Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/02/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
On Thu, 19 Feb 1998, dannyg1 wrote:
> Tom,
>
> > The first is that even the highest quality medium format lenses are not nearly
> > as sharp as the best 35 mm lenses.
>
> This is an overused generalization that's just not true. Many MF lenses can match a
> 35mm equivalent on LPM counts and some aren't even exotics (three that come to
> mind are the H'blad 100 planar, Mamiya C330 105 DS and Mamiya Univ. 50mm).
> Some can also match 35mm for contrast transfer.
>
> IMO, it's better to use a safe 'for the most part' when making statements such as the
> above and lose the 'not nearly'. Most above par lenses image 'nearly' as well as
> one-another. Even when you're looking at lenses that cover 4x5.
Though I don't own a H'blad 100 planar, but based on MTF charts from their web
page, the CF350sa ( newish lens ) could well resolve even higher ( in parts
of its field of view ). Admittedly its tangential resolution lags behind
but it looks like this could be an absolutly astounding lens.
100mm top mtf for 40 lpmm ~67-70 ( tangential slightly worse )
350mmsa top mtf for 40 lpmm ~74-76 ( tangential only 50 )
Duncan ( who has also been wondering about actually how much worse MF
lenses are, compared with 35mm )