Whether it's variation or small design changes over time (and time mixed product being sold) we do not know, but we certainly know that there are a number of common C/Y lenses that will work flawlessly on some 5D bodies, need the small curved block removed from the edge of the rear lens collar to clear on others, and yet even with that block removed will not clear on others. I think this was determined pretty early on in the life of the 5d and has been mentioned here many times. It will be interesting to see how our lenses fare on a 5D replacement when (if?) it is released.
Leon Noel wrote:
Well Paul, the methodology of that test wasn't half bad, so I don't see why we should disregard the results (which comes across as a little unecessarily defensive).
Sorry, I wasn't being defensive. I've just seen that the general consensus is that the 50/1.2 is slightly sharper but the only article that I ever see sighted is the one you posted. The only certain conclusion that I can draw from that article is with respect to the exact two lenses used in the comparison.
The reason I mention sample variation is because I have owned and tested enough samples of the 58/1.2 to conclude that some are better than others. Significantly so. There is no way to know how the 58/1.2 in the article would measure up compared to the ones I've tried.
cogitech wrote:
The reason I mention sample variation is because I have owned and tested enough samples of the 58/1.2 to conclude that some are better than others. Significantly so. There is no way to know how the 58/1.2 in the article would measure up compared to the ones I've tried.
Then it is the same old problem with every manual focus lense produced decades ago that we are collecting: condition. Chances are they have been owned and used by a handful of owners (some of these lenses are way older than me), I guess I can't expect they've never been mishandled or mistored by one or two of the owners, not necesarily solely sample variation either, but it could be both.
As for "significantly differing results", I trust your testing but you realise it could well be user error since Manual focusing stuffs at f1.2 aren't exactly fail-safe.
Leon Noel wrote:
Then it is the same old problem with every manual focus lense produced decades ago that we are collecting: condition.
My results do not support this conclusion. They indicate quite the opposite. (the one in the worst condition performs the best).
As for "significantly differing results", I trust your testing but you realise it could well be user error since Manual focusing stuffs at f1.2 aren't exactly fail-safe.
Where do we draw a line?
I focus bracket between 9 and 12 shots and then take the best from each lens. I have also seen a bit of a pattern which seems to indicate that condition is irrelevant (obviously a damaged or fungus-filled lens would perform worse) but version is relevant. My best performing, worst condition copy is a different version than the rest.
I have several more on the way and will try to confirm the results before I am more specific.
cogitech wrote:
I focus bracket between 9 and 12 shots and then take the best from each lens. I have also seen a bit of a pattern which seems to indicate that condition is irrelevant (obviously a damaged or fungus-filled lens would perform worse) but version is relevant. My best performing, worst condition copy is a different version than the rest.
I have several more on the way and will try to confirm the results before I am more specific.
Thanks to this board, and Cogitech, i picked up a 58mm Rokkor a while back and did the conversion one evening with a glass of wine and some Sufjan Stevens on the stereo. It took maybe a couple of hours, and most of that was the grind-testing to nail infinity focus.
My Rokkor is the metal focus ring one, the early one. It's utterly fantastic.
Here's a couple of food shots i did for a friend with a little restaurant.
All of these are shot wide open, or just one stop down. Focused with Live View on my 40D (gotta love the live view!) I'm itching for a 5D, but am going to wait for the next one - all my alt glass really appreciates the live view for *critical* focusing.
adamM wrote:
Thanks to this board, and Cogitech, i picked up a 58mm Rokkor a while back and did the conversion one evening with a glass of wine and some Sufjan Stevens on the stereo. It took maybe a couple of hours, and most of that was the grind-testing to nail infinity focus.
My Rokkor is the metal focus ring one, the early one. It's utterly fantastic.
Here's a couple of food shots i did for a friend with a little restaurant.
All of these are shot wide open, or just one stop down. Focused with Live View on my 40D (gotta love the live view!) I'm itching for a 5D, but am going to wait for the next one - all my alt glass really appreciates the live view for *critical* focusing.
...
Next to my CZ 35-70, this is quickly becoming a favorite lens of mine....Show more →
Congrats! You're welcome! Well done! And, last but not least, nice shots!
Thank you Paul, i have done the quick comparison between metal ring and rubber ring rokkors in terms of boke in close focus range. Will it be interesting?
I think I remember you mentioning that in another thread
After much searching, I think I finally have a line on one though -- hopefully I can get it to work without shaving the mirror like a couple of the others.
Nice images Adam & Dmitry -- just more examples of why I am interested in trying one out.
