A poinless exercise: trying several fast portrait teles

Asahiflex · 09-26-2009, 11:47 AM

Originally posted by little laker

Asahiflex, is there any chance you'll be doing the same test with a film camera soon?
It might be interesting seeing what those lenses would do on full frame. I wouldn't be suprised if the A* 85/1.4 shines in that test.

Yes, I was planning to do that too. With a fridge full of film that should be possible

Mind you, I'm only interested in the performance at or near wide open (everything shown here was shot wide open, including the portraits). Why buy a fast portrait tele and then use it only stopped down? Likewise I'm not interested in the corner performance of the lenses. If you think I'm wrong then please let me know

The Helios-40-2 will also be added to my collection sooner or later, just like I will add the Carl Zeiss Jena 75mm f/1.5 Biotar

**rparmar** · 09-26-2009, 12:08 PM

Originally posted by ryan s

Like I said over there, the 77Ltd and Tak 85/1.9 win it for me.

And the M85/2. All of these look better than the A* to me, though not by a huge margin.

I also agree that these look underexposed.

séamuis · 09-26-2009, 12:33 PM

to my eyes, the 1.9 Super-Takumar looks the best. I know you really speak highly of the Pancolar Peter, but it just doesnt do much for me.

**dadipentak** · 09-26-2009, 12:55 PM

Nice portraits!

Recercare · 09-26-2009, 01:11 PM

Wow, what a shock.....the A* 85mm is really disappointing. The FA77 is great (as expected) but the real surprise here is the SMC-M 85mm. I really like the rendering of that lens.

Kind regards
.lars

Wheatfield · 09-26-2009, 02:02 PM

Out of curiosity, did you attempt to adjust the A*85mm/1.4 CA during RAW conversion? If you didn't, you didn't do your job.

Andi Lo · 09-26-2009, 02:11 PM

Takumar and FA 77 for me... I actually can't tell betwen the A and FA but I'll take the FA since it's AF and is approximately the same price.

The meyer got a different bokeh to the others, and may be preferrable if you like it.

Votesh · 09-26-2009, 04:34 PM

I don't see why everyone is ragging on the A*. I think it has the best bokeh of the bunch and is probably sharpest. From my experience with it it does often show bad CA, but in most situations it is mostly avoidable.

glasbak · 09-27-2009, 12:48 AM

Originally posted by Asahiflex

Y Why buy a fast portrait tele and then use it only stopped down? Likewise I'm not interested in the corner performance of the lenses. If you think I'm wrong then please let me know

I will bite,
First, on APS-C I would not call these portrait primes.
Second, you cannot judge the corner performance on APS-C, sensor is too small.
Third, if you shoot all wide open, and not at the same aperture, what are you comparing ?
Fourth, why buy fast primes and use them stopped down :
In general, a 1.4 lens will be a better lens at 2.0 than a 2.0 lens at 2.0.

Recercare · 09-27-2009, 02:32 AM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

Out of curiosity, did you attempt to adjust the A*85mm/1.4 CA during RAW conversion? If you didn't, you didn't do your job.

That's ridiculous. If you are going to reduce CA for one lens, then you should also increase contrast for another lens. Why should the A* 85 get special treatment ?

Kind regards
.lars

georgweb · 09-27-2009, 03:52 AM

Peter,
congrats on your son's second birthday, happy party!

Thanks for taking and publishing this nice series. I understand that you have done this in regards to portrait photography. I'd just say this is a series of nice photos from very nice lenses (avoiding the dreaded 'test' scenario).

For a strange kind of reason the Meyer Görlitz is pulling me :-) Apart from your excellent portraits on the net from the 75 Meyer found some more here. I was thinking 'black-and-white' when I read portrait. In that regard the Primoplan is even better maybe. Having the 58 Primoplan and the 100 Trioplan I guess it's just logical to fill the hole with the 75 .-)

I am a firm believer in the cemented triple front lens (a.k.a. classic 'Sonnar') and in that regard the early Tak83 is appealing to me as well as the Jup9. I think there always will be a trade-off between either best bokeh (smooth, silent, low-key) or best 'test'-contrast (the latter being quite undesirable in portraits imo).

Best, Georg

Marc Sabatella · 09-27-2009, 09:21 AM

Originally posted by glasbak

First, on APS-C I would not call these portrait primes.

It's subjective, to be sure, but I think it's a quite useful portrait focal length on APS-C. Still, I'd have loved to see the DA70 included - and maybe one of the new Korean 85/1.4's!

Quote:

Second, you cannot judge the corner performance on APS-C, sensor is too small.

APS-C sensors have corners too. True, you can't judge how the corners would look on FF, but if you don't care about FF, it's still relevant to wonder what the corners might look like on APS-C.

FWIW, I see lots of very good lenses with one or two dogs in comparison. The FA77 was probably consistently my favorite in each grouping, but not by huge margins. The M85/2 continues to impress me simply by virtue of being in the pack.

Wheatfield · 09-27-2009, 09:49 AM

Originally posted by Recercare

That's ridiculous. If you are going to reduce CA for one lens, then you should also increase contrast for another lens. Why should the A* 85 get special treatment ?

Kind regards
.lars

Because the adjustment is routinely available during raw conversion, and CA is only one of many qualities that a lens should be chosen for.
After that, you can decide if the lens' native contrast, sharpness, bokeh or whatever else works for you.
Or, just go out and take some pictures and forget about pointless exercises.

mer · 09-27-2009, 10:00 AM

it would have been to use a busy background, that's where the true test lies

Asahiflex · 09-27-2009, 10:27 AM

Originally posted by glasbak

I will bite,
First, on APS-C I would not call these portrait primes.
Second, you cannot judge the corner performance on APS-C, sensor is too small.
Third, if you shoot all wide open, and not at the same aperture, what are you comparing ?
Fourth, why buy fast primes and use them stopped down :
In general, a 1.4 lens will be a better lens at 2.0 than a 2.0 lens at 2.0.

I love to stir things up a bit!

But you made me think and a f/2 test will be added too.

09-26-2009, 01:11 PM	#20
Recercare Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Sweden Posts: 359	Very obvious Wow, what a shock.....the A* 85mm is really disappointing. The FA77 is great (as expected) but the real surprise here is the SMC-M 85mm. I really like the rendering of that lens. Kind regards .lars

09-27-2009, 03:52 AM	#26
georgweb Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Berlin, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,386	Peter, congrats on your son's second birthday, happy party! Thanks for taking and publishing this nice series. I understand that you have done this in regards to portrait photography. I'd just say this is a series of nice photos from very nice lenses (avoiding the dreaded 'test' scenario). For a strange kind of reason the Meyer Görlitz is pulling me :-) Apart from your excellent portraits on the net from the 75 Meyer found some more here. I was thinking 'black-and-white' when I read portrait. In that regard the Primoplan is even better maybe. Having the 58 Primoplan and the 100 Trioplan I guess it's just logical to fill the hole with the 75 .-) I am a firm believer in the cemented triple front lens (a.k.a. classic 'Sonnar') and in that regard the early Tak83 is appealing to me as well as the Jup9. I think there always will be a trade-off between either best bokeh (smooth, silent, low-key) or best 'test'-contrast (the latter being quite undesirable in portraits imo). Best, Georg Last edited by georgweb; 09-27-2009 at 07:35 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
People Portrait Exercise Jun 19	danielchtong	Post Your Photos!	1	06-27-2010 06:58 AM
For Sale - Sold: EX+++ Canon EF USM 100mm f/2.0 Fast Portrait Lens, Worldwide Shipping	wallyb	Sold Items	1	12-01-2009 11:23 AM
For Sale - Sold: Minolta Rokkor 85mm f/1.7 Fast Portrait Lens converted to M42 Mount	wallyb	Sold Items	6	02-26-2009 10:55 AM
Examples from long teles which don't include birds?	Jasvox	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	49	01-29-2009 11:10 PM
Who says Pentax don't have long teles? 2 x 780mm lens coming	Katsura	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	09-26-2007 10:38 AM

09-26-2009, 11:47 AM	#16
Asahiflex Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,795 Original Poster	Originally posted by little laker Asahiflex, is there any chance you'll be doing the same test with a film camera soon? It might be interesting seeing what those lenses would do on full frame. I wouldn't be suprised if the A* 85/1.4 shines in that test. Yes, I was planning to do that too. With a fridge full of film that should be possible Mind you, I'm only interested in the performance at or near wide open (everything shown here was shot wide open, including the portraits). Why buy a fast portrait tele and then use it only stopped down? Likewise I'm not interested in the corner performance of the lenses. If you think I'm wrong then please let me know The Helios-40-2 will also be added to my collection sooner or later, just like I will add the Carl Zeiss Jena 75mm f/1.5 Biotar

09-26-2009, 12:08 PM	#17
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,819	Originally posted by ryan s Like I said over there, the 77Ltd and Tak 85/1.9 win it for me. And the M85/2. All of these look better than the A* to me, though not by a huge margin. I also agree that these look underexposed.

09-26-2009, 12:33 PM	#18
séamuis Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H. Posts: 5,979	to my eyes, the 1.9 Super-Takumar looks the best. I know you really speak highly of the Pancolar Peter, but it just doesnt do much for me.

09-26-2009, 12:55 PM	#19
dadipentak Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Baltimore, Maryland Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,590	Nice portraits!

09-26-2009, 02:02 PM	#21
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	Out of curiosity, did you attempt to adjust the A*85mm/1.4 CA during RAW conversion? If you didn't, you didn't do your job.

09-26-2009, 02:11 PM	#22
Andi Lo Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia Posts: 2,924	Takumar and FA 77 for me... I actually can't tell betwen the A and FA but I'll take the FA since it's AF and is approximately the same price. The meyer got a different bokeh to the others, and may be preferrable if you like it.

09-26-2009, 04:34 PM	#23
Votesh Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 817	I don't see why everyone is ragging on the A*. I think it has the best bokeh of the bunch and is probably sharpest. From my experience with it it does often show bad CA, but in most situations it is mostly avoidable.

09-27-2009, 12:48 AM	#24
glasbak Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Netherlands Posts: 369	Originally posted by Asahiflex Y Why buy a fast portrait tele and then use it only stopped down? Likewise I'm not interested in the corner performance of the lenses. If you think I'm wrong then please let me know I will bite, First, on APS-C I would not call these portrait primes. Second, you cannot judge the corner performance on APS-C, sensor is too small. Third, if you shoot all wide open, and not at the same aperture, what are you comparing ? Fourth, why buy fast primes and use them stopped down : In general, a 1.4 lens will be a better lens at 2.0 than a 2.0 lens at 2.0.

09-27-2009, 02:32 AM	#25
Recercare Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Sweden Posts: 359	Originally posted by Wheatfield Out of curiosity, did you attempt to adjust the A85mm/1.4 CA during RAW conversion? If you didn't, you didn't do your job. That's ridiculous. If you are going to reduce CA for one lens, then you should also increase contrast for another lens. Why should the A 85 get special treatment ? Kind regards .lars

09-27-2009, 09:21 AM	#27
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Originally posted by glasbak First, on APS-C I would not call these portrait primes. It's subjective, to be sure, but I think it's a quite useful portrait focal length on APS-C. Still, I'd have loved to see the DA70 included - and maybe one of the new Korean 85/1.4's! Quote: Second, you cannot judge the corner performance on APS-C, sensor is too small. APS-C sensors have corners too. True, you can't judge how the corners would look on FF, but if you don't care about FF, it's still relevant to wonder what the corners might look like on APS-C. FWIW, I see lots of very good lenses with one or two dogs in comparison. The FA77 was probably consistently my favorite in each grouping, but not by huge margins. The M85/2 continues to impress me simply by virtue of being in the pack.

09-27-2009, 09:49 AM	#28
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	Originally posted by Recercare That's ridiculous. If you are going to reduce CA for one lens, then you should also increase contrast for another lens. Why should the A* 85 get special treatment ? Kind regards .lars Because the adjustment is routinely available during raw conversion, and CA is only one of many qualities that a lens should be chosen for. After that, you can decide if the lens' native contrast, sharpness, bokeh or whatever else works for you. Or, just go out and take some pictures and forget about pointless exercises.

09-27-2009, 10:00 AM	#29
mer Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Greece Posts: 237	it would have been to use a busy background, that's where the true test lies

09-27-2009, 10:27 AM	#30
Asahiflex Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,795 Original Poster	Originally posted by glasbak I will bite, First, on APS-C I would not call these portrait primes. Second, you cannot judge the corner performance on APS-C, sensor is too small. Third, if you shoot all wide open, and not at the same aperture, what are you comparing ? Fourth, why buy fast primes and use them stopped down : In general, a 1.4 lens will be a better lens at 2.0 than a 2.0 lens at 2.0. I love to stir things up a bit! But you made me think and a f/2 test will be added too.