Test of Twelve 50mm Lenses

[Sonnar Brian]

Look forward to the results.

I also remind you that the attachments to posts allow much larger image files with less compression than does the gallery. You can post a 1024x670 or so with "9" or "10" of 12 compression on photoshop, then post the detail shots (crops) virtually uncompressed.

 

[Trius]

I'm just curious why anyone needs 12 50mm lenses --- do you carry your whole kit with you when shooting 😉?

Do you really want to revive the "how many 50s are too many" thread? 😀

The conclusion/consensus was one cannot have too many. After all, there is sample variability even within the same model. So even "one of each" is not enough!

 

[doubs43]

I'm just curious why anyone needs 12 50mm lenses --- do you carry your whole kit with you when shooting 😉?

For the life of me I can't think why....... BUT, if I count all of my 50's - including SLR lenses - I have AT LEAST between 30 and 40.

I know of one fellow on the RFF who has more than half that many of just one make!! I'm probably a piker in comparison.

Note: Sorry, I was wrong. I just did a quick check of my inventory list which, BTW, isn't complete yet, and I counted 43 50mm/5cm lenses. I didn't count the 55mm or 58mm normal lenses that I also have.

Walker

 

[raid]

Calm down guys; the cost of all the 12 50mm lenses is most likely less than one new Leitz lens these days. The B&W film used for the test mentioned in this posting is not developed yet, but I have results from one roll of color film for these 50mm lenses. I will post the results tonight.

 

[raid]

One last question for you here; I have the color film scanned on a CD (done comemrcially). Should I leave everything as is or should I slightly enhance (such as auto adjust) for all images?

 

[raid]

The color test was done differently and it may not be as good as the one in B&W:

I had my daughter sit on her rocking chair outside our home this afternoon, and I took hand-held the photos at aperture 4.0 and shutter speed 1/1000 for all lenses.

 

[raid]

Here are the results. Note that the I61 is the one lens that we knew up front would be "different" since it is in terrible shape optically.

Edited:

The set includes the following lenses in order from left to right:



1. Leitz Elmar 50/3.5
2. Canon 1.2
3. Zeiss Sonnar
4. Canon 1.8

 

[raid]

Here are four more images:

This set includes the following lenses in order from left to right:


1. Collapsible Summicron
2. Canon 50/2.8
3. Rigid Summicron
4. Nikon 50/2]

 

[raid]

The last four images are here;

This group of images was taken by the following lenses, corresponding to the photos in order:


1. I61 50mm/2.8
2. J-8 50mm/2
3. I61L 50mm/2.8 (later model of I61 with radioactive material)
4. J-3 50mm/1.5

 

[raid]

Just a reminder of which lenses were used:

Lenses:

A. Japanese

A.1. Canon 50mm/1.2
A.2. Canon 50mm/1.8 (Serenar)
A.3. Canon 50mm/2.8
A.4. Nikon 50mm/2

B. FSU

B.1. J-3 50mm/1.5
B.2. J-8 50mm/2.0
B.3. I61L 50mm/2.8
B.4. I61 50mm/2.8 (lens is not clean optically)


C. German

C.1. Rigid Summicron 50mm/2 (first version)
C.2. Collapsible Summicron 50mm/2
C.3. Zeiss Sonnar (pre-war) 50mm/2
C.4. Elmar 50mm/3.5 (pre-war)

 

[wlewisiii]

Boy, this is a hard thing to guess at. There are only a couple of them with enough differences to my eyes to hazzard a guess.

Actually only one - second set, number 2 is probably the better one of the I-61s. Looks like the classic tessar sharpness falloff to me.

I will be curious to know which lens rendered set three, number 1... 😉 Perhaps that's the beater I-61? Or does any of these lenses have a haze issue?

Thanks for this test. I like all of them, but I really enjoy ones like this with a scenario that is really quite common. Down the road a little ways, I should really try to do something like this with my small handfull of 50s (50/1.5 S-J3, 50/1.8 Canon, 50/2 J8, 50/2 Collapsible 'Cron, 50/2.8 I-61L/D, 50/3.5 I-22, &, if an offer is accepted, 50/3.5 Elmar (uncoated). ) so that I have a better idea of what to expect and when to use a given lens. Certainly more fun than wondering if a given hyperexpensive lens that I can't afford will somehow magically make my photography better 😀

Thanks again, Raid.

William

 

[Todd.Hanz]

the anticipation is all I can take on a Sat. night, which is which?

Todd

 

[raid]

William: Such tests are fun. By the way, can you detect some slight color changes in the photos? The Holga-like effect in of the images is due to the beater I61.


Come on Todd; give it some time for the rest of the people here to make a guess. I just posted the shots a few minutes ago.

 

[raid]

William: You are close to the correct guess, but still wrong.

"Actually only one - second set, number 2 is probably the better one of the I-61s. Looks like the classic tessar sharpness falloff to me. "

 

[wlewisiii]

William: You are close to the correct guess, but still wrong.

"Actually only one - second set, number 2 is probably the better one of the I-61s. Looks like the classic tessar sharpness falloff to me. "

Ah. Then I'll go for the Canon 50/2.8 as it's the only other true Tessar in your lineup.

As for color shifts, now I'll have to go back and go through them again and think about it.

BTW, thank your little one for us. Has to seem silly to her after all... 🙂 I know John (my 4 yr old son) wouldn't put up with sitting for these kinds of shots 😱

William

 

[raid]

William has one lens correctly chosen

William has one lens correctly chosen

William: You have good eyes.

Ah. Then I'll go for the Canon 50/2.8 as it's the only other true Tessar in your lineup.

As for color shifts, now I'll have to go back and go through them again and think about it.

BTW, thank your little one for us. Has to seem silly to her after all... 🙂 I know John (my 4 yr old son) wouldn't put up with sitting for these kinds of shots 😱

William

 

[StuartR]

Ok, well 9, 13, and 17 look the best to me. I really don't have too much knowledge, since I don't own any of these lenses, but I would guess that 17 is the rigid summicron, 9 is the collapsible summicron, and 13 perhaps the canon 50/1.8. Anyway, perhaps I have made a fool of myself, but this is a pretty hard test! Not much signature bokeh to judge with...

 

[wlewisiii]

No, I have to say my eyes are simply average: trained to a look, perhaps, but then that's the issue here...

I just have a Tessar fixation that is probably just short of legendary around here. There is something about the look that 4 element/3 group design gives that is just extreamly pleasing to me. I went out of my way to buy a B&L licensed Tessar once just because it was an uncoated Tessar that I could use on my Speed Graphic... 😉

I like many of the later derivatives as well - Sonnars & the entertaining bastards of Sonnars & Planars that have come to rule the world of the 50mm lens. But when I really want to work an image, I want a tessar - I'll plant the main POI dead center on the neg and do all the rest in postprocessing (digital or silver).

I'd have been far more worried if I hadn't been able to see at least one classic image at f4 with 3 true Tessars & an Elmar in that mix. I still need to prove to my eyes, though, if the placing of the aperture blades (Tessar vs. Elmar) is, in the real world, significant.

Thanks!

William

 

[Todd.Hanz]

Allright Raid, I've waited for a while, I have to get to bed so which one is the coll. summicron? I want to sleep with a smile on my face 🙂

Todd

 

[Todd.Hanz]

BTW, your daughter sould be rewarded for her part in this, my guess is row 3 pic 2.