Optical performace of the TTArtisan APS-C 35mm F1.4 on Fujifilm X-E2

Street_Photography wrote:

karoli9 wrote:

Street_Photography wrote:

karoli9 wrote:

...

... Sadly, the Takumar review was in my early days of testing, it needs a huge reevaluation, I consider it to be in alpha state. I have A3 chart measurements, which should be more precise then the A4 chart ones. But I need a lot of free time to do the rewrite

The Super Tak Gifs are very smooth. The TT gifs are all over the place. Is this one of the things that will change? I was assuming the expensive lens was more uniform across the frame and the cheaper very inconsistent. I have only noticed inconsistency once when testing a very cheap modern autofocus lens, but my testing is pathetic. I was thinking at least I know where I stand with the expensive lens (poor edges), whereas the TT looks like IQ will be all over the place.

With the SMC Takumar testing method was different, I did it and interpreted it in a wrong way. I only focused once on the target at the minimum focusing distance with fully open aperture and then took all the pictures without refocusing. By judging the 2D/3D graphs, there was a shift in focus. And I also used an A4 target. It needs a rewrite with all this taken into account. I sold my Takumar, so I cannot retest it. I'm a little bit mad at myself, I don't know if there is reason to keep the Takumar articles online -.-'

The TTArtisan in real life testing gave me all I needed, in the center it has decent contrast and adequate sharpness at f/1.4, and stopping down to f/2.8-5.6 gives me very good contrast and sharpness. I think at close focusing distances the lens doesn't behave as good, as it does for longer focusing distances.

When I get the A0 testchart and perfectly symmetric lighting, I am going to retest all the current combinations.

I feel your frustration at selling it. I still kick myself for selling my first Super Takumar 55mm f1.8. Was soooooo good. Sent it to someone on the otger side of the world too, maybe Peru, so no chance getting it back.

The Canon nFD 50mm f1.4 is a bit of a classic too, for people to compare old with new, if you want to do that (Similar with Nikon's versions). Very good at f1.4 compared to others, just bad CA. I know the Helios 44 is the most popular manual lens but its more for swirly bokeh than resolution.

Yeah, I would edit or unpublish it as it is just misleading, or at least add a clear disclaimer for now. But if people see you say its bad they may not trust the rest of the tests. Maybe unpublish for a few months and if you know you won't update it, then publish it elsewhere e.g. medium.com with a link back to your main site. Then it could be like a starting off journey people can follow to your site. Like a dos and don'ts of your journey to lens testing greatness. I am recommending a client allows me to do that with a post which isn't helpful on their site but could get mega views on others like Medium. I will wait until it has disappeared from Google before doing it so it is fresh content.

In my pathetic tests I tested different focal lengths because I got different results.

Thank you for your remarks, just did that, switched the articles to "Private". It needs rework