How about starting a 50mm/1.5 lens test?

Roland, that's pretty amazing- not a lot of difference in resolution, but the differences in flare are pretty dramatic. One of those J3s is a real star! Unfortunately, two of my lenses exhibit a lot of flare, which is surprising, given that both are nice and clean from recent overhauls.
 
Mark,

Flare in such a set-up may not be just due to internal haze. Maybe a lens element is not perfectly alligned. Is this a possibility? My collapsible Summicron has been cleaned, but it shows flare.

Regretably, it is my J3 that last time showed a lot of flare. Brian cleaned it, but maybe there are wipe marks. It is a sharp lens though.
With a lens hood, and in most light situations, my "flaring J3" will do fine.
 
Roger Hicks says that overexposure can result in what appears as less sharpness.
In a situation with artificial light, all lenses got the same treatment. There should be no wrong exposures.
 
Last edited:
Over/underexposure can change color film dramatically.

The lamp seems to be a "cold" (energy saving) bulb (i.e. fast).

Could it be that we sampled the 60 HZ power frequency differently ?

I hate to ask you this, Raid: would you mind redoing the test on a few of the "bad" lenses with slower film/shutter speeds ?

Roland.
 
ferider said:
Over/underexposure can change color film dramatically.

The lamp seems to be a "cold" (energy saving) bulb (i.e. fast).

Could it be that we sampled the 60 HZ power frequency differently ?

I hate to ask you this, Raid: would you mind redoing the test on a few of the "bad" lenses with slower film/shutter speeds ?

Roland.
Click to expand...

Roland,

What do you mean by "sampling the 60 HZ power frequency differently"? [I think, I know what you mean]
All lenses were subjected to the same light.
What is "sampling" here?

In earlier tests last year, I used a standard light bulb.


The light bulb is an energy saving one.
Please email me a list with specific lenses and exposure settings, and I will redo a test on the weekend. This is not a problem.
Team work is always fun.


At one stage, the lenses must be returned [sadly enough].
 
Last edited:
Just the ones that flare really badly above (like Mark's Jupiters and the Nikkor T) and a reference lens, like the Opton and/or C-Sonnar please. Wide open, and at 1/15th or 1/8th or so. The slower the better, on a tripod if possible.

Thanks,

Roland.

PS: what I mean is: the bulb goes bright and dark with the AC frequency. There could be interference between shutter and AC frequency if your shutter was fast enough.
 
Last edited:
Let's just see if it matters, Raid. I'm not sure at all. Thanks for supporting this request.

Roland.

PS: I love candles :)
 
ferider said:
Just the ones that flare really badly above (like Mark's Jupiters and the Nikkor T) and a reference lens, like the Opton and/or C-Sonnar please. Wide open, and at 1/15th or 1/8th or so.
Click to expand...

Roland, I do not have a Jupiter in the test, but a CZJ and a Nikkor. I wouldn't mind having J-3 number 63, though.
 
dexdog said:
Of course. It is a pretty good lens, as long as one doesn't use it to photograph light bulbs. Also, I usually use a hood on old lenses.
Click to expand...

Just read post #33. Let's see what Raid comes back with. Raid, please do include the R-Sonnar as well in your slow speed test.

Thanks !

Roland.
 
dexdog said:
Of course. It is a pretty good lens, as long as one doesn't use it to photograph light bulbs. Also, I usually use a hood on old lenses.
Click to expand...

This is an important point, Mark. How often do we shoot at a bare light bulb and without a hood? "Light Bulb Photography" is not too popular!:D
 
ferider said:
Let's just see if it matters, Raid. I'm not sure at all. Thanks for supporting this request.

Roland.

PS: I love candles :)
Click to expand...

I will have a super duper light extravaganza test with a candle and two other light sources that will confuse the heck out of these poor, old lenses that have never hurt a human being!
 
raid said:
The 63 J3 is a Contax mount 1956 early ZOMZ made lens. William is the lucky owner.
Click to expand...

Just getting caught up on the thread & have to agree that those images look good. It was $80 from Alex-Photo, IIRC, and it keeps me from looking too hard for a cheap CZJ.

It's interesting to see how it compares to several really more famous lenses.

Thanks for all of this Raid & Rolland.

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