PDA

View Full Version : Sean's RD1 tests


MP Guy
04-17-2005, 09:22
had to disable for a while.

taffer
04-17-2005, 12:17
Impressive set of tests. Thanks Sean and Jorge for hosting them, will take advantadge of the connection at work tomorrow during the (long) coffee time.

MP Guy
04-17-2005, 15:16
I will reset the router now. hang tight. Please let m eknow if its any netter. This is a 1 meg line and should load fast.

mac_wt
04-17-2005, 21:41
This looks very interesting, but the pics load to slow for me to view them. Maybe you could add some medium size versions?

Wim

einolu
04-17-2005, 21:59
poor child! :P

Jim Watts
04-18-2005, 01:21
They seem to be downloading fairly quickly for me at this time. Brief look so far shows no real losers here as far as I'm concerned.

Hope your daughter got a good modeling fee for this Sean.

Sean Reid
04-18-2005, 02:46
These tests form an appendix, of sorts, to the review I'm writing for Luminous-Landscape. They'll make more sense, likely, in the context of the review. It's a very long piece and I'm still revising it.

Huck Finn
04-18-2005, 02:52
Still very slow, Jorge.

Sean Reid
04-18-2005, 03:16
Hi Jim,

My daughter was a real trooper. She's posed many times before for tests (tests only, because my own photography doesn't involve posing) and she knew this one was going to take a long time. She held her chin in her hands to keep a constant distance from the lens and knew that she didn't need to hold some kind of fake smile for these pictures. Instead, she was free to look the way she felt..a little tired, a little bored. She's a young photographer herself though and she understands what the tests are for. The two of us together chose the objects for the foreground and background so as to give the lenses interesting things to draw. Of her own choice, she sometimes comes with me on architectural shoots and helps with lighting and prop arrangement choices. Nine years old and quite a kid...

Cheers,

Sean

Huck Finn
04-18-2005, 03:33
Sweet! :angel: :) :cool:

Sean Reid
04-18-2005, 04:24
BTW, these are level ten JPEGs (set intentionally to that level in order to preserve quality). Maybe we should also post the zip file that contains all the pictures?

Sean

Sean Reid
04-18-2005, 04:29
Jorge,

If you want to make the zip file available for download, let's just add the following to the text on the index page:

"You may also download a zip file containing all of these pictures by clicking here".

The word "here" would of course link to the zip file.

Sean

Sean Reid
04-18-2005, 05:06
Lens tests on this page include:

Voigtlander 35/1.2 Nokton
Voigtlander 40/1.4 Nokton
Voigtlander 50/1.5 Nokton

Canon 35/1.5
Canon 35/2.0
Canon 50/1.2
Canon 50/1.4
Canon 50/1.8

Leica 35/1.4 Summilux Aspherical
Leica 50/2.0

Zeiss 35/2.0 Biogon

jlw
04-18-2005, 05:35
I downloaded all the files last night (so apologies to anyone who found the site running a bit slow during that time -- probably my fault for hogging all the bandwidth!)

My immediate observations:

-- Sean's got a VERY patient 9-year-old there! You didn't let her sample some of that wine, did you?

-- I wish I could shoot in b&w all the time.


-- This was a great test scene -- it really gives me a good idea of the kinds of results I might expect from the kinds of subjects I like to photograph. You can evaluate eyelash sharpness (which I admit is what I always look for, non-definitive though it is); appearance of OOF areas; highlight "blooming" (white napkin), etc.

-- I wish the 35/1.7 Ultron (from Sean's previous review) could have been included in this test set, so we could compare it directly to the ones in this group, but I realize you have to draw the line somewhere.

-- Maybe I'm a pleb, but at f/8 almost all the lenses seem very close in performance, and even at full aperture I can't see any advantage for the 50 Summicron over the 50 Nokton, for example.

-- Some of the worst-performing lenses (e.g. Canon 35/1.5) produced the prettiest-looking results.

-- The big question I was hoping this test would answer was whether I'd see any improvement in fine detail and "microcontrast" if I were to spring for a 50/1.5 Nokton as a replacement for my current Canon 50/1.4. It looks as if the answer is yes, but it took a pretty darn close study to see the differences.

Overall, well worth the download if you're interested in any of these lenses, or just in the "look" of oldies vs. current lenses on the R-D 1.

Jim Watts
04-18-2005, 05:37
Much slower now. So I guess it depends on the demands on the server and slows when all you people in the U.S. start to come online. I think I'll wait to dowload the zip file (if /when available) at about 9.00am BST U.K. time.

Sean Reid
04-18-2005, 06:06
"-- Sean's got a VERY patient 9-year-old there! You didn't let her sample some of that wine, did you?"

No, this isn't France <G> She just understood what I was doing and was willing to help. She acted in a movie last year and that took even more patience than this.



"-- I wish I could shoot in b&w all the time."

I pretty much do unless shooting for a client.


"-- This was a great test scene -- it really gives me a good idea of the kinds of results I might expect from the kinds of subjects I like to photograph. You can evaluate eyelash sharpness (which I admit is what I always look for, non-definitive though it is); appearance of OOF areas; highlight "blooming" (white napkin), etc."

Good. We created the test scene and I thought it was a good match for lenses designed to work in existing low light.

"-- I wish the 35/1.7 Ultron (from Sean's previous review) could have been included in this test set, so we could compare it directly to the ones in this group, but I realize you have to draw the line somewhere."

I added it to the test part way through so it wasn't part of the Fullerton Inn pictures. It will be in the other set, though.

"-- Maybe I'm a pleb, but at f/8 almost all the lenses seem very close in performance, and even at full aperture I can't see any advantage for the 50 Summicron over the 50 Nokton, for example."

Wait till you read the final review. In terms of sharpness across the frame, micro-contrast, etc., the Nokton tops everything except the Leica 50/1.4 Asph. It even betters that lens in the outer zones.

"-- Some of the worst-performing lenses (e.g. Canon 35/1.5) produced the prettiest-looking results."

Well, of course, some of these are your very own lenses so this info. is especially helpful to you perhaps. I talk a lot about this sort of issue (the drawing) in the review.

"-- The big question I was hoping this test would answer was whether I'd see any improvement in fine detail and "microcontrast" if I were to spring for a 50/1.5 Nokton as a replacement for my current Canon 50/1.4. It looks as if the answer is yes, but it took a pretty darn close study to see the differences."

You'll see them more readily once you compare pictures in various settings/lighting. That said, the 50/1.4 really does well for an oldie.

Cheers,

Sean


P.S. Some day I'll actually finish this article.

MP Guy
04-18-2005, 09:11
Had to remove the link. It was taking up quite a bit of bandwidth. Will lookinto relinking later.

Sean Reid
04-18-2005, 13:55
I was afraid of that. I had some other offers for hosting, should we try another server?

Cheers,

Sean

driggett
04-19-2005, 00:45
I can still offer up Apple's .mac service.

Sean Reid
04-19-2005, 03:29
Anyone still interested in hosting these, please e-mail me off-list at [email protected] We can put the zip file up at a few different sites to ease bandwidth issues.

Thanks,

Sean

Sean Reid
04-19-2005, 17:03
OK, these are once again available for download thanks to Chris Driggett. Thanks Chris.

http://homepage.mac.com/driggett/For%20RFF/index.htm

Sean Reid
04-19-2005, 17:19
Since these pictures are being made available even before the article, I should point out that I looked at the critical differences in sharpness among these lenses using flat field tests (not included in these samples and dead boring). The samples I am posting in these sets are generally focused correctly but they're made using a living breathing subject in existing light settings. As such, they aren't necessarily the best indicators of lens sharpness per se.

Instead, they're meant to show how these various lenses draw in both B&W and color. I discuss sharpness and contrast in some detail in the review but these samples are meant to give comparative samples of the characters of the various lenses. In my mind, that aspect is crucially important to a serious photographer.

Cheers,

Sean

driggett
04-19-2005, 17:57
Please let me know if any of you are experiencing problems and give me feedback on how fast or slow the site is.
Thanks,
Chris

Jim Watts
04-20-2005, 00:57
Sean,
Given all the discussions on focus issues with various lenses close up on the R-D1 in other threads can you tell us whether you checked for this on all the lenses and if so what were your findings.

Sean Reid
04-20-2005, 03:39
The Leica 75/1.4 cannot be focused reliably and consistently by my R-D1. The Noctilux can be, under best case circumstances, but I wouldn't ever use it professionally for fast changing subject matter.

Cheers,

Sean

Jim Watts
04-20-2005, 04:57
Sean,
Sorry I should have been clearer. I was refering to potential front (and sometimes back) focus issues close-up as compared to rangefinder rather than the ability of the R-D1's rangefinder base to achieve accurate focus. See Phil's thread on Focusing Accuracy for his findings with a number of lenses or the Deadstock Avenon thread. It happens with some M mount as well as screw (+ adapter) as I have found with 35mm Cron's etc. so is not just an adapter problem.

Sean Reid
04-20-2005, 08:56
Hi Jim,

When I did the flat field tests, I did three rounds for each lens at each tested aperture (wide open, F/2.8 and F/8). The first was focus as indicated by the rangefinder, the second focus set just slightly ahead and the third focus set just slightly back. The sharpest pictures were kept and evaluated. I did this as much to compensate for the inherent slight imprecision of all rangefinders, as well as for possible human error.

It's not in the article, but from my rough notes:

Leica 50/1.0 - difficult to focus with consistent accuracy, no trend of back or forward focus though

Canon 50/1.2 - accurate focus
Canon 50/1.4 - accurate focus
Leica 50/1.4 Asph - accurate focus
Nokton 50/1.5 - accurate focus
Canon 50/1.8 - accurate focus

CV 35/1.2 - accurate focus
Leica 35/1.4 - accurate focus
Canon 35/1.5 - slight back focus
CV 35/1.7 - slight front focus
Canon 35/2 - slight front focus
Zeiss 35/2 - accurate focus
CV 40/1.4 - slight front focus

But...any of these could be human error and I didn't test this aspect specifically.

Cheers,

Sean

Huck Finn
04-20-2005, 09:05
Sean, I would think that this could also represent sample variability.

Sean Reid
04-20-2005, 09:27
Hi Huck,

Yes, it could represent a lot of things. That's why I'm not getting into it in the article. Too many possible variables.

Cheers,

Aunt Sally

laptoprob
04-20-2005, 09:43
Please let me know if any of you are experiencing problems and give me feedback on how fast or slow the site is.
Thanks,
Chris



Hi Chris,

Yes I am encountering problems: I can enter your site but not the tests. Maybe hidden in HTML?
Only option is opening the index. Not the samples themselves. :bang:

Any solutions?

Thanks, Rob.

driggett
04-20-2005, 09:54
Hi Chris,

Yes I am encountering problems: I can enter your site but not the tests. Maybe hidden in HTML?
Only option is opening the index. Not the samples themselves. :bang:

Any solutions?

Thanks, Rob.

Rob,
I just tried again and I have no problems clicking on a index picture to get the full size picture. When you mentioned tests you mean each picture correct?
Thanks,
Chris

Huck Finn
04-20-2005, 10:14
No problem here either.

laptoprob
04-20-2005, 11:41
Hmmmm :bang:
It must be me or something.
Or is it a secret Mac handshake?
I get the index page only downloaded as html page or opened as html page. Not functioning. So I only get the 'empty' shortcuts to the testshots themselves.

I must be missing something.

Rob.



Rob,
I just tried again and I have no problems clicking on a index picture to get the full size picture. When you mentioned tests you mean each picture correct?
Thanks,
Chris

Sean Reid
04-20-2005, 13:01
I actually tested two copies of the 35/1.7 BTW, the first performed rather poorly and the second was so much better it was almost as if it was a different model lens. I've tested various Voigtlander lenses and the first example of the 35/1.7 was the first lens I've tested from the company that I would call "defective". I've run into bad copies of Canon lenses several times but that first 35/1.7 was a first among the CV glass.

So what observations do people have about the lenses based on the samples?

Sean

Huck Finn
04-21-2005, 08:22
Sean, I wish that I could reply to your question, but the download is just too long & cumbersome for me to view them on the monitor or even print them out for comparison. Wish I could, but i can't. Thanks for making them available because when your article is published, the pictures will be a handy archive to reference regarding specific points you make about the lenses.

Cheers,
Huck

pfogle
04-22-2005, 01:17
I found I can't open the files, or see the thumbnails when using Firefox browser (my default), but it works fine in IE. Maybe this is the cause of some of the problems mentioned above?

cheers
Phil

driggett
04-23-2005, 08:22
I have fixed the problem I believe by changing the extension from .htm to .html. Now it works in Firefox for me. The old one is still there. The new link is:

http://homepage.mac.com/driggett/For%20RFF/index.html

Cheers,
Chris

Sean Reid
04-26-2005, 05:43
Thank you to the folks who read the draft of the article and offered comments. I should have it finished soon.

Cheers,

Sean

MIKIRO
05-01-2005, 04:03
Hi, there.
I am new to the list but one of nuts who recklessly jumped to R-D1 soon after its release in Japan. :p I would love to read the article. I enjoyed the lens comparison very much and am interested in Nokton 40mm in particular.

Cheers,

MIKIRO

MIKIRO
05-07-2005, 17:53
Folks. The following are the lens tests on R-D1 published in a Japanese journal some time ago. Those of you who have not seen them might be interested. Sorry, all the text is in Japanese. It is a shame that even lens names are written in Japanese characters, :bang: but with some effort and patience you can possibly guess the names from the letters encoding Japanese characters.

(1) Zeiss Biogon 35mm et al.
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2005/03/28/1240.html

ノクトン: Nokton, ウルトロン: Ultron, カラースコパー: Color Skopar, ズミクロン: Summicron ASPH, ズミクロン: Summicron (8-element), ニッコール: W-Nikkor, ヘキサノン: Hexanon (L-mount)

The test images are shown in the above order.

(2) Planar 50mm et al.
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2004/12/27/634.html

ノクトン Nokton, カラースコパー Color-Skopar, プラナー Planar

(3) Nokton 40mm et al.
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2004/12/03/466.html

ノクトン: Nokton MC, ノクトン: Nokton SC
ズミクロン: Summicron C, ロッコール: M Rokkor