[jeffshaddix]

Hi guys,

I've found lens comparison threads useful in the past, so I thought I'd throw this out there for anyone that's interested.

Yesterday I tested my three 50'ish primes with a simple scene of knickknacks for both sharpness and bokeh. The test subjects are:

Voigtlander Nokton 58mm f1.4
Pentax-A 50mm 1.7
Pentax-A 50mm 2.8 macro

All shots were taken on Manual mode with the exact same exposure settings (ISO 100 fixed, +.7EV, and varying aperture/shutter speed).

On to the test images:

First the bokeh tests! Here follow resizes of the full images, click the link to view the original:

---

Voigtlander 58/1.4 @ 1.4:


A50/1.7 @ 1.7:

---

Voigtlander 58/1.4 @ 2:


A50/1.7 @ 2:

---

Voigtlander 58/1.4 @ 2.8:


A50/1.7 @ 2.8:


A50/2.8 @ 2.8:

---

Voigtlander 58/1.4 @ 4:


A50/1.7 @ 4:


A50/2.8 @ 4:

---

Now to the 100% crops for sharpness:

---

Voigtlander 58/1.4 @ 1.4 ||| A50/1.7 @ 1.7

---

Voigtlander 58/1.4 @ 2 ||| A50/1.7 @ 2

---

Voigtlander 58/1.4 @ 2.8 ||| A50/1.7 @ 2.8 ||| A50/2.8 @ 2.8

---

Voigtlander 58/1.4 @ 4 ||| A50/1.7 @ 4 ||| A50/2.8 @ 4

---

Voigtlander 58/1.4 @ 5.6 ||| A50/1.7 @ 5.6 ||| A50/2.8 @ 5.6

---

Voigtlander 58/1.4 @ 8 ||| A50/1.7 @ 8 ||| A50/2.8 @ 8

---

My personal conclusions:

For bokeh, I think the Voigtlander easily takes the cake. At all apertures the Voigtlander rendered excellent circular bokeh. In contrast, the Pentax lenses showed hexagonal bokeh at apertures past f/2. This is expected since the Voigtlander has nine aperture blades versus six on the Pentax lenses.

For sharpness, it's tough to say. Sadly it appears that the tripod got bumped in the Voigtlander shots from f/2.8 onward, so the focus moved from the eye to the ear. Even that being said, I think the A50/2.8 macro is the sharpest of the three for f/2.8 and beyond. Below that it's hard to say, but I'd be tempted to give the A50/1.7 the prize...the Voigtlander seems a bit more dreamy than the Pentax at large apertures.

Final thougts:

The A50/1.7 fared considerably well considering it's at least 1/3 of the cost of the Voigtlander. For the price and the size, the A50/1.7 is an incredible value. That said, my favorite rendering would have to be the Voigtlander at f/2...what can I say, I'm a sucker for that bokeh! Anyway, hope you enjoyed my rough series of test shots!

---

Last edited by jeffshaddix; 03-05-2011 at 11:51 PM.

[hcc]

Nice comparison. Thank you for sharing this very comprehensive series comparative shots. Really nicely done.

Personnally, I feel that the Voigtlander Photographs are more pleasant to my liking.

It is a pity that Voigtlander discontinued the K-mount manufacturing.

[paperbag846]

Great work. Shows the strengths and limitations of the 50 1.7 really well. The Voigtlander is also my favorite.

[jeffshaddix]

Nice comparison. Thank you for sharing this very comprehensive series comparative shots. Really nicely done.

Personnally, I feel that the Voigtlander Photographs are more pleasant to my liking.

It is a pity that Voigtlander discontinued the K-mount manufacturing.

Thanks hcc. By the way it seems like we're following the same lens path for primes...90mm macro, Voigtlander 58, and I've been thinking about getting that FA 31. How does your kit round out for you? I'd like to get a ~30mm fast prime for indoor shots and portraits, but I'd also like to have some wide-angle macro capability...too many choices.

Great work. Shows the strengths and limitations of the 50 1.7 really well. The Voigtlander is also my favorite.

Thanks paperbag. I honestly was impressed by the 50/1.7's performance...really does a great job living up to its 'nifty 50' name. The Voigtlander certainly is in its own league for bokeh and handling (not to mention build quality!).

---

Last edited by jeffshaddix; 03-06-2011 at 12:04 AM.

[freewheeler]

As much as I loved the IQ of my A50/1.7, I'm happier with my Voigtlander58
because of the handling. Nothing focuses more spot on than a good quality
MF lens in my opinion. With the VL it is a relatively easy procedure.
Although the A50 is very sharp and renders very nice, the VL renders, to my eye,
more pleasing and I have less misses in focusing.
Realy like the side by side comarisons btw, THANKS

[macTak]

A good comparison. I love my M50/1.7. You bokeh test shows something I've noticed, that this optic is really at its best in bokeh in the f2.8-f4 range. That with a resonably close subject I found to produce top-notch results, as the in focus area is very sharp then too.

[jeffshaddix]

As much as I loved the IQ of my A50/1.7, I'm happier with my Voigtlander58
because of the handling. Nothing focuses more spot on than a good quality
MF lens in my opinion. With the VL it is a relatively easy procedure.
Although the A50 is very sharp and renders very nice, the VL renders, to my eye,
more pleasing and I have less misses in focusing.
Realy like the side by side comarisons btw, THANKS

I agree that the Voigtlander is easier to focus than the A50/1.7, but not as easy as the A50/2.8 (likely just due to aperture size). One trick I like to use is put the VL on f/2 and hold down the optical preview button to stop down the lens. Then focusing stopped down slightly is even easier.

[jeffshaddix]

A good comparison. I love my M50/1.7. You bokeh test shows something I've noticed, that this optic is really at its best in bokeh in the f2.8-f4 range. That with a resonably close subject I found to produce top-notch results, as the in focus area is very sharp then too.

Yeah, that's a fantastic range for the lens. I took some family portraiture photos with the A50/1.7 @ 3.2 and they turned out great. The only real drawback is the hexagonal bokeh which may (or may not) lead to a distracting background. It's still a subjective thing, and I think the busyness invoked by the hexagonal bokeh can at times be used to create some interesting compositions.

[GeneV]

Nice comparison. To me, the Pentax were sharper, but the VL has a quality that I also find appealing. It's one reason the 40mm Ultron is always on one of my bodies. I wonder, though, how much the longer focal length contributes to some of the effect, here.

[jeffshaddix]

Nice comparison. To me, the Pentax were sharper, but the VL has a quality that I also find appealing. It's one reason the 40mm Ultron is always on one of my bodies. I wonder, though, how much the longer focal length contributes to some of the effect, here.

Hi Gene, I imagine the extra 8mm contributes a good bit to the amount/size of the bokeh blur, but the characteristics are all the VL, as you well know from your Ultron.

[GeneV]

Hi Gene, I imagine the extra 8mm contributes a good bit to the amount/size of the bokeh blur, but the characteristics are all the VL, as you well know from your Ultron.

It is too bad I got to know (and love) VL after the PKA mount was discontinued. Puts the pressure on while stores still have some.
They aren't cheap on Ebay, either.

[jeffshaddix]

It is too bad I got to know these after the PKA mount was discontinued.
They aren't all that cheap on Ebay, either.

Absolutely...I especially wish that 125mm 2.5 was still available. Talk about poor marketing ruining the possibilities of an incredible product!

[GeneV]

Oddly, I tried one because I was interested in their RF camera for street shooting. Then I realized it would be easier and just as compact to pop the Ultron on my MX. It hasn't been off that body for months--execpt for brief visits to the K-x or SuperProgram.

[dasuhu]

It is too bad I got to know (and love) VL after the PKA mount was discontinued. Puts the pressure on while stores still have some.
They aren't cheap on Ebay, either.

I got my mint condition VL Ultron a few weeks ago for a hair under $300 from e***. That's what made the 40LTD/Ultron comparison more intriguing (similar price, sharpness, minimum focus distance).

Better snatch them all up before e*** sellers/buyers realize that Ultron supplies for PKA are fixed.

I was tempted to flip the Ultron for a small profit when I won it, but trying it out in person quickly put an end to that proposition.

[hcc]

Thanks hcc. By the way it seems like we're following the same lens path for primes...90mm macro, Voigtlander 58, and I've been thinking about getting that FA 31. How does your kit round out for you? I'd like to get a ~30mm fast prime for indoor shots and portraits, but I'd also like to have some wide-angle macro capability...too many choices.

Jeff,
It seems indeed that we follow similar needs.

In response to your query, I am most happy with my line-up and I do not think that I need much more. I shoot mostly outdor and I travel overseas quite a lot (4 months last year). My (limited) line-up reflects my needs, my work outdoor in foul weather when lens swapping is out of question, and my preference to keep things simple (1 lens + 1 body when possible):

* the DA18-250mm is the perfect all-around lens; it is my work-horse, with its limitations in low-light or tricky lighting conditions.

* the Voigtlander 58mm f.14 is my fast prime for low-light, but also some tricky light situations; a very sturdy lens perfect for outdoor and stunning outputs.

* the FA31mm is an all-round prime; this is the lens that I would use when I am unsure about the DA18-250mm and I want the best IQ; excellent for both indoor and outdoor.

* the Tamron 90mm SP is for macro mainly; I still need to learn to use it...

When travelling, I tend to use one of the following combos:
- K-7 + DA18-250mm (1 lens + 1 body, no lens swapping)
- K-7 + FA31mm (1 lens + 1 body, no lens swapping)
- K-7 + DA18-250mm (+ Voigtlander 58mm in my luggage) when I have space.

Overall I can recommend very strongly the FA31mm; it is a very nice complement to the line up, with stunning IQ and no flaws. It is also the perfect all-around prime (if this makes sense) that can doo indoor and outdoor, wide enough for landscape bur close enough for details.

Food for thoughts...