First Results: Test of Fifteen 50mm Lenses

dexdog said:
Raid, this second test is tough! Outside of a little variation in the warmth of the lenses, all are perfoming quite well. I would be hard-pressed to match each lens to the appropriate picture. I think I have picked out the Canon 50/1.4 (notable for cool signature) and the Sonnar/Jupiter, and possibly a Summicron, but other than this, I am puzzled.

This test is a lot of fun.
Click to expand...

Mark: I made it simpler by only including images taken at 4.0. There are big differences at 1.4-1.5 and 2.0, but quite a few shots are out of focus. I will try next a test with a static target.

The few lenses with cool signatures stick out.

Raid
 
Frank: No problem at all. If we don'tpretend to be elitists, we should get a clean J-3 or J-8 and admit that these two lenses are hard to beat once shimmed correctly.

Raid
 
These results really make you wonder why we spend big bucks on 50mm lenses.

I do it to get shots like this:



M8, ISO 640, 1/15@f/1.2, 50/1.2 Noctilux
 
Blakley: You don't need a Noctilux to get an excellent portrait. I am sure that you know it.

Raid
 
Most photos of this attractive woman with the intense eyes, taken with any of the tested lenses, would be as appealing. This is due more to the photographer's skill and the attractiveness of the model, I think.
 
Yeah, but I did need one to get THIS portrait. On film, I would have been using ISO 400. With a Summicron, this would have been 1/4 sec. handheld. With the Noct (and the M8 at ISO 640) I was able to use 1/15 sec. at f/1.2. I could have taken a similar shot with the Summilux - but it's expensive too, and the bokeh isn't as nice.

The lights in the background are running at about 20 watts, and they're maybe 10 feet away.
 
And Frank, I very much appreciate the compliments! I will say that capturing an expression like this means "handheld", and doing that in low light means "wide aperture", so the lens is a factor. But of course the lens doesn't take the picture, and it doesn't pose the model. Still, I would never have gotten this with an Elmar, and I probably wouldn't have gotten it with a Summicron.
 
Simply increase the lighting.

Not an option here; she's a waitress and this (and the others of her) are taken at the bar where she works. I don't control the lights - but that's OK, 'cause as you can see I LIKE the light as it is in there....
 
Hey

Hey

No fair, you focused! :D

blakley said:
These results really make you wonder why we spend big bucks on 50mm lenses.

I do it to get shots like this:



M8, ISO 640, 1/15@f/1.2, 50/1.2 Noctilux
Click to expand...
 
And I understand what you mean too - since an Elmar would get 95% of the pictures we could get with a Noctilux, we're spending more than 100% extra for 5% of our pictures - and the Elmar is already an expensive lens compared to any of the CV 50s. There are certainly great deals in inexpensive 50s out there, and a lot of those lenses are better than anything available at any price 25 years ago.
 
This thread is not about disagreeing about personal choices.
There are plenty of first-class 50mm lenses around, and this is great for all
of us.

Raid
 
Raid,
I want to join the others in thanking you for doing this 50mm testing. I really appreciate it.

Take care,
Michael
 
Thanks, Michael. I enjoy doing such testing, and the incredible resposne form RFF members in terms of "views" is rewarding.

Raid
 
Here are images taken at 2.0 for:

1. Canon 50mm/1.8
2. Summicron Rigid
3. Summicron Collapsible


(from left to right)


Can you detect differences?
I kept the images sizes just below 1MP.

Raid
 

Attachments

  • Summicron Rigid 50mm 2 at 2.0.JPG
    Summicron Rigid 50mm 2 at 2.0.JPG
    879.4 KB · Views: 3
  • Summicron Collapsible 50mm 2 at 2.JPG
    Summicron Collapsible 50mm 2 at 2.JPG
    899.4 KB · Views: 4
  • Canon 50mm 1.8 at 2.0.JPG
    Canon 50mm 1.8 at 2.0.JPG
    927.6 KB · Views: 1
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom