Originally posted by Na Horuk Seems like a fun guy. But I want to hear some more opinions. I know these lenses are highly popular on these forums, but there are so many 50mm - 55mm primes. Are these ancient primes really so good? So much better than a DA 50mm f1.8, speaking purely about optics? Or a Rikenon 50mm f1.4 XR, Zeiss Planar? I'm sure there are differences in character, but it is difficult to say one is "best" by a large margin, no?
I'm genuinely wondering. I love old lenses, I use an M 50mm f1.7 and its pretty great. And I enjoy an Industar 50-2, Helios 44-2. But the guy in the video gives so much praise its almost like the lens morphs the very landscape in front of it!
I had the 55mm F1.8 SMC Tak and DA 50mm F1.8. I think the DA50 is a bit sharper wide open, stopped down they are similar. Flare control is better on the new one, and I think bokeh is a bit better on the old one. I still gave the old lens 9 or 10 in reviews, because the images that come out of it are very nice. When stopped down, I printed a 20x30 print, taken at dusk, which is sharp at close inspection. It's a very good lens for just 25 bucks.
---------- Post added 10-14-16 at 12:45 PM ----------
Regarding the youtube video, I found this guy to be often incorrect and sometimes a bit rude in his remarks. Dcshooter mentioned a few examples of the latter. Another one I remember was a video in which he argued that all the improvements in dynamic range and high iso performance are due to signal processing. He did so with a great conviction, while not mentioning hardware improvements, such as backlit sensor that increased the relative size of a photosensitive element.