Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-13-2017, 05:36 PM - 1 Like   #91
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 11,694
QuoteOriginally posted by angerdan Quote
It's my favourite 400mm lens, so i'd include it for myself as comparision
When compiling a list few best lenses in any lens mount, it is best to leave one's preferences on the shelf.


QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
And conversely, if ZIess had wanted to produce a lens like the 77 ltd. they probably could have, but they didn't.
Have you ever heard of the Carl Zeiss 50mm f/1.5 Sonnar? it is a lens with a reputation for being a polarizing element in the Leicaphile* community. It doesn't perform particularly well in MTF testing due to it not having a planar focus field and under-corrected astigmatism - it was designed in 1932, in the age before multi-coatings even existed** and where lens element counts had to be kept to a minimum to control loss of contrast, it is best known as a pictorial lens - not designed to be clinically accurate like the Zeiss Otus lenses.


For contrast, here it the MTF from the Zeiss Planar 50mm f/1.4:



And for a laugh, the Leica APO-Summicron-M 50mm f/2



*Zeissaphile doesn't have the same ring to it.
** Zeiss still makes them for Leica M mount, the uncoated versions are quite popular.


Last edited by Digitalis; 10-14-2017 at 05:45 AM.
10-13-2017, 10:09 PM   #92
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,990
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
Have you ever heard of the Carl Zeiss 50mm f/1.5 Sonnar? it is a lens with a reputation for being a polarizing element in the Leicaphile* community. It doesn't perform particularly well in MTF testing due to it not having a planar focus field and under-corrected astigmatism - it was designed in 1932, in the age before multi-coatings even existed** and where lens element counts had to be kept to a minimum to control loss of contrast, it is best known as a photographic lens - not a pictorial one like the Zeiss Otus lenses.
How are you defining photographic vs. pictorial? I think of a highly corrected Otus as being the opposite of pictorial.
10-13-2017, 10:28 PM - 2 Likes   #93
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 11,694
QuoteOriginally posted by leekil Quote
How are you defining photographic vs. pictorial?
oooh this topic is a casualty trail.

QuoteOriginally posted by leekil Quote
I think of a highly corrected Otus as being the opposite of pictorial.
You're right, pictorialism is said to have more in common with impressionism, an impression if the idea is enough - rather than the painstaking and exacting reproduction of the object in question. It is like contrasting Vincent Van Gogh to Albrecht Durer. Consider the characteristics of the DA70mm f/2.4 Vs the Pentax FA77 - both are very different lenses, the DA 70mm, a good lens to be sure don't get me wrong: it is an over corrected design. In contrast the FA77 there is some under correction that gives variety to the images it creates.

Last edited by Digitalis; 10-13-2017 at 10:41 PM.
10-14-2017, 04:17 AM   #94
Pentaxian
cyberjunkie's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chiang Mai, Bologna, Amsterdam
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,198
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote


I want citations on this. There may be a grain of truth to this the FA77 wasn't exactly designed with the express purpose of it being an apochromatic-800lp/mm-Lens-from-the-Gods. Jun Hirakawa had some very clear design goals he set out with and he accomplished them...and the resulting lens just happened to have very good MTF characteristics when stopped down, Jun didn't design the FA77 to produce good results on 2D MTF tests** he designed the FA77 to render 3D objects in a very specific way**.

* I have tested Multiple copies of the FA77mm f/1.8 Limited and the A*85mm f/1.4 on my optics bench, there are some subtle differences between them optically.
** If he wanted to, he could have produced a lens that would rival that of Zeiss..but he didn't.
*** I can't wait for Jun to write "Zen and the art of optical design". Reading his design notes on the FA43 and FA77 reveal a keen intellect and an interesting perspective on balancing varying aspects of optical design.
These are the tests i referred to. Still available on B. Dimitrov Pentax K page.
Tests done on film, using an optical chart. Usenet time.
Quite accurately, from what i've read (elsewhere, there must be an archive on the Web with all the posts of the Pentax newsgroup of the time):

Measured Resolution Numbers

"Zen and the art of optical design"... hahaha, why not? Great lens designers of the past have been very interesting characters. The history of photographic optics, and of the people who contributed to it in a significant way, is really fascinating.

RE: pictorialism, let's use the words for the meaning they have in a certain context.
In the history of photography, pictorialism has a meaning. One. Google for it.
As far as i remember, there were two waves of american pictorialism, and the japanese one (second decade of the last century... they used the simple meniscus lens of the Kodak Vest Pocket at full speed, "uncorked").
"Pictorial", or "pictorialistic" lenses were (strong) soft focus objectives which rendered the image in a non-clinic, non-realistic way.
The same kind of aesthetic, albeit less extreme (and the use of the same kind of lenses: Struss, Unar Portrait, Verito, Cooke Portrait, etc) heavily influenced the activity of the best portrait artist of the Hollywood of the twenties. Some portraits of actors and starlets are still an example for whoever likes portrait photography at its best.
Never laid my finger on an Otus, but i'm sure that calling it a pictorial lens is too much of a stretch...
Trying to be clear:
functionally, the only PK lenses that could be called "pictorial" are the Pentax Soft Focus family (i own all of them, including the 6x7 one, excluded the FA version that is optically identical to the analog Pentax-F); technically, the only one that shares the design of many pictorial lenses is the original 2.2/85mm Soft focus, which is a reversed achromatic doublet, with the diaphragm behind the glass (unlike typical soft focus lenses like the Rodenstock Imagon, that have the iris in front of the glass).


cheers

Paolo


Last edited by cyberjunkie; 10-14-2017 at 09:54 AM.
10-14-2017, 06:45 AM   #95
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
When compiling a list few best lenses in any lens mount, it is best to leave one's preferences on the shelf.




Have you ever heard of the Carl Zeiss 50mm f/1.5 Sonnar? it is a lens with a reputation for being a polarizing element in the Leicaphile* community. It doesn't perform particularly well in MTF testing due to it not having a planar focus field and under-corrected astigmatism - it was designed in 1932, in the age before multi-coatings even existed** and where lens element counts had to be kept to a minimum to control loss of contrast, it is best known as a pictorial lens - not designed to be clinically accurate like the Zeiss Otus lenses.


For contrast, here it the MTF from the Zeiss Planar 50mm f/1.4:



And for a laugh, the Leica APO-Summicron-M 50mm f/2



*Zeissaphile doesn't have the same ring to it.
** Zeiss still makes them for Leica M mount, the uncoated versions are quite popular.
Very cool, as always.
10-16-2017, 07:05 AM   #96
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2016
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 447
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Since the inclusion of third party lenses in the forum competition, has even one Zeiss lens been used for a contest or competition winner? What does that say about Zeiss lenses? Is that a comment on the lenses or the people who use them? You'd think from the sound of people, that any image taken with a Zeiss lens would be a guaranteed wiinner.
You seem like a very logical person to me so I assume you would have to realize that the decision or choice to enter contests has nothing to do with the lenses one choses to use. The fact that no contest here has been won by an image taken with a Zeiss lens has NOTHING to do with the image quality of Zeiss lens.
10-16-2017, 07:35 AM   #97
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by sibyrnes Quote
You seem like a very logical person to me so I assume you would have to realize that the decision or choice to enter contests has nothing to do with the lenses one choses to use. The fact that no contest here has been won by an image taken with a Zeiss lens has NOTHING to do with the image quality of Zeiss lens.
When you have no direct access to any other kind of comparison you look for evidence that is indirect.

So, until someone comes up with a better comparison, I'll go with that one.
You certainly can't make a case that because no contest has been won by a Zeiss lens, they are better than other lenses.

This was a follow up to line of thought, encouraged by designers like Jun Hirakawa in his patent notes for the 77 ltd. "Designed for the way people take pictures, not for the test charts." and by his successor both refer to the need for a compromise between 3D spacial ability and lw/ph sharpness. As noted above, except for one lens Zeiss has avoided making that type of lens.
And that the test for that is the preferences of actual humans for the images.

Some of the contests on the forum are determined by the preferences of the people who vote on those contests, so it's quite possible that Zeiss lenses are not considered to be superior in their overall rendering characteristics.There are many other possible explanations, including that no one has submitted a photo taken with a Zeiss lens meaning they couldn't have won a contest.

But, as I have repeatedly pointed out to Fenwoodian, the test chart sharpness of Zeiss lenses may not be the best for portrait or 3D photgraphy, and the continued success of the one Zeiss lens made more in the Pentax style would suggest even Zeiss saw the benefits of going this route at least once.

But I throw it out there as I have many times to Fenwoodian, as a non-studio wildlife, landscape, nature candid photographer, where can I find Zeiss images that show me that Zeiss lenses are better for what i do?

Zeiss has an amazing reputation amongst test chart junkies, but, the lack of outstanding images that people actually like, I see very little evidence they are anything but a niche brand for people who are more influenced by numeric charts than by compelling images.

My view of various lenses tends to be determined by checking to see which lens was used for images that catch my attention. Thus far no Zeiss lens has ever caught my attention while viewing the exif of flickr files. That may well be because Zeiss users don't post their images. But it's more likely the result of no one else thinking as much of the way the lenses render as they do, and the lack of support for their somewhat biased evaluations.

I'm still trying to figure out... what are Zeiss lenses good for? Who uses them for what? What type of photographer would find them to be of value?

My advice to advice to beginning photographers is , find a guy who shoots what you'd like to shoot, find out what equipment he uses, and then try and emulate his techniques..so this is kind of critical to my way of thinking.


Last edited by normhead; 10-16-2017 at 07:57 AM.
10-16-2017, 07:54 AM   #98
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2016
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 447
Wow! You’ve really been thinking a lot about this! I love my Zeiss lens and I don’t really pay much attention to test charts. I also don’t care much about contests. Are they the best lens for everyone? I doubt it but I don’t care - I’m very happy with the images I get with them and you apparently get great images without them. So really, what’s the point of all this “my dog’s better than your dog” stuff?
10-16-2017, 08:01 AM   #99
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by sibyrnes Quote
Wow! You’ve really been thinking a lot about this! I love my Zeiss lens and I don’t really pay much attention to test charts. I also don’t care much about contests. Are they the best lens for everyone? I doubt it but I don’t care - I’m very happy with the images I get with them and you apparently get great images without them. So really, what’s the point of all this “my dog’s better than your dog” stuff?
Now there's a point I can agree with.

My photography instructor once said "Find the lens you love, buy the camera it goes on." But even you have to admit, it's hard to find out if you like Zeiss lenses, because there are so few posted images.
10-16-2017, 08:06 AM   #100
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 301
<<'m still trying to figure out... what are Zeiss lenses good for? Who uses them for what? What type of photographer would find them to be of value?>>

I have basically the same questions because I plan to upgrade the lenses I have for my K-1 which are all zooms. I am interested in compiling a lens kit of primes specifically for landscape photography and because of hearing of the legendary status of Zeiss lenses all of my past 60 years in photography they were my first thought, but the cost is a problem (although not insurmouteable) and reading the above posts gives me doubts. Other considerations are the three amigos, other Pentax limited or star primes, the Samyangs and clones, and the Sigma 35 mm Art (and other Art FF primes if they ever produce them in K mounts). I also wonder how the older Zeiss lenses that are available in K mounts compare with the new Milvus line that can be converted to K mount. Any opinions or advice will be much appreciated.
10-16-2017, 08:10 AM   #101
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
Type in ZIess in exif images in flickr and you don't see anything that knocks your socks off....
Search: Zeiss in exif images | Flickr
10-16-2017, 08:11 AM - 1 Like   #102
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2016
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 447
Here's a link to some of my recent photos taken with Zeiss lens(there may also be a couple of K 35 f3.5 in there too) No guarantee that they will "knock your socks off".
Barn, Cloud, Reflection Pond | 25mm Distagon f2.8 | Chuck Simon | Flickr
10-16-2017, 08:15 AM   #103
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by sibyrnes Quote
Here's a link to some of my recent photos taken with Zeiss lens(there may also be a couple of K 35 f3.5 in there too) No guarantee that they will "knock your socks off".
Barn, Cloud, Reflection Pond | 25mm Distagon f2.8 | Chuck Simon | Flickr
Thanks for those, I have to admit, there's a level of sharpness there, I'm not used to seeing, but, I'm also not sure I wouldn't prefer a gentler smoother rendering of the same images. Personally I tend to go for smooth and dreamy.

I'll have to book mark that page for reference.

Last edited by normhead; 10-16-2017 at 08:28 AM.
10-16-2017, 08:24 AM - 1 Like   #104
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2016
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 447
QuoteOriginally posted by wanderer2 Quote
<<'m still trying to figure out... what are Zeiss lenses good for? Who uses them for what? What type of photographer would find them to be of value?>>

I have basically the same questions because I plan to upgrade the lenses I have for my K-1 which are all zooms. I am interested in compiling a lens kit of primes specifically for landscape photography and because of hearing of the legendary status of Zeiss lenses all of my past 60 years in photography they were my first thought, but the cost is a problem (although not insurmouteable) and reading the above posts gives me doubts. Other considerations are the three amigos, other Pentax limited or star primes, the Samyangs and clones, and the Sigma 35 mm Art (and other Art FF primes if they ever produce them in K mounts). I also wonder how the older Zeiss lenses that are available in K mounts compare with the new Milvus line that can be converted to K mount. Any opinions or advice will be much appreciated.
In my opinion, two of the best landscape lens you can get for your K1 are the SMC K 20mm f4 and the K 35mm f3.5. IF you can find them, cheaper than Zeiss and hard to tell the difference. As you may of guessed, I don't put much value in auto focus for landscapes.

---------- Post added 10-16-17 at 08:25 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Thanks for those, I have to admit, there's a level of sharpness there, I'm not used to seeing, but, I'm also not sure I wouldn't prefer a gentler smoother rendering of the same images.

I'll have to book mark that page for reference.
Thank you.
10-16-2017, 09:02 AM   #105
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Alex645's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,526
Just to add to the Zeiss conversation: Nearly every Academy Award for best cinematography was given to a film that was shot with either Zeiss or Panavision lenses. Of course it is not the lenses that are winning the awards, but the cinematographers generally choose the best rental optics available.

In still photography, at one time, Zeiss ruled commercial studio work with the abundance of Hasselblad MF bodies. But in this day and age of autofocus photographers, most have switched to other brands.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
200mm, 300mm, 50mm, af, conclusion, f2, f2.8, fa, fa77ltd, k-mount, length, lens, lense, lenses, macro, mm, pentax, pentax lens, pentax-a, pentax-da, pentax-m, ratings, review, reviews, slr lens, smc
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
prime, prime, everywhere a prime... pepperberry farm Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18567 4 Hours Ago 08:38 AM
Best budget options for a prime 30-35mm f1.2-1.8 AF lens for Pentax APS-C? Rayn Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 28 07-05-2016 02:55 PM
New lenses for Ks-2: 55-300 + 35mm prime or 50mm prime? Sean Hamilton Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 13 05-11-2016 07:37 PM
People The Turkish Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister (photo series/essay) alamo5000 Post Your Photos! 2 04-10-2016 10:09 PM
Pentax prime vs Nikon prime ladybug Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 58 09-19-2010 01:03 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:37 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top