Meyer optik gorlitz Primoplan 58/1.9 & Schneider Kreuznach Xenon 50/1,9

Non scientific test, just for fun. I like both lenses. All shot in Sony NEX5. edit resize only
1st test, same distance, xenon is wider (50mm against 58mm)

Primoplan

Xenon

In 2nd test, I used closest distance for both lenses. So it was different distance. Xenon has shorter distance, so even it's wider but can produce bigger macro ratio.

Primoplan

Xenon

I hope you like it.

Tair 11A 135/2,8 & CZ Sonnar 135/2,8 T* AEJ

I have the Zeiss for long enough, and I always satisfied with it. Now I have Tair 11A, which is said to be one of best 135mm lens ever made.
Phisically, Tair is heavier and little bit longer. all metal stuff, while Sonnar has rubber grib for focusing ring.
All have internal hood, but Tair is shorter, not long enough.
Blades? Tair has 20  blades, sonnar has 8.
Closest distance, Tair 1,2m Zeiss 1,6m
Both has CA and sharp start at wideopen.
This is not scientific test, just few minutes comparison in my backyard.
Camera Sony NEX5, white balance sunny, landscape mode.
There were other images, but speed was various so the tone cannot represent the real comparison. this happened because light was changed often.
No edit except resize & auto sharpen (in irfanview)
In the first comparison we can see Tair has more green color. while Zeiss has more pastel color
Click images for bigger one.

Fresh B/W from Sony NEX5 at 1,2m (closest distance of Zeiss)

This one was at F 5,6

My conclusion?
I like 'em both. 

Konica Hexanon 28/3,5 AE & Schneider Kreuznach Curtagon 28/4

First of all, Curtagon was my favourite  amongst 28mm lenses. I just curious of the hexanon which said to be good one. Just got my Hexanon few days ago. Find other post of both lens in here( Hexanon)  and Curtagon, here.

• Based on This Schneider site My Curtagon was made in 1967 while Hexanon AR (which has Focusing ring with checkered rubber inlay, Smallest aperture 16, 7 elements in 7 groups, Green AE mark and Round AE lock button) according to This Konica site was made around 1975.
• Dimension: Curtagon is  smaller but it's little heavier
• Closest focus: Curtagon has 0,25m mark, but it can be turn closer. while Hexanon has 0,3m.
• Sharpness in wide open; I can say curtagon is little bit better, maybe half stop slower make different. Hexanon is sharp too, even at infinity.
• CA control ; Hexanon has lots of CA, worst in wideopen, reduced little stopped down. Curtagon has little in wideopen
• Contrast: Hexanon has better result, later production bring newer coating I guess.
• I wrote before that "I haven't make comparison for infinity distance yet, but I think both has almost similar result". Then I realized something different. It's about edges sharpness. Curtagon win in this case. Hexanon soft at edges. (at least I tried at f8)

Here we go the short comparison I took this morning


pictures below are center crop at wideopen. see CA control,

konica

SK Curtagon

on Following images, please Click image to see bigger size
both here at F5,6, see the color/contrast

Bokeh at 0,3m distance, I think it's at f5.6 Curtagon has 5 angle star bokeh, hexanon 6 angle star (we know what hexa mean ;D)

Flare test

Minolta rokkor 85/1,7 MC & Konica Hexanon 85/1,8 AR EE

All shot wideopen, no different between f1,7 and 1,8 in speed on my NEX5
First Minolta, 2nd is Konica

Yashica ML 55/1,2 & Konica Hexanon 57/1,2

just simple comparison with Sony NEX5, not scientific test.
Opinion? judge by yourself :P

Hexanon


ML


Hexanon


ML


Hexanon


ML

Yashica ML 55/1,2 & Canon FL 55/1,2

My friend offered me his Canon FL 55/1,2. too bad I'm out of cash. it's bargain condition tough
My Yashica has worse body.
I made short comparison in room, available light same setting
ML

FL


Vivid mode
ML

FL


portrait or standard mode
ML

FL

Isco Gotingen 50/1,9 Zeiss planar 50/1,8 & Zenitar 50/1,7

Time to compare these 3 50mm. well maybe it's nit fair as planar isn't good shape, while 2 other is in good condition
I just took this set few minutes ago. same speed 1/80 ISO 800, in front of my Asus, available light, setting portrait.
Interesting result
zenitar


planar


Westrocolor


zenitar


planar


westrocolor

Voigtlander APO LANTHAR 90mm f/3.5 MC LTM silver & Leitz Elmar 90/4 Leica M

Voigtlander APo Lanthar

Leitz Elmar

This is not scientific test, just quick test for my new Voigtlander APO LANTHAR 90mm f/3.5 MC Leica 39 screw mount compared to my  Leitz Elmar 90/4 Leica M mount. Both has silver body, beautiful.
Voigt condition is like new body & glass, while Leitz's body like new too but glass has cleaning mark ( due to my shots this isn't affect image quality ).

The elmar has longer body than lanthar

Lanthar's body is fatter

Lanthar has 10 blades

Elmar 15 blades

aperture 3,5 -22 of lanthar

aperture 4-32 of elmar

lanthar is MC, elmar no coating sign

here's the shot with Sony NEX5

elmar

lanthar

Elmar

Lanthar

elmar 

lanthar

elmar

lanthar