Jason, one of my pen-pals, an english professional photographer, told me once that he'd used a 6" f/2.5 TTH and that he regarded it as the epitome of soft (my words, not his) when shot near wide open. I gather that one man's soft is another's interesting.
Originally Posted by JG Motamedi
Based on my use of 6 1/2" and 7 3/4" (?) Speedics I would have to agree. At full aperture these lenses--at least the ones I have used--were pretty soft; my f2.7 Tessar is sharper. No noticeable halation or aberrations. I suppose it has its appeal.
Originally Posted by Dan Fromm
The outer surfaces need to be counted, of course, and I assumed them.
The thing that usually interests me with fast lenses is transmission, and I start counting furiously to get a grip on how much light is going to be bouncing around inside the lens when I want to be making a picture.
Thinking about the problems of shooting the Speedic - and other pre WW2 uncoated 'speed' lenses - distracted my numerical attention. Good thing this keyboard isn't a table saw.
"One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid,
and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"
Indeed! I would be fingerless by now.
...Good thing this keyboard isn't a table saw...