S-mount 50mm lenses - 4 way comparison

varjag said:
Jon, from your infinity focus comparision I see that Voigltander isn't quite focused on infinity, but on the branch. Could it be collimation issue? It'd explain some of the difference in performance.
Click to expand...

I thought the Voigtlander might not be adjusted to focus all the way to infinity, pulling up just short, but the test shots I took at closer distances match the infinity results fairly well. It might well be a design issue, or a collimation problem as you mentioned. The Voigtlander is really good across the frame when stopped down a bit, though.
 
The lenses

The lenses

Here's a shot of the lenses (and one of the cameras) used in this comparison.

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • four 50s.jpg
    four 50s.jpg
    97.3 KB · Views: 3
Last edited:
I have also compared my vintage - a black-chrome version - Nikkor-S 5cm/1.4 and CV S Heliar 50mm/3.5 lenses both at f/3.5. If you are interested, the first shots are here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/532095859/ (Nikkor)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/532096339/ (Heliar)

They were shot today with Voigtländer Bessa R2S camera and Fuji Reala film.

I didn't find much difference on these two frames. In some other frames the edge softness came sometimes from my Nikon Super Coolscan 4000 ED scanner... The SA-21 film adapter couldn't always keep the edge of the frames sharp. 🙁 The worst cases were, when the frame was the first one or the last one on my six frame film strip.
 
jsuominen said:
I have also compared my vintage - a black-chrome version - Nikkor-S 5cm/1.4 and CV S Heliar 50mm/3.5 lenses both at f/3.5. If you are interested, the first shots are here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/532095859/ (Nikkor)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/532096339/ (Heliar)

They were shot today with Voigtländer Bessa R2S camera and Fuji Reala film.

I didn't find much difference on these two frames. In some other frames the edge softness came sometimes from my Nikon Super Coolscan 4000 ED scanner... The SA-21 film adapter couldn't always keep the edge of the frames sharp. 🙁 The worst cases were, when the frame was the first one or the last one on my six frame film strip.
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting the links 🙂 I think your photos show quite a difference. I think the Nikkor-S shows more purple fringing, and is defintely softer towards the corners. And to think the Nikkor-S was already stopped down 2.5 stops but the Heliar was wide open. Hope you don't mind me posting some comparisons of your photos.

attachment.php


attachment.php


attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • softness01.jpg
    softness01.jpg
    236.7 KB · Views: 1
  • softness02.jpg
    softness02.jpg
    213 KB · Views: 1
  • purple fringing.jpg
    purple fringing.jpg
    160.9 KB · Views: 1
jonmanjiro said:
Hope you don't mind me posting some comparisons of your photos.
Click to expand...

Thanks for clarification and detail comparison for my photos. I didn't have time to do it myself. 🙂 But now I can see, that there was indeed a visible difference! I'll post a new photos later today.
 
David Murphy said:
Somebody educate me here, is the Millenium Nikkor-S 50/1.4 a modern lens that was released with recreated Nikon rangefinder, or is this a vintage lens?
Click to expand...

It's a modern multicoated lens.

It's the reissued version of the Nikkor-S 50mm (no cm here!) f1.4 "Olympic" lens that was sold in the mid 60's, and is a completely different formula from the original vintage Nikkor-S 5cm f1.4 lens.

This lens came with the S3 2000 and S3 Limited Edition Black reissue cameras.
 
Last edited:
It would be interesting to do a comparison of the 50mm f1.5 Nikkor from 1950 with the later optics. Remember that Duncan believed the 1.5 Nikkor was the sharpest optic he had ever used. He was not impressed with the first 50mm f1.4 Nikkors. But Nippon kogaku did change the formula within the year. WES Loder
 
Great test. Interesting how good the old 50f2 is! The Millenium is a sterling lens and the Nokton is a reasonably priced alternative. I find that there is a great deal of variations with the 50f1.4 Nikkors. I have a couple of good ones and one, an old black that is breathing down the neck of the millenium. The 50f2 is a bit of an under rated lens. In the F-mount it was one of the better 50's around, but it does not have the cache of the f1.4 or f1.1.
For some inexplicable reason I do have 4 50f2's. Three are very good and the 4th one is not that hot (it is a late chrome version). After February's Nikon month, which was shot with 400 ASA film, the sun is now showing up a bit more regularly so I will load up with some slow,fine grain film and try the 50 f2's again - as well as some of the other 50's. in particular Brians 53/1,8 Menopta. This got to be one of the great bargains as well as a damned sharp lens!
 
Tom A said:
Great test. Interesting how good the old 50f2 is! The Millenium is a sterling lens and the Nokton is a reasonably priced alternative. I find that there is a great deal of variations with the 50f1.4 Nikkors. I have a couple of good ones and one, an old black that is breathing down the neck of the millenium. The 50f2 is a bit of an under rated lens. In the F-mount it was one of the better 50's around, but it does not have the cache of the f1.4 or f1.1.
For some inexplicable reason I do have 4 50f2's. Three are very good and the 4th one is not that hot (it is a late chrome version). After February's Nikon month, which was shot with 400 ASA film, the sun is now showing up a bit more regularly so I will load up with some slow,fine grain film and try the 50 f2's again - as well as some of the other 50's. in particular Brians 53/1,8 Menopta. This got to be one of the great bargains as well as a damned sharp lens!
Click to expand...

I have a Helios-103 that Brian adjusted for my Nikon RF. Mine is sharp at the center with corners a little soft. I have a roll that I need to develop in my S3 at the moment. Are the Menopta and the Helios the same?
 
scorpius73 said:
I have a Helios-103 that Brian adjusted for my Nikon RF. Mine is sharp at the center with corners a little soft. I have a roll that I need to develop in my S3 at the moment. Are the Menopta and the Helios the same?
Click to expand...

If I remember correctly, one name is for lenses for export and the other is for lenses intended for the domestic market (forget which is which).
 
furcafe said:
What are you using now for a fast 50 in S mount (if anything)?
Click to expand...

A sonnar Nikkor-S 5cm f/1.4 I got from Keith. Its my 4th (and best) copy of this lens. Sharpness drops off a bit towards the corners (as is normal for a sonnar) but central sharpness is right up there with the Millennium.
 
Another thank-you!

I only wish you'd had in hand, when you did the tests, the main lens for my S3 body that's visiting you now in Tokyo. It's a 2007 Sonnar-C in S-mount, and I go back and forth between it and a vintage Nikkor. I haven't done what you'd really call tests with it, but I believe it has less CA than my Millennium Nikkor. Wide open it seems to preserve the old Sonnar look; then it becomes quite modern/contrasty when stopped down. If only it were in the comparison too!

If what I've been told is correct, then much of the difference between the older Nikkor and the Millennium is the difference between Sonnar and Planar designs?

Re: the Nokton: To me, the test shows that if I wanted to use this lens, I should buy a LTM version and some other body to put it on, out of respect for the beauty and balance of classic/vintage camera bodies. IMO its 'drawing' or image quality has little to do with what's attractive about Sonnar/Nikkor images. I don't mind the softer corners of the elderly lenses – this might be called, in a complimentary sense, 'focus vignetting'? 🙂

Kirk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom