The "look" of three 50mm

[raid]

IIRC, Raid, the collapsible and the rigid ARE known to be flare-prone, compared to the more modern versions.

Ray: This is good to know. Thanks for the information.. Now the results do make sense to me. The old German lenses flared but the Japanese did not. Both the Nikon and the Canon lenses did well with flare control.

 

[FrankS]

Good work, Raid! I agree with the others about your model. I'm liking the J3 shot a lot.

 

[raid]

Good work, Raid! I agree with the others about your model. I'm liking the J3 shot a lot.

Frank,
Tomorrow I will try to upload the results for the Nikkor 5cm, the Zeiss Sonnar and the Rigid Summicron (First Version). Later, I can upload the results @ f 4.0 for all eight lenses. My little girl is my champ; she likes photography and has already a fake camera pus a non-working small Minolta. Yes, The J3 did well. I liked it too.

 

[dr.kollig]

Summar shots wide open in colour

Summar shots wide open in colour

Took some pictures in town the contrast of the Summar wide open is pretty low, but I think for illuminated objects it is just fine.

Wolfram

 

[MCTuomey]

Joe, since this excellent thread has evolved beyond its original scope to be of interest to most RFFers, should it be moved to general discussion?

Maybe even its own forum, something like "Rangefinder Lens Confabulation" or "Lens Musings."

Okay, I'll go away and get my coffee now ...

 

[wilt]

Looks like the Canon's are doing well. I expected the 1.8 to look good (since I have and know one), but the 2.8 is very interesting to me. Just goes to show what a well made Tessar can do. I'm looking forward to the rest. Any comments on particular lenses while we wait?

William

Didn't know Canon did a Tessar clone. There's one for sale at eBay at the moment, BIN 345 $.

Then there's the Elmar and the Industar. What other 50 mm Tessars or Tessar-like lenses are there in LTM or M?

 

[gbb]

Hey, All

Could someone put up a link to Raid's photos, I can't find his gallery. Thanks.

 

[raid]

Here is a link:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=3565


I will today add five more photos from my test.

 

[raid]

I just tired to upload photos but was told I have exceeded my daily limit. I guess, it is "each 24 hours" and not "each day" how the limit is enforced in RFF. I must wait until after 6pm or so.

 

[furcafe]

I can't think of any in M-mount, but I believe the 1950's Chiyoko (Minolta) 5cm/2.8 Super Rokkors, made in LTM for Minolta's LTM rangefinders, were Tessar-types.

Didn't know Canon did a Tessar clone. There's one for sale at eBay at the moment, BIN 345 $.

Then there's the Elmar and the Industar. What other 50 mm Tessars or Tessar-like lenses are there in LTM or M?

 

[raid]

I am now really liking my Canon 50/2.8 lens after the evaluation. It is a nice performer at relatively good cost and it provides an alternative to the more expensive modern 50/2.8 lenses, like the Elmar.

 

[raid]

Took some pictures in town the contrast of the Summar wide open is pretty low, but I think for illuminated objects it is just fine.

Wolfram

Hello Wolfram,
The posted photos are rather small. What is your general feeling about your Summar 50mm lens? I have never used one.

 

[raid]

I have uploaded the remaining three images for the Nikon 5cm, the Zeiss Sonnar and the Summicron rigid first version lens. I have a feeling that this thread is dying in the optics forum.

 

[ChrisN]

Hi Raid - the Nikkor is very close to the Canon 50/1.2, isn't it? I think the Canon will stay as my favourite! Great work! As you noted, the Zeiss and the rigid Summicron both exhibit a fair bit of flare in this test. Thanks for you efforts!

 

[raid]

No problem, Chris. I wonder whether this test is conclusive since most of the time people do not shoot into the light sources. Maybe a standard comparison with good light will also be useful. I figured out a quick way of doing such a test (with available model) and it would not be too time consuming.

 

[FrankS]

That is a good idea and would be very appreciated, Raid.

 

[raid]

I will see how much free time I will have the coming weekends since tomorrow classes start again at my university and it is back to work. By the way, the first test was done with lots of quality control (my speciality). I took two photos @ f2.0 to make sure there is no measurement error (by me) and then I changed the "model" and repeated the entire test at f 2.0 and f 4.0 and got consistent results. I now can look at a photo (out of 32) and guess very well which lens it was. There was no difference between photos at f 2.0 and f 4.0. The flare was pretty much the dominating factor in my experiment.

 

[ed1k]

Thanks everyone, it's indeed very interesting thread. It's good you used tripod - for 1/60 and longer is a must (and slow film is more suitable for this kind of test, IMHO). Raid, you did incredible job, thank you very much!

Eduard.

 

[raid]

Thanks everyone, it's indeed very interesting thread. It's good you used tripod - for 1/60 and longer is a must (and slow film is more suitable for this kind of test, IMHO). Raid, you did incredible job, thank you very much!

Eduard.

Eduard: You are welcome. I will do another test after making sure there is no internal haze in any of the lenses.

 

[raid]

I took the rigid Summicron today to my camera repairman in town and asked him to clean any haze in it.