The Two 50mm Heliar Lenses: Any Tests Done?

The Two 50mm Heliar Lenses: Any Tests Done?

  • I choose the 50/2.0

    Votes: 86 62.8%

  • I choose the 50/3.5

    Votes: 51 37.2%
  • Total voters
    137
  • Poll closed .
raid

raid

Dad Photographer
Local time
10:40 AM
Joined
Nov 2, 2005
Messages
36,563
Has anyone published online a review on the two 50mm Heliar RF lenses? I wonder whether the 50/2 is somehow better optically than the 50/3.5 or vice versa. Is it true that it is not difficult to design a very sharp 50mm lens with max aperture 3.5?

The two lenses are recent, so they are multicoated and they should resist flare well.

Bokeh comparisons and resultions comparisons should be useful here.

Anyways, does anyone here know of an existent comparison between these two lenses?

Also, owners/users of these two lenses, please share with us the points of strength and points of weakness of your Heliar 50/2 and/or Helair 50/3.5.

Thanks.
 
I meant existing tests done by other people. It seems that every lens out there gets tested, so when there is a lens hyped as sharpest lens ever tested, and then it is followed by a faster lens, a logical question would be to ask whether the faster lens is as "good" as the slower lens, or vice versa.

I compared these two lenses, but if both lenses are sharp, I winder whether I will be able to detect subtle differences. The 3D effect is there.
 
Sean Reid did a review of the Heliar 50/2 along with the Summarit 50/2.5 and the Skopar 50/2.5 last January.

I suspect that the lens he was given was not a good one, the results he got were far less superior than what I have with mine.

So far, I have never seen a side by side comparison of the two heliars.
 
Well, then my basic lens comparison may be a first one.
Not bad at all.

I am surprised that modern lenses also suffer from inconsistent results. I expect this to happen with vintage lenses.

I may then do a match-up after all. I thought that comparing 15 lenses would be sufficient to get an overall feel for the lenses, but having access to the 3.5 and the 2.0 Heliars may be a chance that will not happen agaon for a while.
 
Would such a test include wide-open comparisons, despite the difference in apetures?

I llke the look produced by the Heliar at f2, it would be interesting to compare to the 3.5 also wide open. This would be for the look or feel of the image, rather than any comparison as to depth of field of course.
 
Last edited:
I have all the 50mm lenses by Voigtlander, but have never done a comparison as I had the impression that very few will be interested the comparative results from Cosina's humble offering. Those attracted by Cosina's great prices will gravitate towards these lenses anyhow, while some of those owning pedigree optics will feel the need to brand bash or justify/defend their 'investment'.

Cheers,
 
fergus said:
Would such a test include wide-open comparisons, despite the difference in apetures?

I llke the look produced by the Heliar at f2, it would be interesting to compare to the 3.5 also wide open. This would be for the look or feel of the image, rather than any comparison as to depth of field of course.
Click to expand...

Hi Fergus,
Since you are leaving me the 50/2 extra time, I will try to take one roll at all apertures and at different light situations with each lens. I was actually dreaming/planning about the set-up last night.
 
bennyng said:
I have all the 50mm lenses by Voigtlander, but have never done a comparison as I had the impression that very few will be interested the comparative results from Cosina's humble offering. Those attracted by Cosina's great prices will gravitate towards these lenses anyhow, while some of those owning pedigree optics will feel the need to brand bash or justify/defend their 'investment'.

Cheers,
Click to expand...

Hi Benny,
Let's move away from defending CV glass to comparing CV glass as it is becoming more and more a popular choice of Leica mount camera owners.

Did you observe specific differences between these two Heliar lenses?

Usually, a 3.5 lens is much less expensive than a corresponding 2.0 lens by the same manufacturer. Here,things are different due to the rarity factor.

Could it be that the 2.0 lens is actually an "equal" or better lens and that the 3.5 Heliar is more expensive only because of the limited production numbers?
 
I agree about judging CV lens on it's own merit.

I've never used the two lens together so I can't comment about specific differences between them. Given the different subjects and shooting parameters, I don't have a common platform to make any observations on the differences. Perhaps I'll take both of them out for a spin one of these days.

As far as rarity goes, there are actually almost as many Heliar 50mm f/3.5 (2000 pieces) as there are Heliar 50mm f/2.0 (2500 pieces - 1700 Black/800 Silver). Both these lenses are not expensive and are usually sold for less than their list price when introduced.

Cheers,
 
If our sunny and bright weather continues I will also attempt an in use test of the two lenses. I have a brick (20 rolls) of Fuji Minicopy II (6 iso - though I push it to 20) and also some "vintage" Tech Pan. That should give us some idea which one is the "best". Personally, I find the 50f3.5 tack sharp at f3.5 and the f2 a bit soft (not unsharp as such - slightly lower contrast maybe). Both are great lenses and can hold their own against anybody's offering's.
 
Tom,
That would be great if you can add your hands on lens test.
Collectively, we should be able to figure out if there actually exist true differences or not. Since the 50 3.5 has been validated by others as being tack sharp with a 3D siganture, it would be an awesome accomplishment by CV to make a 50 2 with similar properties.


I am exited about such a comparison. I will continue using ASA 100 Kodac UC film to maintain consistency in the lens testing.
 
Raid - you mean you want consistency in the testing! I will try - once I found out what the Minicopy will develop properly in ( a bit more than 3 zones. At the moment it is insisting on zone 10/5/1 - and nothing in between!!!
 
Tom,

I do what is reasonably manageable to attain consistency. I take photos with a given lens at the start of a roll of film and in the middle ... etc.
 
Raid,
If you want to send me an airline ticket, my RD1 and I will fly down to Fla. this weekend. :)

--michael
 
I may have to settle for my M3, Michael.

I started tonight a roll of film with the two Heliars for bokeh effect.
 
Back to the topic of this thread, we will hopefully soon know more about finer details regarding the two Heliar 50mm lenses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom