the_jim
human
So a few months back, I was looking for a Tessar type lens to use on my Zeiss Ikon, so I jumped on fedka.com and picked up a 50's era FED 50/3.5.
The front element looked like the surface of an ice-skating rink and the results were pretty mediocre, which surprised me because the Tessar on my Rolleiflex T and the Nikon 45mm f/2.8P are both phenomenal lenses.
One day, I was cruising ebay, and stumbled upon a red-scale Elmar in excellent condition so I couldn't resist. For the sake of my own curiosity I thought I would attempt a very basic, non-scientific lens test between the two lenses.
Here are the pictures. Both were shot wide-open around 5:00pm on my Zeiss Ikon. The film used was Tri-X developed in 76 1:1. The lighting conditions were changing quickly so there is a little discrepancy there.
So which is which? Fed 50/3.5 or red-scale Elmar 5cm?
a:
b
P.S. Focus was on the nail sticking out at 45 degrees or so.
The front element looked like the surface of an ice-skating rink and the results were pretty mediocre, which surprised me because the Tessar on my Rolleiflex T and the Nikon 45mm f/2.8P are both phenomenal lenses.
One day, I was cruising ebay, and stumbled upon a red-scale Elmar in excellent condition so I couldn't resist. For the sake of my own curiosity I thought I would attempt a very basic, non-scientific lens test between the two lenses.
Here are the pictures. Both were shot wide-open around 5:00pm on my Zeiss Ikon. The film used was Tri-X developed in 76 1:1. The lighting conditions were changing quickly so there is a little discrepancy there.
So which is which? Fed 50/3.5 or red-scale Elmar 5cm?
a:

b

P.S. Focus was on the nail sticking out at 45 degrees or so.