Re: [Leica] apo 90 versus 4/150

[Jeff S <4season@boulder.net>]

Erwin Puts wrote:
> 
> That people perceive Hasselblad pictures as sharper has nothing to do
> with the optical qualities but the film area, as so many
> contributions have discussed and the lower enlargement factor.
> BTW: I did not state that every 35mm lens is better than the 4/150. I
> said specifically that the apo 90 was better as shown above. I have
> the highest regards for Zeiss lenses, but their strength is the
> smoothness of rendition of outlines and the beautiful definition of
> fine textures.

Erwin, do the differences in the Leica vs Zeiss MTF figures suggest
tighter manufacturing tolerances on the part of Leica, or deliberate
choices made by the lens designers in order to balance various aspects
of lens performance? Does better MTF = worse bokeh? Subjectively, some
of the sharpest optics I've ever owned were the 75 and 150 mm Mamiya 6
lenses but they also seemed to have some of the ugliest bokeh (I love
'em at f/8 though). My pre-aspheric Leica glass and Zeiss glass doesn't
have the same ultra-sharp look but they're very nice all-around
performers and I don't so much mind letting backgrounds go out of focus
when I use them.
- -- 

Jeff Segawa
Somewhere in Boulder, Colorado