Mother of All 50mm Tests

[raid]

Trius: No, that's fine. Maybe someone will volunteer such a lens.

I want to do a test that is non-standard, so any creative ideas are welcome. There are plenty of published tests that are done in a standard manner.

Throwing in 50mm SLR lenses into the test is a good idea, isn't it?
The problem with 50mm lenses is the fact that all of them are at least good performers.



Raid

 

[Trius]

The problem with a "non-standard" test is that controlling the variables is difficult, even though still required. Nonetheless, I concur that it is preferable to the standard tests.

The key, I think, is to clearly define the objectives.... resolution? Contrast? Edge sharpness? Evenness? Bokeh? "Drawing"? If you try to do everything, the test will go on forever (especially if it is on film, which is of more interest to me than digital), and the results will likely be subject to a wider range of interpretation/opinion.

While testing SLR lenses would be interesting, personally I would keep it as a separate test of SLR lenses only.

 

[NIKON KIU]

OK Raid, you did it again!
I will make sure there is a Nikkor 5cm 1.4 included in this "Mother of all 50mm lenses test"...and if I have to send you a camera to include this lens, I will.
At your terms of course😎
Kiu

 

[raid]

OK Raid, you did it again!
I will make sure there is a Nikkor 5cm 1.4 included in this "Mother of all 50mm lenses test"...and if I have to send you a camera to include this lens, I will.
At your terms of course😎
Kiu

Kiu,

I accept your offer. If you still have my address, mail me your lens.Send me a pm if you need my address again.

Thanks.

Raid

 

[raid]

The problem with a "non-standard" test is that controlling the variables is difficult, even though still required. Nonetheless, I concur that it is preferable to the standard tests.

The key, I think, is to clearly define the objectives.... resolution? Contrast? Edge sharpness? Evenness? Bokeh? "Drawing"? If you try to do everything, the test will go on forever (especially if it is on film, which is of more interest to me than digital), and the results will likely be subject to a wider range of interpretation/opinion.

While testing SLR lenses would be interesting, personally I would keep it as a separate test of SLR lenses only.

Trius,

No test is perfect from a usefulness point of view. Maybe I should take both color and B&W film and define up front my goals, as mentioned by you. I need tips to do a good job.

Raid

 

[back alley]

i would offer my zm 50/2 planer but then i would be incomplete, not one with my gear and sadly, i fear, i would self destruct...

😉

 

[raid]

i would offer my zm 50/2 planer but then i would be incomplete, not one with my gear and sadly, i fear, i would self destruct...

😉

Joe: I don't want you to selfdestruct! However, in the name of science, such sacrifices may have to be done. 😀


Raid

 

[raid]

Scam alert! 😉

(The winky icon identifies this as a joke, not a serious post.)

Frank: Of course I knew what you meant. The joke is a good one.

Raid

 

[Avotius]

we need the new sonnar in this test group!

 

[raid]

William: I will include the I-50 since I have one. Which lens is the I-22? Is it the collapsible Industrar with a 2.8 max aperture or is that the I-61?

Raid
=====================================

Raid,

Yep, that's an Industar 50. This can be a very good lens if you appreciate the Tessar look. Think about your I-61L/D with somewhat less contrast...

Also, I agree with ZorkiCat. I do think that the rigid I-50 is a seriously ugly lens (with some utterly wierd ergonomics...) but the Tessar formula is really very simple and the Soviets always did a decent job on it. Unless your example has chips gouged out of the center of the lens, you'll have decent images that, given more modern coatings, may well surpass classic Elmars.

YMWV, obviously, but I think you may well be plesantly surprised by this lens. Put it in your massive 50 test so I don't have to send you my I-50!

(More seriously make sure a I-22 or I-50 is represented.)

William

 

[raid]

we need the new sonnar in this test group!

I will wait some time until all interest for participation in my test has subsided, then I will do my testing. Maybe someone will volunteer such a lens after all. You never know. The test results can be quite useful as earlier test results have shown to be true. I got my Summicron cleaned because the results showed unacceptable levels of flare. I had my Zeiss lens reshimmed by DAG because the focus was off slightly. I got additional respect for my Nikkor 50/2 lens after the flare test. The Industrar 61-L did very well last time, and I was also quite impressed by its performance relative to far more expensive lenses.
The Canon 50/1.2 did very well and I noted additional interest for this lens after the test results were posted here in the RFF. The color photos in one of the tests brought out some diferences between warm and cool lenses in color. For example, the Zeiss photos were quite light lden in tone while the Steinheil (tele) photos were blueish in tone.

The tricky part now is to figure out which specific testing could maybe bring out some differences between all these excellent 50mm lenses.


So far, I have committments for sending me:

1. Canon 50/1.4
2. Canon 50/1.5
3. Nikon 50/1.4

Thanks Mark and Kiu! I am not greedy, so if this is it, this is great already.


Raid

 

[NIKON KIU]

So far, I have committments for sending me:

1. Canon 50/1.4
2. Canon 50/1.5
3. Nikon 50/1.4

I will make sure there is a Nikkor 1.4 included in this test.....however, I don't have any in scremount!!
This means I have to send you one in Nikon RF mount.
I am sure you have no cameras to mount the lens on, right?
Do you prefer an S2 or S3???
Beware of what you're getting yourself into!!
The M6 is not that interesting!
Kiu

 

[raid]

I will make sure there is a Nikkor 1.4 included in this test.....however, I don't have any in scremount!!
This means I have to send you one in Nikon RF mount.
I am sure you have no cameras to mount the lens on, right?
Do you prefer an S2 or S3???
Beware of what you're getting yourself into!!
The M6 is not that interesting!
Kiu

Kiu,

What are you trying to do to me??!! No,I regretably do not own any Nikon S mount camera [now!].
I don't want to burden you too much, but if participation in this test is what you want, send me any camera with lens. I will treat each with extra care, as you know.

Let me know ifyou needmy address again or not.
Greetings,

Raid

 

[Pherdinand]

Raid, I can save you a bit of work.
The old Zeiss 50/2 and the Jupiter-8 are the same.
Doing the test correctly (thus with good working lenses and focusing them the same way) you should see no dfifference. If you do, it's not a general lens characteristic but a sample to sample variation 🙂

 

[rxmd]

In order to account for sample variation, which is known to be considerable with Russian lenses at least, it would be good if you included more than one sample at least for the J-3 and possibly the J-8.

Philipp

 

[Bill58]

Raid:

OT--did you ever get your Natura fixed?

Bill

 

[raid]

Raid, I can save you a bit of work.
The old Zeiss 50/2 and the Jupiter-8 are the same.
Doing the test correctly (thus with good working lenses and focusing them the same way) you should see no dfifference. If you do, it's not a general lens characteristic but a sample to sample variation 🙂

Pherdinand: I do not think that the old Zeiss Sonnar is "identical" to the J-8.
I know that the J-8 is a sharp lens, but I haven't seen any reports that the Zeiss glass and the Jupiter glass are the same in all aspects. Do you mean they have the same optical design or do you mean they are actually identical lenses? Note that there are many Sonnar design lenses, such as the
Nikkor 5cm/2 or the Canon 50mm/1.5, but these lenses are not [to the best of my limited knowledge] identical. Maybe you are referring to the fact that most "so called Zeiss lenses" are fake?




Raid

 

[raid]

In order to account for sample variation, which is known to be considerable with Russian lenses at least, it would be good if you included more than one sample at least for the J-3 and possibly the J-8.

Philipp

Philipp: My J-3 has been reshimmed by Brian Sweeney, and it has already been tested to be sharp. My J-8 came to me in excellent optical conditoon too, and it aslo did very well in an earlier test. What usually happens after such test results are posted is that owners of such lenses start commenting on the test results relative to their own experiences. There, we will be able to read about possible sample differences. I try to repair/adjust/reshim/CLA any tested lens that does not perform as it should.


Raid

 

[raid]

Raid:

OT--did you ever get your Natura fixed?

Bill

Hi Bill,

I couldn't find any repairman to service the Natura, so I shot another roll of film with it. All photos came out fine. The strange looking lens opening and closing was the only reason for my I initially thinking that the Natura Black was faulty. I am used to oldmechanical cameras, somaybe the Natura looks different when looking at the front of the lens when releasing the shutter.


Raid

 

[Pherdinand]

...I haven't seen any reports that the Zeiss glass and the Jupiter glass are the same in all aspects. ...

You can read my own "report" on this issue, if you really need a report on it🙂
The optical design of the sonnar 50/2 (rigid) and the jupiter-8 is the same, in may cases tyhe materials are also the same, there are minor differences in the construction (like cheaper barrel, click stops for the aperture) but if assembled and used properly, a jupiter-8 results in the same image as a sonnar 50/2.
But it was just an idea, i certainly do not want to stop you doing your own tests.

cheers