35mm side by side review posted

Moderated by: guardian

Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell
FM Forum Rules

FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Image Upload

2 end

eosslr
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #1 · 35mm side by side review posted

http://slrlensreview.com/content/view/487/131/

Part 1 - intro
Part 2 - general impressions
Part 3 - lab tests 1
Part 4 - lab tests 2
Part 5-8 - field tests (coming soon...)

May 12, 2008 at 06:13 AM

Sam N
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #2 · 35mm side by side review posted

Interesting read and one of my favorite focal lengths. I'll be looking forward to the field tests.

May 12, 2008 at 08:15 AM

edwardkaraa
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #3 · 35mm side by side review posted

Very nice as usual. Thank you for your efforts

May 12, 2008 at 09:19 AM

PeaktoPeek
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #4 · 35mm side by side review posted

Wow, quite a collection. Looking forward to the final results....

Paul

May 12, 2008 at 09:20 AM

foxbat
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #5 · 35mm side by side review posted

Is your Summicron the ROM version or a late version of the 3CAM?

May 12, 2008 at 09:20 AM

brainiac
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #6 · 35mm side by side review posted

eosslr, I'm sorry I haven't sent you the 35PC yet, but someone is borrowing it with a view to buying it. If he doesn't, I will send it.

May 12, 2008 at 10:11 AM

brainiac
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #7 · 35mm side by side review posted

A little proof reading:

"UPDATE: Per quite a few requests from readers, I added Carl Zeiss Jena MC Flektogon 35mm f/2.8"

"Well, when it comes down to features, a manual lens is a manual lens, and there's not much one should expect here when it comes down to features."

"however, you'd be able to notice traces of distortion in certain types of shorts"

Edited on May 12, 2008 at 10:28 AM

May 12, 2008 at 10:15 AM

Kiron Kid
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #8 · 35mm side by side review posted

eosslr wrote:
http://slrlensreview.com/content/view/487/131/

Part 1 - intro
Part 2 - general impressions
Part 3 - lab tests 1
Part 4 - lab tests 2
Part 5-8 - field tests (coming soon...)

I just went there and registered. But, I couldn't access any reviews. The lenses are listed, but that's it. What did I do wrong?

Thanks

May 12, 2008 at 02:11 PM

Kiron Kid
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #9 · 35mm side by side review posted

Kiron Kid wrote:
eosslr wrote:
http://slrlensreview.com/content/view/487/131/

Part 1 - intro
Part 2 - general impressions
Part 3 - lab tests 1
Part 4 - lab tests 2
Part 5-8 - field tests (coming soon...)

I just went there and registered. But, I couldn't access any reviews. The lenses are listed, but that's it. What did I do wrong?

Thanks

On second thought, maybe I just chose a couple of lenses that haven't been reviewed yet...

May 12, 2008 at 02:47 PM

eosslr
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #10 · 35mm side by side review posted

foxbat wrote:
Is your Summicron the ROM version or a late version of the 3CAM?

it's a late 3cam version

May 12, 2008 at 02:52 PM

Arianne Dubois
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #11 · 35mm side by side review posted

Deserving attempt. Very useful.
(We are working on something quite similar.)

It is a pity that the three best lenses are missing:

Contax 35-70 (in our tests the best 35mm lens)
Canon EF 24-105 f/4 (astonishing at 35mm and better than 35 f/1.4)
Contax 35 PC (second best Contax 35mm)

May 12, 2008 at 03:54 PM

B Landau
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #12 · 35mm side by side review posted

With all the positive comments I have beeen reading about the ZF 35/2 I am surprised it did not fair somewhat better in your lab tests - particularly with regard to edge resolution.

The summicron 35/2 is no doubt a very good lens, but on my copy I do see noticeable resolution loss in the extreme most corner regions (when shooting at f/8). Having said that the edge resolution of non-corner regions is extremely good.

May 12, 2008 at 04:12 PM

SJMD
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #13 · 35mm side by side review posted

Arianne Dubois wrote:
Deserving attempt. Very useful.
(We are working on something quite similar.)

It is a pity that the three best lenses are missing:

Contax 35-70 (in our tests the best 35mm lens)
Canon EF 24-105 f/4 (astonishing at 35mm and better than 35 f/1.4)
Contax 35 PC (second best Contax 35mm)

I will say I find the 35-70 to be a great lens - would love to see a comparison.

best

steve

May 12, 2008 at 04:55 PM

jonboring
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #14 · 35mm side by side review posted

It hard for a lens to be all things to all people. I wonder if you should have 2 categories- fast 35 which is used with wide apertures and a 'landscape" 35mm which usually shot stopped way down, F8 or F11?

In the former, corner performance doesn't really matter as those area are usually out-of-focus. You are more interested in bokeh than sharpness in the outer edges.

With the "landscape" 35, bokeh doesn't matter and you need the critical sharpness all the way to the corners.

May 12, 2008 at 04:58 PM

cogitech
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #15 · 35mm side by side review posted

I agree. ^

Edited on May 12, 2008 at 05:01 PM

May 12, 2008 at 05:01 PM

eosslr
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #16 · 35mm side by side review posted

brainiac wrote:
A little proof reading:

"UPDATE: Per quite a few requests from readers, I added Carl Zeiss Jena MC Flektogon 35mm f/2.8"

"Well, when it comes down to features, a manual lens is a manual lens, and there's not much one should expect here when it comes down to features."

"however, you'd be able to notice traces of distortion in certain types of shorts"

cool, thanks - will correct today...

May 12, 2008 at 05:11 PM

eosslr
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #17 · 35mm side by side review posted

jonboring wrote:
It hard for a lens to be all things to all people. I wonder if you should have 2 categories- fast 35 which is used with wide apertures and a 'landscape" 35mm which usually shot stopped way down, F8 or F11?

In the former, corner performance doesn't really matter as those area are usually out-of-focus. You are more interested in bokeh than sharpness in the outer edges.

With the "landscape" 35, bokeh doesn't matter and you need the critical sharpness all the way to the corners.

this makes sense. double amount of work ;-) but makes sense... when i get free time, i'll add this to the review

May 12, 2008 at 05:14 PM

Lotusm50
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #18 · 35mm side by side review posted

...and with a "landscape" lens you probably won't find all that much difference in sharpness at f8 and f11 between these lenses. More important will be other factors like (micro)contrast, flare, color rendition, shadows, etc. None of which is tested.

You could walk away from this "test' as done and think there wasn't all that much difference between these lenses, and you could seamlessly substitute one for another. Of course we know that is far from reality. There is a lot in the comparative performance between these lenses that won't be conveyed by 2 simple data points.

May 12, 2008 at 05:18 PM

pdmphoto
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #19 · 35mm side by side review posted

Nice work, but again the definition of "borders" seems to cloud the results. I've tried about half of the listed lenses and my corner results don't match these border results, so I'd be careful about interpretting the results from the "borders".

For instance, I'm a long time proponent of the Zuiko 35/2.8 (tested 3 copies), but also have the Leica 35/2.8 (second version, which is supposed to be optically identical to the tested third version). After using both for hundreds of landscape shots stopped down to f/5.6-11, there is no doubt the corners are consistently superior on the 35/2.8 Elmarit.

Because I really wanted a 35/2 lens, I have also tried the Zuiko 35/2 (3 copies - from silvernose to latest MC), and a Leica 35/2 - neither had as good corner resolution as the Leica 35/2.8, or even the Zuiko 35/2.8 - when stopped down. To get better speed I went to the Zeiss 35/1.4 (albeit in RolleI mount), and found the performance superb, except for the *very* corners which show some decline.

Besides the "borders" issue. I am at a loss to understand how these tests can be so different from my own real world tests. I'm sure it is a combination of factors, but I wonder if these tests are done at a distance considerably less than infinity? I've found some lenses do very well at distances close in, but progressively worse towards infinity. If that is the case than these tests are more close focus, than real world performance for the type of photography I do.

B Landau wrote:
With all the positive comments I have beeen reading about the ZF 35/2 I am surprised it did not fair somewhat better in your lab tests - particularly with regard to edge resolution.

The summicron 35/2 is no doubt a very good lens, but on my copy I do see noticeable resolution loss in the extreme most corner regions (when shooting at f/8). Having said that the edge resolution of non-corner regions is extremely good.

May 12, 2008 at 05:41 PM

pdmphoto
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #20 · 35mm side by side review posted

You will see noticeable differences, in the extreme corners, with all these lenses stopped down to f8-11. Some don't have it no matter the aperture, the others have varying degrees (and types) of weakness, even when stopped down.
.
Lotusm50 wrote:
...and with a "landscape" lens you probably won't find all that much difference in sharpness at f8 and f11 between these lenses. More important will be other factors like (micro)contrast, flare, color rendition, shadows, etc. None of which is tested.

May 12, 2008 at 05:47 PM

B Landau
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #21 · 35mm side by side review posted

pdmphoto wrote:
You will see noticeable differences, in the extreme corners, with all these lenses stopped down to f8-11. Some don't have it no matter the aperture, the others have varying degrees (and types) of weakness, even when stopped down.
.
[

I agree. When I compare my CZ 35-70 to the Summicron 35/2 the corners and edges do resolve differently. Both are excellent lenses, but as an example the corner resolution roll-off on the Summicron starts closer to the extreme corner than the CZ. If I had to say which had more roll-off at the extreme corner I would say it is the Summicron. On the other hand, if I look at the extreme left and right hand edges of the frame (away from the corners) I think the Summicron has slightly better resolution. All of my comments are in the context of f/8 and near infinity focus - meaning landscape type set-up conditions.

May 12, 2008 at 08:46 PM

Lotusm50
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #22 · 35mm side by side review posted

B Landau wrote:
I agree. When I compare my CZ 35-70 to the Summicron 35/2 the corners and edges do resolve differently. Both are excellent lenses, but as an example the corner resolution roll-off on the Summicron starts closer to the extreme corner than the CZ. If I had to say which had more roll-off at the extreme corner I would say it is the Summicron. On the other hand, if I look at the extreme left and right hand edges of the frame (away from the corners) I think the Summicron has slightly better resolution. All of my comments are in the context of f/8 and near infinity focus - meaning landscape type set-up conditions.

Precisely. One reason among others why a test that only looks at 2 points is inadequate, and potentially misleading.

May 12, 2008 at 10:13 PM

Andi Dietrich
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #23 · 35mm side by side review posted

"

Precisely. One reason among others why a test that only looks at 2 points is inadequate, and potentially misleading."

Agreed, but then AG shows lots of passion, he is open to critics and he has improved his review site constantly.
He is also among the few which provides full size images of some of the tested lenses. I would prefer to have the possibility to download an interior or landscape photograph though. We probably agree that this much better than posting 3, 4 or 7 crops from one image.

Edited on May 12, 2008 at 10:39 PM

May 12, 2008 at 10:39 PM

eosslr
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #24 · 35mm side by side review posted

pdmphoto wrote:
Nice work, but again the definition of "borders" seems to cloud the results. I've tried about half of the listed lenses and my corner results don't match these border results, so I'd be careful about interpretting the results from the "borders".

Valid question - take a look at the targets displayed in FAQ. MTF is measured off left top and right bottom slanted squares. These are 85% distance from the center (for self-assembled chart) and 80% distance from the center (for the iso chart).

pdmphoto wrote:
Besides the "borders" issue. I am at a loss to understand how these tests can be so different from my own real world tests. I'm sure it is a combination of factors, but I wonder if these tests are done at a distance considerably less than infinity? I've found some lenses do very well at distances close in, but progressively worse towards infinity. If that is the case than these tests are more close focus, than real world performance for the type of photography I do.

I think I have mentioned this in my other posts and it should definitely be in the FAQ. I record best MTF, meaning that I don't take one set at just a particular distance, but rather vary the distance to the chart as well to measure MTF at various distances. Thus one lens might be optimized for closeups while the other will be optimized for infinity - I will have the best MTF for both. I do not record at what distance the lens produced the best MTFs - just the best MTF out of all sequences. The process is relatively streightforward, it just requires bunch of measurements - start at a distance, go through focus brackets for all tested apertures, move the camera/lens by 1m, repeat, move by 1m, repeat etc...

This is all described in the FAQ section - specifically put it there since I was repeatedly getting this question.

Edited by eosslr on May 12, 2008 at 11:00 PM GMT

Edited on May 12, 2008 at 11:00 PM

May 12, 2008 at 10:52 PM

eosslr
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #25 · 35mm side by side review posted

B Landau wrote:
With all the positive comments I have beeen reading about the ZF 35/2 I am surprised it did not fair somewhat better in your lab tests - particularly with regard to edge resolution.

The summicron 35/2 is no doubt a very good lens, but on my copy I do see noticeable resolution loss in the extreme most corner regions (when shooting at f/8). Having said that the edge resolution of non-corner regions is extremely good.

well, i will post the real life test results in a day or two - i have all pictures taken, it's just a matter of massaging them to fit the web page and adding colorful comments that sometimes create a lot of controversy ;-) seriously, i'll have full sized images uploaded as well, not just crops - it would be quite interesting to see whether the real life tests back MTF measurements...

May 12, 2008 at 10:59 PM


FM Forums \| Alternative Gear & Lenses \| Join Image Upload 1 2 end