On March 28, 2003 09:03 am, collinb wrote:
> I'm going to chime in again with some thoughts.
>
> Lens coverage information
> http://www.graflex.org/lenses/lens-spec.html
>
> Resolution information
> http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html
>
> The particular lens can make a perception difference here.
>
> A very good medium format lens, say on Pentax 67, will hit around 90 lp/mm
> A mediocre medium format lens, like a Yashica D, will hit around 40 lp/mm
>
> A good LF lens, Super Symmar XL, is up at that 80+ lp/mm range.
> A decent LF lens, Fujinon-W 135/5.6 (70s vintage), is around 70 lp/mm.
> A mediocre LF lens, like a Wollensak, will be about 35 lp/mm, and really
> bad corners!
Which F stops are you interested in? If the resolution tests of LF lens
showed anything it was that at working F stops [F/16 and smaller] the
difference between lens are fairly small. Often so small that sample
variation might explain it. A good example of this is the Fuji CM-W f/5.6
125mm dated some time in the 1990s versus Carl Ziess Jena f/9
12.5cm with a serial number that dates it at 1931. If you're actually stopped
down to F/32 that likely gets even closer.
Obviously if you have a need for a fast lens with large coverage then the
modern designs can be better. But if at the smaller stops things get pretty
damn close.
Nick
