Summicron 50/2 vs Nikkor 50/2 comparison

[goamules]

Since I had these two lenses out, I decided to do a quick comparison. 1959 Summicron DR M mount and about a 1951 Nikkor 50/2 in collapsible LTM mount.

The cactus shots were on two subsequent days, same time, same light. But I couldn't remember exactly how close I was on the previous day. About F8. The second pictures are off a tripod, at F4. Can you tell which is the Summicron?

 

[goamules]

And the F4 shots, from a tripod (click for larger):

 

[goamules]

Admittedly, it's harder to tell stopped down, but you can see a contrast difference. Look at the labels on the plastic flower pots. I'll post the F2 shots next. Which is which?

 

[Alberti]

I'm interested in the 'truth'.
Of the cacti, I like the second but what am I comparing?

Indeed the first shed is clear, the second gives me pain in the eyes, just a tad misaligned or so - its not a different focal plane of the second lens I think. [The modern sum micron can have a smal focus stage. That is not what I see.]

 

[John E Earley]

In the shed photos, the bottle necks in the upper right corner tell a tale.

 

[goamules]

Sorry I never got back to this, there was underwhelming interest for several weeks.

In all cases, the Summicron is first.

 

[kbb]

The cactus shots, not being identical and being handheld, are of no value for a comparison. But, the tripod shots are most revealing.

 

[goamules]

I find it hard to believe you can find "no value" in comparing two very similar shots, though more discerning eyes can. It doesn't have to be pixel peeping at test targets and rulers. The cactus shots used the same:
- Cactus
- Aperture
- Distance to subject
- Time of day and lighting conditions
- "film" (sensor settings)
The only thing that is NOT the same, is the exact composition so you can pick the 4th cactus needle on the 2nd hand on both shots.

Look for:
- Sharpness in center
- Out of focus areas of the ground and cactus
- Color saturation
- Color hue
- Contrast

Often when this forum discusses a lens, someone will show one favored shot. I can do that for any lens. They don't show anything for comparison, just one great shot of a [girl, sailboat, flower, cat] and say "See?! The sumisonaranar is the BEST!" Here are some comparisons, one in "similar" conditions, one in "identical." My point is, in "similar" conditions, no one could tell an average lens from a top in it's class lens.

 

[x-ray]

Thanks for posting. I have a rigid Nikkor f2 that I'm very pleased with. I had a v4 Summicron I sold about ten years ago and was never thrilled with it due to flare. In the 60's and 70's I had a rigid v2 and DR and then a v3 which I felt was a big improvement over the rigid and DR. I also had the 50 Noctilux v1 but didn't feel it was a particulay good lens past f4 and was only ok wide open.

I currently have a Planar and the Nikkor f2 and like especially the planar over any of the Summicrons.