25mm/1.4 Switar compared to 24mm/2.8 Nikkor

[petermcwerner]

Although when I received the c-mount Switar I swore at the vignetting, today my judgement is more positive: it is sharp, has beautiful bokeh and color rendition

View attachment 13457

Phalaenopsis Orchid

Switar 25mm/1.4 ISO=100 1/25 @ f/2.8 - Nikkor does not focus close enough


View attachment 13458

Switar 25mm/1.4 ISO=100 1/50 @ f/2.8


View attachment 13459

Nikkor 24mm mm/2.8 ISO=100 1/60 @ f/2.8


View attachment 13461

100% crop of Switar


View attachment 13460

100% crop of Nikkor



​

 

[petermcwerner]

Some more technical details:

Needs machining: No
Covers whole sensor @ 4x3 : Vignetting: Yes - Smearing: No
Observations: Aperture ring difficult to reach in the Rabenwolf c-mount adapter

View attachment 13462

Switar 25mm/1.4 ISO=100 1/50 @ f/2.8 - Uncropped

As can be seen from the 100% crops, the Switar is sharper than the Nikkor at the same aperture. I prefer the color rendition of the Switar, but that is open to indiviudal taste. Part of the difference in color may also be due to the fact that the Nikkor recorded a bigger image field, which may have influenced the Auto White Balance of the G1.
​

 

[Y.B.Hudson III]

I'm really liking t' Switar's signature... softer overall contrast with more micro contast... like t' see "outside" on a partly cloudy day...

regards, hudson.

 

[djonesii]

I am finding the cine lenses to be gems ..... I really like my Kodak, and have a few more on the way .....

As for the Nikkor comparisons, I have not done that yet. Not to speak poorly of your, but I sold of my 24 2.8 and kept that 28 2.0 as a much better lens. As I get some time, I will run a few tests and put up on the board ..

Dave

 

[milapse]

Although when I received the c-mount Switar I swore at the vignetting, today my judgement is more positive: it is sharp, has beautiful bokeh and color rendition

Exactly my experience so far, cropping is not that bad when the lens performs really well inside it's IC

 

[monza]

Great comparison, the Switar is impressive.

One of the problems with some cine lenses, as you mention, is ergonomics. They are very small and often either the focus ring or aperture ring is so close to the adapter, it becomes difficult to adjust. Perhaps this is something that could be added to the database in a Misc Notes field.

 

[Ranger 9]

Exactly my experience so far, cropping is not that bad when the lens performs really well inside it's IC

Besides, who said photos have to be rectangles? The original Kodak produced a round image.

 

[petermcwerner]

Besides, who said photos have to be rectangles? The original Kodak produced a round image.

Sure, that is what one find on old thumbs. Let us have the most modern equipment to make pictures like at the beginning of the last century. Why color, why fast lenses? Why digital, let's use glass plates we make and develop ourselves ... Just laughing, no offense meant, I just prefer rectangles, must be I am too square ...

 

[monza]

Let us have the most modern equipment to make pictures like at the beginning of the last century.

Yes! Digital body, and vintage lenses. Perfect combination.

 

[woodmancy]

Yes! Digital body, and vintage lenses. Perfect combination.

Amen - this is what the fuss is about. Everyone tells us that it is the lens that draws the picture. The G1 gives us all the digital flexibility we need to check out the huge array of drawing tools out there. :thumbs:

 

[Ranger 9]

Just laughing, no offense meant, I just prefer rectangles, must be I am too square ...

One thing I'll say for rectangular photos is that it's a lot easier to buy frames for them!

I was just pointing out that this is simply a convention, not a law of nature.

 

[wjlapier]

Interesting Peter. My Switar 25/1.4 needed the rear sanded, and then the inner optic housing was rubbing on the baffle of the G1. If you get a chance, could you take a picture of your Switar and then write down whatever is on it? I'm just curious as to why your's doesn't need machining, but mine needs it alot.

BTW--you did well with your's. I appreciate your test between the Nikkor and the Switar.

 

[milapse]

Interesting Peter. My Switar 25/1.4 needed the rear sanded, and then the inner optic housing was rubbing on the baffle of the G1.

I'm a little confused here too.. Hawk's adapter will go to about 37.5mm dia, I assume the Rabe about the same? The switars are particularly 'close'... I had one seller of the 10mm/1.6 report that the flange was 38mm yet others have claimed no mods?

 

[wjlapier]

I'm a little confused here too.. Hawk's adapter will go to about 37.5mm dia, I assume the Rabe about the same? The switars are particularly 'close'... I had one seller of the 10mm/1.6 report that the flange was 38mm yet others have claimed no mods?

The threaded part was a bit longer than the rear of the adapter when screwed all the way in. Then when I focus to infinity the rear optic housing will go past the rear of the adapter and press against the baffle in the G1. I sanded the mount down so it would fit, but needs a little bit more taken off, and the metal housing around the rear optic needs a little machining too.

Most other lenses I have don't need machining. The only others that do are the Zeiss Tevidon 25/1.4 and the Cosmicar 12.5/1.4.

 

[petermcwerner]

One thing I'll say for rectangular photos is that it's a lot easier to buy frames for them!
I was just pointing out that this is simply a convention, not a law of nature.

Everyting in nature is rectangular: eggs, stones near the seaside or in a river, thousands of other examples, so it must be a law of nature

 

[monza]

I'm a little confused here too.. Hawk's adapter will go to about 37.5mm dia, I assume the Rabe about the same? The switars are particularly 'close'... I had one seller of the 10mm/1.6 report that the flange was 38mm yet others have claimed no mods?

I haven't seen a Rabe adapter, but the Hawk and MS Optical adapters don't quite get to 37.5mm. Both are pretty much at the limit, any further and the adapter would break.

 

[petermcwerner]

I haven't seen a Rabe adapter, but the Hawk and MS Optical adapters don't quite get to 37.5mm. Both are pretty much at the limit, any further and the adapter would break.

On my Switar, directly after the c-mount there are 3 steps that fit all in the recessed part of the Rabe adapter:

- the first step, immediately after the 25mm c-mount is 32mm, then
- a second step of 35mm.
- Finally the aperture setting ring, which is the widest, 36mm.

There is still approx .5mm leeway between the aperture ring and the recessed part of the Rabe adapter, but this makes it quite difficult to set the aperture.