"? Does that mean at random? Strictly speaking, it would, I suppose. Sounds like a load of hooey to me.


PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 12:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Farside wrote:

That Group f/64 sound like a right bunch of sticklers. Long since dead, I assume, but I certainly wouldn't want to sit in the pub with them and argue about 'pure photography'.
I can just imagine them... dragging their clunky old house-sized cameras up hills on horseback and pointing them at the view. "With no composition"? Does that mean at random? Strictly speaking, it would, I suppose. Sounds like a load of hooey to me.


I too disagree from their opinion.
I value composition very much and I believe in the importance of knowing the history of the arts and of studying the great paintings and statues of the past.
I do not give a damn at which aperture a photo has been taken. I like to photograph reality but I don' t have the presumption that my camera is a faithful recorder of the reality: even f/64 photographs composed casually are always an interpretation of reality, always subjective.


PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Khun Pilant, very nice dog picture! Smile

Bill


PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 4:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I made a quick Planar-Summicron comparison at close range focusing here:

http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?p=19084#19084


_


PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 6:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank you so much, Orio!
I have 2 weeks before the seller is back, so I am looking around for the samples on photo sites.
On the flickr I saw some amazing images of Summicron with Leica M8 (!!!) Smile.
.


PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iha wrote:
I have 2 weeks before the seller is back, so I am looking around for the samples on photo sites.


I've got the older Summicron, which sometimes can be found at a reasonably low price compared to the newer one. I've found it sharp enough even on a 350D, I simply cannot imagine needing a lens any sharper. There are some photos taken with it on a 350D, at http://galactinus.net/vilva/retro/eos350d_summicron50.html

Another choice would be the 2.8/60 Macro-Elmarit-R, but it is a lot more expensive. It is my best "normal" lens, examples at http://galactinus.net/vilva/retro/eos350d_elmarit60.html . This lens is one of the few ones which is sharp corner-to-corner on a 5D, see e.g. http://galactinus.net/vilva/retro/eos5d_files/e60_7423lz.jpg

I've also got both the 1.4/50 and the 1.7/50 Planars but no good example shots on-line. The 1.7 is a wee bit sharper than the 1.4 and often much cheaper. The speed difference doesn't amount to much in practice and the difference in bokeh is also minimal - both lenses can produce a generally nice bokeh but also a pretty bad one if the conditions happen to be very unfavorable.

Veijo


PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 12:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
vilva wrote:

I've got the older Summicron, which sometimes can be found at a reasonably low price compared to the newer one. I've found it sharp enough even on a 350D, I simply cannot imagine needing a lens any sharper. There are some photos taken with it on a 350D, at http://galactinus.net/vilva/retro/eos350d_summicron50.html
Veijo


They say that the older Summicron has a bokeh that is nicer than the newer version. Hard to say from your samples, because most of them are shot with iris stopped down, but from the last picture for instance I'd say this seems to be true. I am unhappy with the bokeh of my Summicron-R 50 last version. In fact, I can say I'm quite unhappy about the lens as a whole. I tend to use the Planars much more.
Maybe I shouldn't say this from having only used two copies of this lens, but I am of the impression that the Summicron-R 50 is not really on top of 50mm lenses like a Leica lens should be. I feel that not only the Planars are better (for my personal taste of course), but also the Nikkor 1.4/50 and the SMC Takumar.

Maybe I am influenced by the fact that the other Leica lenses I have, in the 35, 90, 135 and 180 focal lenghts, are all on top of performance amongst my collection. So I would expect the 50mm also to be, but it's really not - at least, not for me.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 12:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
iha wrote:

On the flickr I saw some amazing images of Summicron with Leica M8 (!!!) Smile.
.


Yeah but that it's the rangefinder version. Not really the same lens. So don't judge the Summicron-R based on the pictures you see taken with the Summicron-M (or simply Summicron)
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2