getting a bit geeky: brick wall lens test (rate the results)

[vuk_vuksanovic]

gentlemen.

<br><br>

please forgive this, but i took a shot earlier today <i>merely</i> to

test out the characteristics of a lens which i have on loan (many

thanks to the company who provided it). it is a so-so picture, but

very telling of the glass--at least to my eyes. i would be interested

in getting your opinions in terms of the attributes you see:

<br><br>

<a

href="http://www.avzine.com/vuk/temp/dior.htm">http://www.avzine.com/vuk/temp/dior.htm</a>

<br><br>

thanks!<br>

vuk.

<br><br>

p.s. i have made up my mind, but i'm just curious to see if we see the

same stuff.

[peter_white2]

It stinks.

[jorge]

Vuk, at that image size it's very difficult to judge anything besides composition. ;-) One other thing, I don't like this lens out-of-focus characteristics, at least as apparent in that image. I think I see the dreaded double line bokeh (ni-sen boke, Japanese speakers?) that I've come to hate in Nikkors.

[mark feldstein]

Well, I don't see any brick wall. Colorful, to say the least, but shifted due to ambient light sources and one could have used color correction filters to prevent that. No depth of field. I see only one row of Dior bottles. When providing test data, it's also customary to describe what it is you're testing and who the manufacturer is. By the way, aside from gentlemen, we have quite a few women here as well. :>)

Mark

[jason]

I like the test wall.There is color!It looked like it was fun!

I'm not sure what the test or result, is meant to be!

Is it Nikkor? My Summilux 35mm did double out of focus.

[vuk_vuksanovic]

couple of quick notes:

 

1) not looking for a critique of the photo; just comments about the lens please

 

2) keep in mind there are MANY little lights hitting these bottles

 

vuk.

[Brian_Edwards]

I have no idea what you could have noticed about the lens, but I am curious why the third

horizontal rod (can't quite think what to call it), seems to be larger in the middle (just

reflections, I suppose). Also, the two gold bands that run vertically along each side do not

appear to be straight. Should they be? It might just be the lighting, but some of the

background (wall?) appears to have a darker patch in the middle. How did you light this

image? Did you shoot this image wide open? I am guessing (a wild one at that) that you

used a digital camera, but there appears to be no purple fringing which, of course, is

good. I'll keep looking, but I guess I really need to consider getting a life.

 

All the best.

[gaijin]

What's in focus is sharp, contrasty, good resolution, and nice color saturation. Out of focus (Bokeh) is approaching ugly.

[cougar_allen]

That is the worst image of a brick wall I have ever seen. That lens distorts shapes so badly the bricks don't even look rectangular -- and color rendition is way off too; they came out every color except brick red. The simple meniscus in my old Brownie Starflash could take a better picture of a brick wall than that. My recommendation: do not buy.

 

-Cougar :{)

[cougar_allen]

Look -- this is what a photograph of a brick wall should look like. Just so you know the difference between a good lens and a bad one.

 

-Cougar :{)<div></div>

[Uhooru]

The in focus is sharp, clear, color saturation is nice and rich, the out of focus doesn't bother me at all maybe a tad harsh, but its hard to tell in one photo. Some one show me a "good" out of focus. Does not look like a brick wall, WTF?

[richie chishty]

Bad bad bad bokeh!

[bobatkins]

I happen to have an excellent picture of a brick wall which I took for a lens review I'm writing. It's much better than Vuk's image and it actually shows bricks.

 

I'm not at liberty to reveal which lens...<div></div>

[kelly_flanigan1]

Konica Auto S2 Lens test; 3+ decades ago<BR><BR><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/1471363-lg.jpg">

[kelly_flanigan1]

4000 pixel/inch scan with a Canon FS4000US scanner of a 80 line pair/mm negative<BR><BR>

 

Konica Auto S2<BR><BR><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/1471262-lg.jpg">

[lot_wxs]

Noctilux at 1.0? (considering the third horizontal rod). I can't guess what you mean with comments 'in terms of the attributes you see'.

[ronald_moravec1]

I like the lens. The out of focus looks gradual and smooth and no double line effects. Mind you this is all I can see as small picture on a computer monitor.

 

Please tell us the lens type. Did you sneak in an old

summarit, new Zeiss, or new 1.4 50?

[patricks]

gotta concur that the bokeh has the double-line character to it, which as a recent nikkor user, i recognize and i am not too fond of.

[andy m.]

Here goes.. Old Minolta Autocord, lens fully open<p>

 

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/3115215-lg.jpg">

[michael s.]

Gotta hand it to some of these forumers: they sure know a brick wall when they run into one.

[terribletomterrific]

What is "bokeh?"

 

Tom

[vuk_vuksanovic]

i wonder what the leica people are going to make of all this when i post my next example.

 

vuk.

[Brad_]

I'm on the edge of my chair.

[vuk_vuksanovic]

<b>brad wrote:</b> <i>"I'm on the edge of my chair."</i>

<br><br>

the fact you've replied so quickly makes that rather obvious.

<br><br>

hang in there dude!

<br><br>

vuk.

[__jon__]

>Vuk Vuksanovic , feb 13, 2005; 10:21 a.m.

 

>>Brad - , feb 13, 2005; 10:38 a.m.

 

>>>Vuk Vuksanovic , feb 13, 2005; 10:41 a.m.

 

>>>the fact you've replied so quickly makes that rather obvious.

 

>>>hang in there dude!

 

>>>vuk.

 

Let me see... he posted 17 minutes after you and then you post 3 minutes after him. I

think you are sitting in your chair hitting the "refresh" button on your browser, just waiting

for responses to your troll. Go away.