Benjamin Marks
Veteran
Hello all:
I have been using the RD-1 for about two months now and have tried a large number of 50s on it and a couple of 35s. The 50s include:
Summicron, Summilux, Notilux, Elmar Collaps., Summarit, Summitar, Zeiss-Ikon, Hexanon-M, Nockton, Canon f1.5, Jupiter-8
I have also tried it with the following 35s: Summicron Asph, Nockton (f/1.2), Summiron and an Ultron.
First off, I'd like to echo something that Sean Reid noted in his excellent and informative fast lens test on Luminous Landscape: What I seem to be choosing is the "flavor" of the starting points for the digital process. In the 50's I find that I gravitate towards the Summicron, Zeiss-Ikon and Hexanon-M lenses. I find them uniformly excellent at all apertures and have had no problems focussing them. I've apended a picture below to try to illustrate what I'm talking about with a Summicron. In the converted Raw file on my computer screen, I can count my daughter's individual eye-brow hairs. I have liked the 50 Nockton, but find that I go to the Summicron first.
I have had difficulty focussing the Canon 1.5, the Jupiter-8 and the Summitar. I know that the Canon lenses have their fans, I just have not been able to get this one (a spendy, clean version from Kevin Cameras) to perform. The Summitar is one I bought recently from Sherry Krauter . . . I think it needs to be tested on a film camera first. I know that others have had issues with the thickness of the sm adapters. My adapters come from Cameraquest . . .I have not done any comparison testing. The Noctilux has its own challenges wide open, but this is true even on an M6, partially because of the situations in which I tend to use the lens.
With the 35s, the Summicron-APSH just blows me away. There is a "wow" factor there that I just have not been able to get used to. The Summiron has a very different look (as you might expect of a 50 year old lens) -- I'd characterize this as much more pastel.
Below is a 50 Summicron shot and a 100% crop. I would note that the noise in these pics (shot at ISO 400) is not objectionable at working size.
I have been using the RD-1 for about two months now and have tried a large number of 50s on it and a couple of 35s. The 50s include:
Summicron, Summilux, Notilux, Elmar Collaps., Summarit, Summitar, Zeiss-Ikon, Hexanon-M, Nockton, Canon f1.5, Jupiter-8
I have also tried it with the following 35s: Summicron Asph, Nockton (f/1.2), Summiron and an Ultron.
First off, I'd like to echo something that Sean Reid noted in his excellent and informative fast lens test on Luminous Landscape: What I seem to be choosing is the "flavor" of the starting points for the digital process. In the 50's I find that I gravitate towards the Summicron, Zeiss-Ikon and Hexanon-M lenses. I find them uniformly excellent at all apertures and have had no problems focussing them. I've apended a picture below to try to illustrate what I'm talking about with a Summicron. In the converted Raw file on my computer screen, I can count my daughter's individual eye-brow hairs. I have liked the 50 Nockton, but find that I go to the Summicron first.
I have had difficulty focussing the Canon 1.5, the Jupiter-8 and the Summitar. I know that the Canon lenses have their fans, I just have not been able to get this one (a spendy, clean version from Kevin Cameras) to perform. The Summitar is one I bought recently from Sherry Krauter . . . I think it needs to be tested on a film camera first. I know that others have had issues with the thickness of the sm adapters. My adapters come from Cameraquest . . .I have not done any comparison testing. The Noctilux has its own challenges wide open, but this is true even on an M6, partially because of the situations in which I tend to use the lens.
With the 35s, the Summicron-APSH just blows me away. There is a "wow" factor there that I just have not been able to get used to. The Summiron has a very different look (as you might expect of a 50 year old lens) -- I'd characterize this as much more pastel.
Below is a 50 Summicron shot and a 100% crop. I would note that the noise in these pics (shot at ISO 400) is not objectionable at working size.
Ben, do you think the speed of the 50/1.5 is the issue with your inability to focus it or do you think your sample is off in some way?
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
Don't have enough data yet. Once upon a time, I'd get a "new" (well, new to me) lens and run some film past it to get a sense of what it could do. But I've been having so much damn fun with the RD-1 that I haven't developed film since mid-february. My exposed film is collecting at the bottom of camera bags. It mocks me. Because of the good results I've gotten on the RD-1 with the Noctilux, Nockton and Summilux, I'm inclined to think the Canon 1.5 is the culprit or that the screw-mount adapter is off. The Jupiter-8 is not really a good control because of (what I assume are) close-focus roller-cam issues.
What I really need to do is shoot a roll of B&W film and develop the damn stuff.
What I really need to do is shoot a roll of B&W film and develop the damn stuff.
Jim Watts
Still trying to See.
Ben,
It could be the adapter or it might be the way the cam itself engages with the cam follower on the R-D1. If its the latter it may be O.K. on a film camera. My 35mm Cron thats off on the R-D1 is fine on my M4. Have you checked to see if the focus is off by a consistant amount of front or back focus?
Jim
It could be the adapter or it might be the way the cam itself engages with the cam follower on the R-D1. If its the latter it may be O.K. on a film camera. My 35mm Cron thats off on the R-D1 is fine on my M4. Have you checked to see if the focus is off by a consistant amount of front or back focus?
Jim
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
Jim:
I have not yet checked on that issue. With my first RD-1, there was a focus accuracy problem with all of my lenses. With this one, there seems to be an issue with only a few. My difficulty is that I don't yet have a good set of controls in place (acquired too many 50's in a short span of time . . . it's a good problem to have ;-) but I haven't been systematic about testing). More on this as it . . . er . . develops.
best regards,
Ben Marks
I have not yet checked on that issue. With my first RD-1, there was a focus accuracy problem with all of my lenses. With this one, there seems to be an issue with only a few. My difficulty is that I don't yet have a good set of controls in place (acquired too many 50's in a short span of time . . . it's a good problem to have ;-) but I haven't been systematic about testing). More on this as it . . . er . . develops.
best regards,
Ben Marks
vincenzo
Established
Jupiter-3 50/1.5 produces peachy results for next to nothing. No focussing issues. I also had a J-8 but gave up messing with the aperture and focussing rings which were far to loose on both versions I had. The J-9 has some serious focus shift problems and won't work on my RD-1.
vincenzo
Established
Found the hexanon a very good performer but lacking a little bite for my taste.