p.71 #1 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Bifurcator wrote:
I nabbed the:
MC Tele Rokkor-QF 200/3.5
Auto Tele Rokkor-PF 135/2.8
MC Macro Rokkor-QF 50/3.5
MD Rokkor 50/1.4
Yesterday and they're all very good! I shot about 50 shots with each except the 50/3.5 Macro - which I shot about 300 with. I like it. It's rather unique for a 50mm macro - high contrast, low flare, yet with a LARGE glow falloff around bright objects and a half decent bokeh. I guess it could just need cleaning though.
i have the earliest version (m39 mount with SR adapter) of the 50 macro, and also was surprised to see relatively poor correction of spherical aberration. i definitely wouldn't call the bokeh halfway decent though, it's worse than the usual macro harshness. quite sharp though. haven't really had much opportunity to test it's flare performance, but the deeply recessed front element can't hurt.
p.71 #2 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Bifurcator wrote:
I nabbed the:
MC Tele Rokkor-QF 200/3.5
Auto Tele Rokkor-PF 135/2.8
MC Macro Rokkor-QF 50/3.5
MD Rokkor 50/1.4
Yesterday I tried MC Rokkor PG 50/1.4 and MC W.Rokkor SI 24/2.8 with NEX7 for floral closeups, ISO 200-400.Results are disappointing.Significantly worse than those of Distagons 25/2.8 C/Y,ZF and Planars 50/1.4 ZF.2,50/1.5 C/Y.Even the kit lens did better. Details in the shaded areas are poor,lacking contrast and hidden in chroma/luminance noise.I have to search this more in deep,but so far it seems that out of my lenses only Zeiss still delivers on the high pixel density sensor.Rokkors were never stellar by means of sharpnes/microcontrast compared to Zeiss lenses,but the difference was not that significant with NEX5N as it is with NEX7.
p.71 #3 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Peire wrote:
Yesterday I tried MC Rokkor PG 50/1.4 and MC W.Rokkor SI 24/2.8 with NEX7 for floral closeups, ISO 200-400.Results are disappointing.Significantly worse than those of Distagons 25/2.8 C/Y,ZF and Planars 50/1.4 ZF.2,50/1.5 C/Y.Even the kit lens did better. Details in the shaded areas are poor,lacking contrast and hidden in chroma/luminance noise.I have to search this more in deep,but so far it seems that out of my lenses only Zeiss still delivers on the high pixel density sensor.Rokkors were never stellar by means of sharpnes/microcontrast compared to Zeiss lenses,but the difference was not that significant with NEX5N as it is with NEX7....Show more →
i'm certainly not surprised to hear the zeiss have higher microcontrast. i don't know about that version of the 24mm, but the 50/1.4 is definitely optimized for infinity not close ups in terms of sharpness aberration control and flatness of field, though i believe the planar probably is as well. i prefer my rokkors to zeiss for flowers, but it certainly isn't due to sharpness and contrast.
p.71 #4 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
LightShow wrote:
I'm thinking the macro is great, does it have the rubber focus ring or metal? I found my metal version to flare worse than my 58/1.2, although I have not used them together.
It's the rubber version. It's not "great" but it's very good. It sells for $75 ~ $125 and that's about what it's worth in terms of a lens this old which isn't a rare collectors item. IQ and function wise it's on par with the Nikkor 55/2.8 Macro. There's not enough CA in this version of the lens to even mention. Well, the proof of the lens is in the viewing of the image as they say; and all the ones I posted on the previous page are wide open with only a little processing. Here's some 100% crops from two of them. The "Large glow falloff" in that one shot is because the lens needs to be cleaned is all.
The shot was taken with the Rokkor 50/1.4 or I would have included it in the shot there. That's the 50/3.5 Macro fully extended. The Barrel markings and top rim disappear into the focus ring when focused to infinity. That beveled tip makes it look pretty cool on the GH1. It looks a bit, um, uncircumcised.
I took the 200/3.5 out birding today and while I haven't processed them yet the camera display was showing it to be quite a bit better then "good" and well into being excellent. I'll know more when I process them - from now...
p.71 #5 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
I was wrong about the MC 200/3.5.... It's good but only good... Not awesome or anything. It's weird, I have a few lenses which look exceptional in the EVF but in PS they'r not what they look like in the camera's displays. Maybe it has something to do with EVF resolution or something?
p.71 #8 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Picked up an AI 28/3.5 to complete by basic Nikkor kit (28/50/105). Decent little lens, not up to the 28/2.8 AI-S in performance but completely acceptable performance on film and it's unlikely to ever see digital.
p.71 #10 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Went on a buying spree this week. I picked up a Canon FD 50 1.2 locally for a good deal, bought a Rokunar (made by Vivitar) 55 2.8 macro (FD) off of buy/sell, and got a used Rokinon 85 1.4 from KEH.
p.71 #11 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Got a cheap Minolta MC W. Rokkor 28mm f/2.0 today on the fleamarket. A mount screw and paint missing.
Wonder how it performs after conversion on the EOS 5D.
p.71 #13 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Today's delivery: Vivitar Series 1 70-210 2.8-4 (Komine made) and an albinar 28 2.8 macro, both in FD mount. Total outlay: $30 (Though I need to pick up a couple of FD rear caps).
p.71 #14 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
just recieved the zeiss c/y 28-85mm.
its a tank.
but its very nice, an more compact than i thought.
i will see how it performs against the N24-85 which i sold.
p.71 #16 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Nice, LightShow. I'll be interested to hear what you think of it. I love my Canon LTM 35/2, but it's biggest problem is flare. You just have to whisper the words "light source" near the lens and everything washes out in veiling flare.
p.71 #17 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
I don't mind veiling flare, and under some situations I like it, it's the the reflection and refraction flare I don't like.
I had high hopes with the 35/2.8 on my NEX7, but there is some smearing towards the corners, the rest looked nice, so it will be on display till I replace the 7, I expect this 50 to be much better.
