First Results: Test of Fifteen 50mm Lenses

I´m glad I found this thread

I´m glad I found this thread

Great thread, interesting tests. I have always wanted to compare these lenses. As mentioned, taste differ, but I believe the rigid summicron and the jupiter(s) performing very well. / Kim
 
Welcome, Kim. There are numerous great threads posted in RFF,and it can be difficult to spot a specific thread, especially when you don't know what is posted inside the thread. I amglad that you find this thread interesting.

Greetings,
Raid
 
Raid, great work with the 50/0.95! I could not look at all the pictures, but the few I did open were nice (I am visiting my mother for holidays, and using -gasp- a dial-up connection that is painfully slow). The lens exhibits pretty good OOF areas, I think.
 
Thanks, Mark. I am surprised how nice some of the test images came out. I wish you a great time at your mother's home.

Raid
 
I spent some time comparing images taken with the Canon 50mm/0.95. In this test, I took repeatedly images at 0.95, while each time I took a photo I first threw the lens to out of focus to make sure that I force myself to focus accurately. I noticed how shallow the depth of field is at 0.95. To better see it, realize that it was very difficult to get both the eyses and the teeth in focus since their planes were slightly off. Things are made worse by the low light conditions. Still, one image came out "perfect" in my opinion. The candles were not at the same exact plane as the eyes,and so they were OOF compared to the sharp eyes. Nico commented on an image that he preferred to have seen the candles clearly, but then the eyes would be OOF.

Here is the image that I like a lot.

My other comment is on the initial comparison of several 50mm lenses in this thread. Unless my eyes are playing a trick on me, I see the image taken with the super cheap 50mm/3.5 Industrar lens as one of the sharpest images.


http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5288163


The Nikkor 50/1.4 was pretty sharp. I refer to the following image of Dana. Look at her eye lashes. There was a fatigue factor for me in the testing of the many lenses. I tested the Nikkor after I had tested the other LTM/M lenses.

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5311439&size=lg



Raid
 
Last edited:
Mikael.N said:
Merry Christmas Raid and thanks for good job with lens testing this has been 2006 best tread and very informativ regarding what to buy.
Click to expand...


Thanks Mikael.
I wish you too a Merry Christmas and hopefully the following year will be good for all of us and our families.

I am quite happy that so many RFF members and visitors are viewing this thread favorately and not as an activity that has no merits or usefulness.
I still want to do another focusing test on the Nikkor 50mm/1.1 to figure out whether this lens needs some shimming or not, plus I have several 50mm lenses that were sent to me that still need testing.

Cheers,

Raid
 
I have received today another two lenses from Fred. Thanks!
One of the two lenses is a beautiful Leitz Noctilux 50mm/1.1 lens.
The other is a Zeiss Jena Sonnar 50mm/1.5 in LTM.

Update on the Nikkor 50mm/1.1: It seems that with the Nikon S2, this lens focuses behind the focus point [when I use it], so I will try using Mark's Bessa R2C with this lens instead to find out whether the camera/lens combo makes a differences. It could be my own user's error too. I will try to get my wife to be the model again with the same lights as the ones used for the Canon 50mm/0.95. I will try to use all Nikon mount lenses in the same roll of film.

My wife is getting impatient with me; she wants me to send back ASAP all lenses and cameras and make the dinner table clear of any photography items.

Greetings,

Raid
 
Last edited:
Here are photos of the four fast lenses. The Canon 50mm/1.2 looks rather small, doesn't it!


Photo Nr. 1 : Canon 50mm/0.95
Photo Nr. 2 : Canon 50mm/1.2
Photo Nr. 3 : Leitz Noctilux 50mm/1.0
Photo Nr. 4 : Nikkor 50mm/1.1


Raid
 

Attachments

  • Canon 50mm 0.95 on Canon 7s.JPG
    Canon 50mm 0.95 on Canon 7s.JPG
    290.4 KB · Views: 0
  • Canon 50mm 1.2 on Canon 7s.JPG
    Canon 50mm 1.2 on Canon 7s.JPG
    297.4 KB · Views: 0
  • Leitz Summilux 50mm 1.1 on Bessa T.JPG
    Leitz Summilux 50mm 1.1 on Bessa T.JPG
    305.2 KB · Views: 0
  • Nikkor 50mm 1.1 on Bessa R2C.JPG
    Nikkor 50mm 1.1 on Bessa R2C.JPG
    335.9 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Raid, you’ve done fantastic job! Thanks a lot! I can’t see any real shortcomings in your testing approach, so I guess we have to accept those results … though we should remember that technical performances are not photographical criteria.
Having said this, I’m a bit disappointed by the results of the Summitar, as others stated; my own Summitar performs very well and I have more details than it appears in your test (your Summitar shows better performance in the portrait series). I’m also disappointed by the Summicron collapsible; low contrast, can't handle the highlights 🙁 . On the other hand, the results of the J8 astonished me; I know J8 can be very good, but that good ... your J8 is better than the one I’ve had.
Bad news (for me): I’m looking for a Canon 1.5/50 now :bang:
Thanks again Raid,
Marc-A.
 
Marc: Thanks for your encouraging words. I need such encouragement to keep on with the lens comparisons. I am also disappointed with the performance of the rigid Summicron compared to how it did in an earlier test of mine. I have a feeling that since my lens comparisons differ this time from my last test of 50mm lenses, that maybe lens performance can differ based on what type of photo is taken. In earlier lens comparisons, I did not have dark room environments and I did not include an artificial light source for flare and bokeh.
Roland mentioned recently something to this effect [that different uses can result in different relative results]. If you use the lens for nature photography you may be content with a lens that does not so well in a flare test done in a dark room.

Important restrictive factors for me are time and cost.
If I would shoot one roll per lens, I would need about 22-24 rolls of film.
I don't mind doing once a year such a test as I am right now.
Cost is maybe OK but I don't have that much free time anymore.



The FSU lenses are gaining more respect after each test. I now trust my J-3 as a single 50mm lens in my camera bag. In the past, I viewed FSU lenses as paper weight.


Unless I am mistaken, I have the following lenses to compare:

1. Nokton [Prominent] in Leica mount
2. Nokton [Proimemnt] in Nikon mount
3. Zeiss Jena 50mm/1.5 in Leica mount
4. Zeiss Tessar in Nikon mount
5. Leitz Noctilux 50/1.0
6. Nikkor 50/1.1
7. Nikkor S 50mm/1.4
8. Zeiss Sonnar C 50mm/1.5

Once I complete these comparisons, I may be ready for one more round of testing of specific cases based on the requests of RFF members. I want to make sure that I have not forgotten some important comparisons before returning these wonderfulo ptics to their kind owners.





Regards,

Raid
 
Last edited:
Tessar

Tessar

Friends:

Dont be surprised if the cheap Industar lens outdoes the others. Fast lenses are a compromise. The old 50/2.8 Tessars and Xenons were optimized for sharpness and contrast.

Some of the sharpest slides i have shot were with a cheesy Voigtlander VF101(compact autoexp RF from the 70s)with a 40/2.8 Color-Skopar.

Comments?

MikeyGaGa
 
Mikey: I put up the FSU lenses not just against very fast lenses, but I have Summicrons and Nikkor lenses too. Still, the FSU lenses did quite well relatively speaking. The Industrar 50/3.5 rigid surprised me the most.

Raid
 
Kiu: By careful testing, maybe I can remove the "i" and replace it with a beautiful "ea" ? Your lens is so beautiful, it is worth it.

Raid
 
I have completed three rolls of lens comparisons today. One roll was true B&W, and it will take some time to get the film developed and scanned, but the other two rolls were C-41 B&W and maybe I can post tomorrow the results.

Raid
 
Last edited:
Randy: I hope that the results will be interesting. The Nocilux was easy to focus as was the Zeiss C-Sonnar. I had difficulties with the Nikkor 50/1.1 in seeing the focus point. With a rangefinder camera, you expect not to see differences from lens to lens when focusing with a camera. This is strange.
Maybe I am imagening things here.

I took photos of Dana first, followed by photos of my wife. With Dana I decided not to use candle light to avoid any dangers of fire, and I used a small Florescent light.

Raid
 
Last edited:
Maybe, Raid, but I think that you're probably right in that I've noticed that some lenses are just easier to focus than others. Perhaps it's the throw of some lenses and/or the feel of any focusing tab/protrusion just making some lenses easier to focus than others. And like I said, i'm looking forward to seeing your latest batch of test results.

-Randy
 
Randy: I will try to have two rolls of film posted tomorrow night. I hurt a muscle in my back recently, and this slowed me down. Today, I tried carefully to take the test photos. After seeing and using so many beautiful 50mm lenses, it is now difficult to decide which to get or sell. I hope that you will like the test result, Randy.



As for the focusing issue, I wonder if some lenses have a better rangefinder coupling than others.


Regards,

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