Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,228   Posts: 1,532,784   Online: 872
      
Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678910
Results 91 to 96 of 96
  1. #91
    DrPablo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    796
    Images
    63
    Your analogy is not a good one, because the tests I cited are not from the lensmaker.
    It's from a photographer who was interested in the following question:
    "What is the resolving power of medium format lenses?"

    And he set about testing a LOT of them. He picked a methodology that was imperfect, but uniform. He tested them the same way.

    Furthermore, the tests were not MTF tests! They were line pair tests. The target doesn't matter as long as it's the same target, the same shooting distance, and the same lighting -- and the tester knows how to count. Even if he did the test wrong, the results remain meaningful as a relative comparison of resolution among the lenses he tested, as long as he used the same methodology for all lenses.

    You can dismiss the tests if you want. But unless you have the wherewithal to test every lens yourself, by the criteria that matter to you, you're left with no other basis to compare them objectively.
    Paul

  2. #92

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Aquitaine
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    4,913
    The few lens designers I've met also shoot with their lenses. Several are enthusiastic photographers. They freely admit that no matter how well you meet objective criteria, you don't necessarily get a lens that gives good pictures -- and vice versa, as witness the current 50/1.5 Sonnar.But they sure as hell don't dismiss either objective or subjective criteria.
    Free Photography Information on My Website
    http://www.rogerandfrances.com

  3. #93

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Italia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,680
    http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/results.html

    People often quote the results but ignore the comments. I think the main point of the Perez tests isn't that one or another is better but how small any difference is. This is even more of an issue when looking at his LF tests at working apertures. The worst coke bottle at the sort of F/stops often used for 8x10 isn't a great deal worse then the latest kilo buck lens.

  4. #94
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Obviously there is a big difference in culture between small format and medium and large. I think we have to bear in mind that different people in this thread are coming from very different places.

    As they probably should, many 35mm shooters do tend to know a thing or two about MTF and CA and all that. And along with that comes some amount of equipment snobbery. Some of it is justifiable, some is not. Look, people are now shooting colour and over a broader ISO range than in HCBs day I don't mind a stimulating debate about Leica vs. CZ.... in the case of 35mm lenses. One also sees some of that attitude in MF but far more rarely in LF. Yes I am generalizing, I know that everyone can name exceptions. But seriously, most of this chatter is entirely cultural.

    As for me, when I consider new 35mm lenses (e.g. the new ZF lenses) I do definitely consult the charts and ask myself what I might be getting. I pay even closer attention if I expect to put the lens on an APS digital. But for LF, well, I have two ancient convertible lenses that are poorly ranked but which I adore. They really deliver. During those rare moments that I covet a brand new APO Schneidagon XXX for $4000 I simply remind myself about all those LF photographers who did far more with far less.

    Back to the RB and RZ lenses.... About a year ago I took a hammer to an old RB 127 f/3.8, I wanted to excise the leaf shutter mechanism and had given up trying to dismantle the thing in a controlled way. Wham! with a hammer. Nothing. Bam! right on the rear element! Little chip on the side. What the f...?! Threw the thing against my patio. Wanna see the dent in my patio? I still keep that lens as a paperweight, I did succeed in cracking the rear element but never got it to actually fall out, and the barrel is fine.

    All I can say is, the RB lenses would make marvelous artillery projectiles- who needs depleted uranium when old RB lenses are so inexpensive.
    Last edited by keithwms; 08-30-2007 at 04:35 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: spelling
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  5. #95
    jd callow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Milan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,002
    Images
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick Zentena View Post
    http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/results.html

    People often quote the results but ignore the comments. I think the main point of the Perez tests isn't that one or another is better but how small any difference is. This is even more of an issue when looking at his LF tests at working apertures. The worst coke bottle at the sort of F/stops often used for 8x10 isn't a great deal worse then the latest kilo buck lens.
    Excellent point.

    *

  6. #96

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,813
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
    The few lens designers I've met also shoot with their lenses. Several are enthusiastic photographers. They freely admit that no matter how well you meet objective criteria, you don't necessarily get a lens that gives good pictures -- and vice versa, as witness the current 50/1.5 Sonnar.But they sure as hell don't dismiss either objective or subjective criteria.
    Good point. You must take into consideration both objective and subjective criteria.

    A lens that tests very high in lppm is not necessarily a great lens for making real pictures, though IMHO it will be more often than not.

    On the other hand, a lens that is a real dog in resolving power in lppm will almost never be a great lens for a wide variety of subject conditions, unless the deck is stacked toward an image that favor some type of lens aberration.

    On the other hand, many people love the images they get from Diana and Holga cameras. Go figure.

    Sandy King
    Last edited by sanking; 08-30-2007 at 10:40 PM. Click to view previous post history.

Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678910


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin