PDA

View Full Version : Field Testing Lenses: Tell me which ones!


raid
05-24-2007, 18:51
Hi,
I am in the middle of lens testing in the 35mm-40mm range. I need your wishes to see which lenses you want a field test for. I want to consider "affordable" lenses that are possibly popular for RFF members.

I already field tested the expensive 35mm/1.4 Summilux and the CV 35mm/1.2.

Raid

vrgard
05-24-2007, 19:19
Hey Raid, I'm assuming you meant 35 and not 50 for the Ultron in this survey, right?

-Randy

raid
05-24-2007, 19:39
Hey Raid, I'm assuming you meant 35 and not 50 for the Ultron in this survey, right?

-Randy

Randy,

Yes, I meant the 35mm/1.7 Ultron.
How can I modify the poll?


Raid

rover
05-25-2007, 07:33
Randy,

Yes, I meant the 35mm/1.7 Ultron.
How can I modify the poll?


Raid


I just made the correction.

dostacos
05-25-2007, 08:24
I would like to see the difference between the two 40s does the single coat or the multicoat shoot better or does it matter

raid
05-25-2007, 11:14
I just made the correction.

Thanks! Now the poll looks correct.

Raid

raid
05-25-2007, 11:16
I think that the polls show what I wanted to do anyways; for all practical purposes, there is no optical difference between the SC and MC Nokton lenses, and I will use one of them. The 35/1.7 and the Color Skopar Clasicc seem to be popular lenses, plus the Summicron-C.

Raid

ibcrewin
05-25-2007, 11:23
I'd like to see a test with the 35/2.5 color skopar. I'm new to the RF lenses and it seems to me this lens is very contrasty.

raid
05-25-2007, 11:40
I'd like to see a test with the 35/2.5 color skopar. I'm new to the RF lenses and it seems to me this lens is very contrasty.

The Color Skopar will be tested in the field.

Raid

oscroft
05-25-2007, 12:25
This looks pretty good to me. I've always wanted a 40mm lens, and now that I have an M body I'm seriously considering a 40 Nokton. I already have a 35 Skopar, so being able to compare field test results from both of them would be brilliant. I'm looking forward to it :)

vrgard
05-25-2007, 12:47
Sorry if this posting causes anyone to think that I've unfairly swayed the voting, but I sure hope that either the Summicron 40 or the Rokkor 40 end up in the field test. I, for one, would be disappointed if it ended up being a field test of current lenses only. And thanks again, Raid, for all your hard work.

-Randy

raid
05-25-2007, 14:35
Sorry if this posting causes anyone to think that I've unfairly swayed the voting, but I sure hope that either the Summicron 40 or the Rokkor 40 end up in the field test. I, for one, would be disappointed if it ended up being a field test of current lenses only. And thanks again, Raid, for all your hard work.

-Randy

Hi Randy,

The Summicron-C is more readily available [it seems] than the Rokkor for the CLE, so I will have the Summicron C in the field test.

Raid

vrgard
05-25-2007, 15:02
Great to hear. Thanks, Raid! Really looking forward to your results (and, of course, to Roland's analysis/presentation of same - you like how I just volunteered Roland into your project?...;) ).

-Randy

ferider
05-25-2007, 15:05
Great to hear. Thanks, Raid! Really looking forward to your results (and, of course, to Roland's analysis/presentation of same - you like how I just volunteered Roland into your project?...;) ).

-Randy

Speaking of which: if you have any additional pics to upload to my site, Raid, please do so soon,
so I can take them home.

Also you not using the CLE lens in the field means that I can have it back soon - yeah :)
Miss that little jewel.

More so than the 35/2.5 PII. If anybody wants it, it will be up for sale soon ...

Roland.

raid
05-25-2007, 18:30
Roland,

Do I still need the bokeh test for all lenses on top of the selective field testing?
If not, I could return all lenses within one week.

I am waiting for the two B&W rolls to be developed for the field testing of the CV 35/1.2 and the Summilux 35/1.4.

Tomorrow's field testing will require two rolls of film. If I use B&W film, there are no local photo finishers that handle B&W [as they should]. I am out of XP2. I don't know when I can send you the results. Why don't you go ahead and analyze what has been uploaded. This is just a friendly suggestion, Roland.

Raid

raid
05-25-2007, 19:02
I will take two rolls of film as follows:


Roll # 1:

M3 with:

(i) J-12 35mm/2.8
(ii) Canon 35mm/1.8
(iii) Nokton 40mm/1.4 Classic
(iv) CV 35mm/1.7

Roll # 2:

M6 with:


(i) Summicron 35mm/2 V3
(ii) Suumicron-C 35mm/2
(iii) CV Color Skopar 35mm/2.5
(iv) Zeiss ZM Biogon 35mm/2

I will cover bokeh shots here.


What do you think?


Raid

raid
05-25-2007, 20:44
1. CV 40mm/1.4 Nokton MC 25 69.44%
2. CV Ultron 35mm/1.7 19 52.78%
3. CV 35mm/2.5 Color Skopar Classic 18 50.00%
4. Leitz Summicron -C 40mm/2.0 14 38.89%
5. Rokkor 40mm/2.0 13 36.11% [similar]
6. Canon 35mm/1.8 13 36.11%
7. CV 35mm/2.5 Color Skopar PII 11 30.56% [similar]
8. CV 40mm/1.4 Nokton SC 10 27.78% [similar]

rxmd
05-25-2007, 21:24
(iii) Nokton 35mm/1.4 Classic
Do you mean the 40/1.4 or the 35/1.2?

Philipp

raid
05-26-2007, 06:49
Do you mean the 40/1.4 or the 35/1.2?

Philipp

Hi Philipp,
The 35/1.2 has already been field tested, and I meant the CV 40mm/1.4 Nokton.

Raid

raid
05-26-2007, 17:57
I did the tests as mentioned below:
Roll # 1:

M3 with:

(i) J-12 35mm/2.8
(ii) Canon 35mm/1.8
(iii) Nokton 40mm/1.4 Classic
(iv) CV 35mm/1.7

Roll # 2:

M6 with:


(i) Summicron 35mm/2 V3
(ii) Suumicron-C 35mm/2
(iii) CV Color Skopar 35mm/2.5
(iv) Zeiss ZM Biogon 35mm/2

It happened that the chrome lenses were used on a chrome M3 and the black lenses were used on a black M6. With the M3, I used a Pentax digital spotmeter to get at the exposure,while with the M6 is used its meter.

Lens testing is now over.

Raid

BillBlackwell
05-26-2007, 18:53
I already field tested the expensive 35mm/1.4 Summilux and the CV 35mm/1.2.

And what were the results?

raid
05-26-2007, 18:59
Bill: I am still awaiting the developing and then getting scans for the rolls. There is no magic way in getting immediate developing of B&W film followed by scanning. Then, I need to load up the images and I need to label each image with the lens info and exposure info. Then Roland needs to set the images up for analysis.

Cheers,

Raid

Joe Mondello
05-26-2007, 19:01
I say go for the 4-40s!

BillBlackwell
05-26-2007, 19:17
Be sure to post the results.

I have both (the 35 Nokton f/1.2 and 35 Summilux Asph f/1.4) lenses, but have not tested them against each other myself yet. When I do lens testing I do it indoors under somewhat controlled conditions with slide film - then view the results on a light table under a loupe.

I have done tests with scanned print film as well, but I think slides show better results. One of my most surprising test results to date was the 40mm f/1.4 Nokton MC against the 35 Asph and 50 Asph Summilux. The Nokton is a surprisingly good little lens - even wide open - on par with the Leica lenses.

raid
05-26-2007, 19:30
I say go for the 4-40s!

Joe: I did test several 40mm lenses so far, and I tested the Nokton MC today, plus the Summicron C. The Rokkor is similar in optical design to the Summicron C and the SC Nokton looked like the MC version in previous images.

Raid

raid
05-26-2007, 19:33
Be sure to post the results.

I have both (the 35 Nokton f/1.2 and 35 Summilux Asph f/1.4) lenses, but have not tested them against each other myself yet. When I do lens testing I do it indoors under somewhat controlled conditions with slide film - then view the results on a light table under a loupe.

I have done tests with scanned print film as well, but I think slides show better results. One of my most surprising test results to date was the 40mm f/1.4 Nokton MC against the 35 Asph and 50 Asph Summilux. The Nokton is a surprisingly good little lens - even wide open - on par with the Leica lenses.


Bill,

You should be in a better position than me then. I have just tried out these lenses which were given to me temporarily for the testing. I used on purpose a very slow film like EFKE 25 to try to capture any fine differences between the CV 35mm/1.2 and the Summilux 35mm/1.4. I had open shade photos and also images with a sunlit background. There was an outdoors arts show close to the waterfront in downtown Pensacola, and it became my testing ground. I even asked one of of the displaying artists to allow me take photos of him. He looked interesting with his full beard.

Cheers,

Raid

payasam
07-20-2007, 00:48
Raid, I am not an artist and I sure as hell am not interesting: but I do have a large grey beard. Would love to be a co-subject with Dana.

raid
07-23-2007, 16:53
You are in Delhi and I am in Penscaola.

payasam
07-24-2007, 00:06
Re-arrange the map, perhaps? A bit of Induced Continental Drift?

Rob-F
10-15-2007, 19:33
I voted for the 35/2.5. I'll be waiting to see what you come up with.

When you get that far, I want to see your test of the 75/2.5. I would ask for a shootout against the 75mm Summicron, but you did say, "affordable." Still, maybe you could borrow one.

raid
10-15-2007, 20:38
Hi Rob,
This was a test of 35mm-40mm lenses.
A future test may include 75mm lenses.

Greetings,

LeicaTom
10-15-2007, 21:34
Raid,

I have to travel to Pensacola to do the Carl Zeiss Jena 2/50mm Sonnar/Leica IIIC K test someday!
(Maybe some prewar German styled artistic nudes about 5am in the morning on the Pensacola sand dunes, I`m sure I can set up an art model in that part of Florida)

Tom

raid
10-16-2007, 07:11
Raid,

I have to travel to Pensacola to do the Carl Zeiss Jena 2/50mm Sonnar/Leica IIIC K test someday!
(Maybe some prewar German styled artistic nudes about 5am in the morning on the Pensacola sand dunes, I`m sure I can set up an art model in that part of Florida)

Tom

Tom,
Let me know if your plan becomes a reality.
I certainly will let you use my lens.

photophorous
10-16-2007, 09:52
Just wanted to ask about one thing. I noticed your list includes both the Color Skopar Classic 35/2.5 and the Pancake II 35/2.5. Aren't these lenses the same optically, and therefore wouldn't they test the same? I'm curious because I own the PII, and would like to know if your test results for the Classic will be indicative of my lens' performance (sample variations aside).

Thanks,
Paul

robin a
10-16-2007, 10:06
Raid,

I have to travel to Pensacola to do the Carl Zeiss Jena 2/50mm Sonnar/Leica IIIC K test someday!
(Maybe some prewar German styled artistic nudes about 5am in the morning on the Pensacola sand dunes, I`m sure I can set up an art model in that part of Florida)

Tom
Hey,I'll carry your bags !...........Robin

raid
10-16-2007, 12:38
Hey,I'll carry your bags !...........Robin

Robin,
There is a fee!!!!!
We'll talk about this later. :cool:

raid
10-16-2007, 12:39
Just wanted to ask about one thing. I noticed your list includes both the Color Skopar Classic 35/2.5 and the Pancake II 35/2.5. Aren't these lenses the same optically, and therefore wouldn't they test the same? I'm curious because I own the PII, and would like to know if your test results for the Classic will be indicative of my lens' performance (sample variations aside).

Thanks,
Paul

Paul,
There was no difference that I could make out.

LeicaTom
10-17-2007, 02:07
Tom,
Let me know if your plan becomes a reality.
I certainly will let you use my lens.

Ohh I wil seriously.......I have seen the beaches up there and they are a whole lot different than the one`s down here, the beaches up there resemble the North German and Dutch coasts, with the dunes and wild long grasses etc.

Just have to find a tattooless natural bodied model who can pull off a 1930`s look, this might be a slight problem, the natural and tattooless part

Tom

raid
10-17-2007, 08:28
You could always start a new trend of tattooed unnatutural bodied 1930's look model.

lawrence
10-18-2007, 07:52
I've recently been testing 35mm lenses and two of the ones I tested are in your list: Canon f1.8 and the Ultron. I also tested Summilux pre-ASPH and Summicron 4th. My tests show that all these lenses are pretty good once you hit f4 and it's at the wider apertures that you can easily tell one lens from another. My main criteria were sharpness and vignetting and on that basis I was really impressed with the Ultron -- it's better in both respects at f2 than the Summicron. The Canon is a nice-ish lens but has major vignetting at f1.8 and f2. The Summicron is small and mechanically smooth but, as implied above, performance at f2 is pretty useless; it also loses a lot of contrast wide open. I also have a Nokton and I'll be testing that next.

raid
10-18-2007, 09:53
Lawrence,
Almost all lenses I have tested did very well at f 4.0 and at smaller apertures. The lenses with a more modern design often have the edge at wide open images.

Here is the link to some results that Roland posted on his website a few months ago:
http://ferider.smugmug.com/gallery/2940230#158701273-A-LB

The portraits taken with the two 35mm Summicrons at 2.0 is not bad at all. Do you see vignetting?

lawrence
10-18-2007, 12:43
Raid

Thanks for the link but I can't really distinguish between the lenses on test because the images are far too small. Also, I don't think the subject matter is very suitable either -- with tests like this you need something with crisp outlines to be able to assess sharpness. So in answer to your question, no I can't see any vignetting but I can't see much else either!

I'll publish the results of my own tests so you can see what I mean, once I've tested the Nokton 35.

Lawrence

raid
10-18-2007, 15:49
Raid

Thanks for the link but I can't really distinguish between the lenses on test because the images are far too small. Also, I don't think the subject matter is very suitable either -- with tests like this you need something with crisp outlines to be able to assess sharpness. So in answer to your question, no I can't see any vignetting but I can't see much else either!

I'll publish the results of my own tests so you can see what I mean, once I've tested the Nokton 35.

Lawrence

Lawrence,
The posted results were not sharpness test images but portrait images to illustrate how a lens renders a human face. There were other tests for sharpness and flare control.

ferider
10-23-2007, 15:58
He's got a point though, Raid: I think we agreed back then
that differences between the lenses are very small,
in particular when compared to your classic 50 and short tele tests.

Best,

Roland.

raid
10-23-2007, 16:19
He's got a point though, Raid: I think we agreed back then
that differences between the lenses are very small,
in particular when compared to your classic 50 and short tele tests.

Best,

Roland.

Hi Roland,
Yes, the differences were small. The bare bulb flare test did reveal differences though. If we would blow up 11x14 prints and also inspect the individual negatives with a Lupe, then we may see more differences.

One of the problems in large scale lens comparisons is the time factor. It takes a lot of time to go through all needed lens settings for all lenses. It takes also a large amount of time to set up the comparison results, as you have done on your website.

Comparing [only] three lenses allows you to do a better comparison for these three lenses involved. If you have 12 or 26 lenses, as I had, things become more difficult to handle.

We always said from the beginning that others should contribute their comparisons to make the lens comparisons better and more complete.

I started out doing my lens comparisons with a very specific goal that was not about sharpness alone. I stated that I wanted to see how a lens renders a human face in a portrait. This goal is different from an optics test for resolution and sharpness and contrast.





Greetings,