New R2

always hard to tell from net pics but that lens looks damn sharp to me.
and you have to squint to see any distortion.
bottom line- most people (non photographer types) would be very happy with the results from that lens.

what do you think doug?

joe
 
True, Joe; it's hard to assess sharpness online, but hopefully those three 100% crops from 3000x2000 scans will give some idea. The nature of the bokeh, and the magnitude of distortion should be visible even on the smaller scale pics. I hope some other aspects of the lens's nature will show up too...

I'd like to hear what others have to say...
 
Ehm I think I'll stick to my Nokton 50/1.5 and forget the idea of trading it with the smaller Skopar.

Doug, your Skopar will most likely outperform NPZ film in term of resolution. Any shot on ISO100 film? Looking at your samples at the moment, I will say the Nokton at f/2 is already a few miles ahead of the Skopar at f/2.8. But what do I know?! I'm just a newbie using my camera to perve nice girls. 😛
 
Cool shots, Oscar & Kris, fellow perverts! 🙂

I wouldn't doubt the Nokton may well be sharper than the Skopar. But the Skopar looks pretty sharp, seems to have a pleasant character, and is very compact. I don't often need fast lenses.

I've had a change of attitude about the smaller film formats since I got that honkin' big Pentax 6x7, years ago. Before, I was trying everything to achieve sharpest results in 35mm... optimum apertures, sharp lenses, films like Pan-F and Agfa Isopan FF, Leitz enlarging lens on aligned enlarger, etc etc.

But, in resolution the 6x7 (and the 645 rangefinders too) can simply exceed anything 35mm can do. So I'm not so much persuing sharpness in the 35's, and more interested in other factors. The main role now for my 35 gear is to be more compact and lighter, and fun/different to use.
 
Back
Top Bottom