Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/02/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Just curious... how many of you that are posting on this resolution thread, have a UV permanently mounted on your lens? Could be oxymoronic you know... ;-) Jim At 08:44 AM 2/10/98 +1000, you wrote: > >> The recent add by Zeiss in PopPhoto claims a resolution of 300 l/mm for its >> MacroPlanar 2,8/60. This claim I find on the high side. Leica lenses easily >> handle 150 - 250 l/mm (areal resolution!!!!). But that is not the question. >> Looked at the MTF curves the important figure is the contrast transfer at >> 80 l/mm. Most lenses have really trouble getting this relatively low value >> on the film with a good contrast. >> So here you have it; on the face value most modern films will 'handle' >> around 125 - 150 l/mm. Most lenses can on one count easily top these >> figures and chalk up values of 150 and 300 l/m, depending on the >> measurement method. This comparison gives the plus to lenses. >> >> But lenses also are really in trouble to get 80 l/mm. In this comaprison >> the film easily wins. If you go for high contrast transfer for both system >> components (film and lens); the film can handle 40 to 80 l/mm and the lens >> can handle 20 to 40 lines (or to be a bit tolerant 80 l/mm). In this >> comparison both components are about equal. The best lenses just outperform >> most films and the best films just outperform most lenses. >> Are we lucky that with Leica lenses we can have the best of both worlds. > >Just to make things worse, I was reading an artical about the problems of light >scatter on/in the film. Given the same "resolution", a smaller aperature will >give a better lpmm on the film. Though your lens may give its best performance >at f4, f8 will probably give you better resolution on the film. > >Then again we can start on film flattening devices etc, etc. > >The lpmm of film is, I belive, performed using contact printing methods. > > Duncan ( just adding annother level of complexity to the equation ) >