Arsat-Kiev/Zeiss-Rollei side-by-side fisheye photos

Hi Folks:

I recently bought a couple of fisheye lenses for 6x6 (120) use and I
thought that some or all of you would be interested in the following
side-by-side fisheye photos taken with the Arsat 30mm on a Kiev 60, and
the Zeiss F-Distagon 30mm on a Rollei 6008i.

These take up a lot of space and are saved as progressive, maximum
quality jpegs. Accordingly, if you have only a dialup then it's going to
be a long download.

When you click on any of them you'll be presented with large photos. If
you press your right mouse button, (in Netscape 7.1) and choose view
image, the photo(s) will be reduced in size to fit your screen. I think
that something similar is available in IE.

Astia 100

No sharpening

No PS work except for spotting.

http://www.hemenway.com/ArsatDistagon

For the price, (compared to the F-Distagon) I think that the Arsat is a
very good value.


Jim

Jim Hemenway wrote:


http://www.hemenway.com/ArsatDistagon

For the price, (compared to the F-Distagon) I think that the Arsat is a
very good value.



Thanx for posting these, I sure don't see much if -any- difference!

BTW was your arsat the latest MC version? Just curious as my MC version
seems to have slightly better contrast compared to my single coated one.
--

Stacey

Hi Jim:

Very nice comparison photo's. I have the Arsat for my Mamaiya 645 Pro
and I have often wondered how it stacked up against the Distagon. I also
have a Kiev 60 and wonder whether some of the apparent difference in
contrast on the Arsat photo's is caused by internal flare from the lack of
flocking inside the Kiev. The contrast certainly seems improved on the
photo you took under the shade of the bridge.

Thanks for sharing Jim, nice test.

Best Regards,

John Horton

wrote:

I also
have a Kiev 60 and wonder whether some of the apparent difference in
contrast on the Arsat photo's is caused by internal flare from the lack of
flocking inside the Kiev.

Most definitely yes.

Ralf

--
Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany
private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de
manual cameras and photo galleries - updated March 30, 2004
Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses

Recently, Stacey posted:

Jim Hemenway wrote:


http://www.hemenway.com/ArsatDistagon

For the price, (compared to the F-Distagon) I think that the Arsat
is a very good value.


Thanx for posting these, I sure don't see much if -any- difference!

Frankly, Stacey, this comment surprises me! Perhaps it's your monitor?

The Arsat clearly shows color aberations if you look at the lighthouse
enlargements. This is apparent in the full image in the overall sharpness;
the Zeiss wins hands-down there and in all of the photos. The Arsat's red
fringing may explain some of the artifacts, such as the tendency toward
the red-ish coloration of the walkway bricks in the Milkbottle photo set.
Jim would have to tell us what color the bricks really are, but my
impression is that the Zeiss' color balance is more believable. I did find
it interesting that the Arsat appears to be more contrasty in some of the
shots, but not others, such as the Boston-to-Hull set where the definition
of the Zeiss is apparent, even in the thumbnail.

OTOH, there may be some other explanation for these variances. Again, Jim
would have to offer insights. Overall, I thought the Arsat was an
impressive lens, and the difference in price between it and the Zeiss
could buy a lot of gear.

Regards,

Neil

Neil Gould wrote:

fringing may explain some of the artifacts, such as the tendency toward
the red-ish coloration of the walkway bricks in the Milkbottle photo set.


I'm seeing on my monitor some very slight printing differences. Both this
one and the tracks pic have the Arsat lens photo printed darker. Maybe the light
changed but that looks like printing to me.

Nick

Hi Stacey:

BTW was your arsat the latest MC version? Just curious as my MC
version seems to have slightly better contrast compared to my single
coated one.

Yes as far as I know. I bought it new from the dealer several weeks ago.

Jim - http://www.hemenway.com

I'd have to go visit the MilkBottle again but I seem to remember that
the bricks are closer to gray than they are to red.

Jim - http://www.hemenway.com


Neil Gould wrote:

Recently, Stacey posted:


Jim Hemenway wrote:


http://www.hemenway.com/ArsatDistagon

For the price, (compared to the F-Distagon) I think that the Arsat
is a very good value.


Thanx for posting these, I sure don't see much if -any- difference!


Frankly, Stacey, this comment surprises me! Perhaps it's your monitor?

The Arsat clearly shows color aberations if you look at the lighthouse
enlargements. This is apparent in the full image in the overall sharpness;
the Zeiss wins hands-down there and in all of the photos. The Arsat's red
fringing may explain some of the artifacts, such as the tendency toward
the red-ish coloration of the walkway bricks in the Milkbottle photo set.
Jim would have to tell us what color the bricks really are, but my
impression is that the Zeiss' color balance is more believable. I did find
it interesting that the Arsat appears to be more contrasty in some of the
shots, but not others, such as the Boston-to-Hull set where the definition
of the Zeiss is apparent, even in the thumbnail.

OTOH, there may be some other explanation for these variances. Again, Jim
would have to offer insights. Overall, I thought the Arsat was an
impressive lens, and the difference in price between it and the Zeiss
could buy a lot of gear.

Regards,

Neil

Hi Nick:

There's no printing here at all, at least in the physical sense.

I shot these photos side-by-side within minutes of each other and what
you see is what the chromes look like on the light table.

These are straight scans with no adjustments (Leafscan 45) and nothing
was done in Photoshop after scanning to lighten or darken or sharpen. I
did have to do a little spotting on some of them because of dirt on the
film from the lab.

Jim - http://www.hemenway.com



Nick Zentena wrote:

Neil Gould wrote:


fringing may explain some of the artifacts, such as the tendency toward
the red-ish coloration of the walkway bricks in the Milkbottle photo set.



I'm seeing on my monitor some very slight printing differences. Both this
one and the tracks pic have the Arsat lens photo printed darker. Maybe the light
changed but that looks like printing to me.

Nick

Hi John:

I just now inspected the interiors of both the Kiev60 and the Rollei
6008i... neither have any flocking, both are dull, flat black inside. If
internal camera reflection/flare was the problem, wouldn't that be
apparent with both cameras?

I did find that some internal lens flare is common with both lenses
unless the sun is almost at one's back with the Arsat and at one's
left/right with the F-Distagon.

When price is considered, the Arsat is nevertheless a very good value.

I think that I'll keep both for now because the Arsat is a good backup
to the F-Distagon and with adapters can be used on the Mamiya M645, 645
Pro, Contax 645 and Pentax 645. I think, but don't know for certain
that it will also work on the Pentacon and one of the 6x6 Exactas.

Jim - http://www.hemenway.com


wrote:

Hi Jim:

Very nice comparison photo's. I have the Arsat for my Mamaiya 645 Pro
and I have often wondered how it stacked up against the Distagon. I also
have a Kiev 60 and wonder whether some of the apparent difference in
contrast on the Arsat photo's is caused by internal flare from the lack of
flocking inside the Kiev. The contrast certainly seems improved on the
photo you took under the shade of the bridge.

Thanks for sharing Jim, nice test.

Best Regards,

John Horton