Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
  

oil on aperture blades of 58 FL 1.2 - can it affect pictu...
  
 
alexands
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · oil on aperture blades of 58 FL 1.2 - can it affect picture quality too?


Hi Duewithouttape. The focus achieved is the best I can get out of the lens at f1.2. I use the magnify function on the a7r. I've taken tons of pictures and none are even close to being sharp at f1.2. The issue is worse for distant objects. I find that if I tune the focus for maximum sharpness (as above) I get that glow with bright objects. If I bring the focus a bit closer the glow goes away but the pic is even fuzzier. I have a Novaflex adapter on order to rule out the possibility it is the adapter....I thought maybe internal reflections on my cheap ebay adapter are making matters worse. Alternatively, maybe its just spherical abberations (as you suggest) and the nature of the beast at f1.2. What confuses me though is that I see sharp pictures at f1.2 in this forum (even with this same lens). If the adapter does not make a difference, there is a repair guy in town who has agreed to take a quick look at it...I'm still within my window to return the lens if I decide too (although I really like the bokeh so I'd be tempted to keep it regardless and shoot at f2).


Apr 01, 2014 at 01:10 PM
OpticalFlow
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · oil on aperture blades of 58 FL 1.2 - can it affect picture quality too?


Hi alexands,
FWIW I have a Nikkor S 5.8cm 1.4 of a similar vintage that is in mint condition but shows very similar softness and coma wide open. From 2.8 onwards it is very usable and shows no signs that it might be decentered so I have been attributing these deficiencies to the optical design.



Apr 01, 2014 at 01:23 PM
alexands
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · oil on aperture blades of 58 FL 1.2 - can it affect picture quality too?


That is interesting OpticalFlow and I'm guessing the situation will end up being the same with this lens. I may simply have to select my subject matter accordingly when I want to shoot at f1.2. Flowers, for example, seem to look great with that soft dreamy look even if nothing is really sharp. Still, I'll test with the new adapter, have a repair person take a look at it and then reassess. I can work within its limitations once I know nothing is technically wrong with it.


Apr 01, 2014 at 01:44 PM
alexands
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · oil on aperture blades of 58 FL 1.2 - can it affect picture quality too?


The Novoflex FD-NEX adapter arrived and it does not help. The images coming out of the cheap ebay adapter and the Novoflex adapter are identical. I took the lens to an outlet center that had older Canon film bodies and tested it on these. There was not ghosting, coma, or anything like that when looking through the viewfinder. Any text was also crystal clear at f1.2. So, if its not the adapter and the lens works great on a film body, then it must be the way it interfaces with the digital sensor. Next, I may try to an FD/FL - EOS adapter to see if its any different on a 5d III than on a A7r.


Apr 01, 2014 at 09:56 PM
OpticalFlow
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · oil on aperture blades of 58 FL 1.2 - can it affect picture quality too?


You should be able to assess this on your 5D using free-lensing, no need for an adapter just for the purpose of testing. While you may struggle to have the optical axis of the lens perpendicular to the sensor, this will only change the plane of what's in focus - same as with a tilt lens. The actual parts that are in focus should still tell you something about the lens.

I strongly doubt that what you were seeing indicates some sort of bad interaction between sensor and lens. I think what you observed by looking through the optical viewfinder is that the matte screen in the film bodies you tried only accepts light from a limited range of angles, i.e. a similar effect to stopping down to f2 or f2.8.




Apr 02, 2014 at 12:18 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



OpticalFlow
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · oil on aperture blades of 58 FL 1.2 - can it affect picture quality too?


Just to give you an example of my Nikkor 5.8cm 1.4 wide open

https://www.flickr.com/photos/94122950@N05/12730363194/

(focused on the sign, you can get to full resolution by clicking on the "...")

I think that is fairly similar to what you're seeing



Apr 02, 2014 at 12:25 PM
alexands
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · oil on aperture blades of 58 FL 1.2 - can it affect picture quality too?


Thanks very much for your thoughts on this OpticalFlow and I will give the free lensing with the 5d III a try. So, would you expect this lens to function similarly (i.e. same ghosting, aberrations, etc.) wide open on a film camera?(I mean the final result, not just what it looks like through the viewfinder). And would this mean that any of the older 1.2 lenses would be similar wide open? The link in your last post is not working for me.




Apr 02, 2014 at 12:34 PM
OpticalFlow
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · oil on aperture blades of 58 FL 1.2 - can it affect picture quality too?


Hi,

yes. I would expect similar results on a film camera (end result).

No, I'm not suggesting that all older 1.2 lenses behave like that - I have a FL 55 1.2 that is stellar. What I am saying is that *some* of the early designs are not very good at f1.2 or f1.4 - both your canon FL 58 and my Nikkor 5.8cm predate the FL 55 1.2.
But that is just based on my limited experience and may be affected by a bad sample. If someone can show much better pictures taken with a FL 58 in similar conditions as yours then I am proven wrong and it is probably your copy - although almost certainly not caused by the aperture blades (more likely by someone trying to fix the aperture blades and putting things back together the wrong way round).

Sorry about the broken link, I probably have the wrong permissions set in flickr. Will deal with it later when I'm home.



Apr 02, 2014 at 12:47 PM
BrianVS
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · oil on aperture blades of 58 FL 1.2 - can it affect picture quality too?


I had a 58/1.2 FL Mount- picked up for $50 at a Photorama show. Used it with a Canon Pellix, sold it with the camera. I kept the 50/1.4 FL Mount lens, the later 1968 version with 7 elements in 5 groups.



Converted the Canon 50/1.4 FL to Leica M-Mount, RF coupled.

If you "have to have" an F1.2 lens, the Canon 55/1.2 FL, Konica AR mount and Minolta MC mount F1.2's are better. The Canon 58/1.2 used Hot glass, the 55/1.2 FL mount dropped it.

The Canon 50/1.4 FL mount used here was a $30 lens. 1/2 stop slower, but much-much sharper.



Apr 02, 2014 at 02:17 PM
1      
2
       end




FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password