Actually Doctor Optics stated clearly that LF Tessars were optimised for f22 (5x4) they took over production of LF lenses from CZJ.
Obviously with smaller formats the sharpness kicks in earlier as the focal lengths are so much shorter. But then I really liked the Triotar I had on a Rolliecord D
You need to be careful discussing Zeiss LF lenses as they vary depending on era and place of manufacture. I haven't used a bad Zeiss lens yet, but that doesn't mean they've all been good by modern standards. Remember that a lens many would have thought was excellent years ago might be poor/bad compared to what came later. Then realise Zeiss have been around a long time
I think it would be hard to find any contemporary sources discrediting a Zeiss lens at the time it was manufactured, I'm not saying they were the best rather that they were close
Originally Posted by Ian Grant
We had Zeiss' dr. Kornelius Fleischer/Müller (he used two names - don't know why) defend the Zeiss Tessar 160 mm lens on Photo.net, at the time they made this thing for Hasselblad, by saying that the other Zeiss lenses were often too good.
If that isn't saying that it isn't up to scratch, i don't know what is.
And it was not just 'a source', but a Zeiss employee who's job as Head of Strategic Marketing was to promote Zeiss products.
Last edited by Q.G.; 05-30-2009 at 07:37 PM. Click to view previous post history.