Summicron 50/2 vs Soviet lenses: Test Part II

One more note: I checked the corner performance of all the lenses I tested when stopped down to F8. All the lenses were much sharper and differences between them were minimal. I suppose this is obvious but I thought it was worth mentioning.
 
I agree, nothing wrong with that photo, or any of them really. I wasn't really saying you should have checked modern lenses, I was commenting on Ko.Fe's post that "all old lenses are crap". He's wrong, of course.
 
I have PDF files of catalogues of Russian lenses (1970 & 1971); they are quite big (10,2 and 7,5 Mb)
RFF only allows me to upload 3 pages and there are 8 on Industar 61
If you are interested I can send them to an e-mail address
 
The pics above prove that the Industar 61 is a very sophisticated Tessar like lens but very different from the original German lens.
 
efinglada said:
I have PDF files of catalogues of Russian lenses (1970 & 1971); they are quite big (10,2 and 7,5 Mb)
RFF only allows me to upload 3 pages and there are 8 on Industar 61
If you are interested I can send them to an e-mail address
Click to expand...

Thanks for the upload. Seems the resolution is 38/25 line per mm for center/corner. This matches the value they show on zenitcamera.com for the lens Industar-61-Z(3), which is an early version of an SLR lens.

On the site it's shown that the later Lanthanum versions for SLR and or RF have a higher resolution, something like 44/30. Regardless of that there was a non Lanthanum Industar-61M lens with 45/28.

Too bad the site doesn't show the resolution value for the Zebra I-61. And it doesn't show the Panda version at all. I guess it's the same with Zebra, optically.
 
bobby_novatron said:
I appreciated everyone's feedback from the original thread I started regarding this 50mm lens test. The testing proved to be much more time-consuming and difficult than I originally imagined.

It is exceedingly difficult to maintain correct focus plane, frame alignment, etc. even when using Live View.

Based on the input I received from the previous testing, I re-did the test today (my wife always says I'm a bit obsessive) and tried to compensate for more variables.

---

Objective (no pun intended):

To test the center and corner performance of various 50mm prime lenses.

Methodology:

1. Leica M 240 (latest firmware) on tripod ~ 1.0 meter from test plane
2. original files DNG uncompressed, converted to best-quality JPEG in Adobe Elements
3. White balance manually sampled
4. two second timer used to reduce image blur
5. in-camera lens profile chosen as 50mm F2.8 for all lenses
6. multiple Live View focus samples taken for each lens in order to improve focal accuracy

Lenses used:

1. Canon 50mm F1.4 "Japanese Summilux"
2. Helios-103 53mm F1.8
3. Jupiter-3 50mm F1.5
4. Jupiter-8 50mm F2
5. Industar-50 50mm F3.5
6. Industar-61 L/D 55mm F2.8
7. Olympus 50mm F1.8 (Fotodiox adapter)
8. Olympus 50mm F1.2 (Fotodiox adapter)
9. Carl Zeiss Opton / Sonnar 50mm F1.5 (Contax adapter)
10. Leica Summicron-M 50mm F2 v5

Whew! I think that's it.
Click to expand...


Thanks for your efforts, very cool indeed!

Wow those Olympus lenses are good.
 
efinglada said:
I have PDF files of catalogues of Russian lenses (1970 & 1971); they are quite big (10,2 and 7,5 Mb)
RFF only allows me to upload 3 pages and there are 8 on Industar 61
If you are interested I can send them to an e-mail address
Click to expand...

Many thanks for those (I've pm'd you for the files - thanks)
 
Ko.Fe. said:
I respect OP for his time and effort. Every time I'm trying to test even single lens it isn't easy at all.

Just one comment about tests like this.

If I ever own M240 or even digital cropper which is capable of LTM-M, I would never use FSU or any film era lens on it. I wouldn't even bother to test them.

Why? Because it gives crap. And it is proven one more time here.
Wanna use film lenses, use them on film or don't use them at all.

FSU lens on digital cameras shows nothing relevant to me as FED-2 shoter for thirty+ years.

Cheers, Ko.
Click to expand...

Hi,

That's not my conclusion...

Regards, David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom