Sharpest Lens Ever under $4000 ??

Marc G. said:
i seriously doubt that a standardzoom can beat a dedicated macro lens in 35mm or a larger format lens (best options there of course)

i even doubt it can beat the 135mm L
Click to expand...

Apparently you are thinking of V1. VII of this lens just came out a few months ago. This lens is in another league. V1 wont touch this lens. Do your research.
 
Leica Monochrom plus Zeiss ZM 25 2.8 Biogon, the latter coming in well under $4k. Sharpness is a function of many things but the properties of these two products, particularly high resolution, combined with an appropriately contrasty subject is going to give one of the sharpest 24 x 36mm sensor/negative images achievable.
 
gb hill said:
Apparently you are thinking of V1. VII of this lens just came out a few months ago. This lens is in another league. V1 wont touch this lens. Do your research.
Click to expand...

that is true.

just as an fyi though, Cicala over at lens rentals has tested it (he does line pairs per image height, so equal print sizes and comparable across systems) and the 50 Summilux ASPH still edged it out (at least at f2.8, but given the 50 lux ASPH's mtf I doubt that the Canon could beat it out).

Both fall short of the Zeiss 100mm Makro-Planar (which the 25mm biogon is some 33% better than, btw, according to Zeiss) and the Coastal Optics 60/4 (which is above the price limit of this topic).

there is no doubt that the 24-70 II is an AWESOME lens when it comes to resolution, but it does not appear dethrone the 25mm biogon in terms of absolute resolution.

would love to see some comparison shots, though.

I think this is an interesting conversation, FWIW. Sharpness may not be the ultimate in terms of choosing a lens, but these discussions always provide food for thought as well as suggestions for new toys to try and track down.
 
In the end, does any of this really matter?

I shoot the Zeiss Biogon 25/2.8 quite literally every day and I can't remember the last time I thought of how many line pairs per millimetre it is supposed to be able to resolve.

Probably never.

Ok, maybe I peeked when I bought the thing... maybe. Mostly I wanted a solid performing 25mm M mount lens and the ZM25 was priced right compared to the alternatives I was looking at. Oh and I also liked the shorter minimum focus distance. End of story!
 
DR Summicron.
SMC Takumar 50mm.
Leica 135mm Apo-Telyt
many more...

Pretty much any quality lens for 35mm at f/5.6 or f/8.
Are you looking for wide open performance? Center of the image? Flatness of field? Where is this sharpness located?

MTF charts are awful, if you ask me. Real life is seldom sharp anyway. In human vision or in a photo, everything has some movement to it, as it should.

Phil Forrest
 
One of the criteria missing is the subject distance. Usually, for infinity subjects, you should be looking for maximum sharpness among the teles, like the Apo Summicron 180 R or even Hasselblad Apo Sonnar 250/5.6, in the shorter focusing range, tele macro lenses should prevail, like Apo Macro Elmarit 100 R or Makro Planar 100 ZF. I don't know how much this lens costs second hand, but in the close to normal fl apparently the benchmark is this one:
http://www.jenoptik-inc.com/coastal...ainmenu-155/80-uv-vis-ir-60-mm-apo-macro.html
 
kxl said:
Define sharpness. ;)
Click to expand...

This is a good starting point. Sharpness can refer to resolving power. If we are doing aerial photo mapping, and need to count golf balls from 20,000 feet, that is what we need. Sharpness can also mean the subjective impression thereof. That might be best achieved by means of good micro-contrast. I recall that in the 1970's, Leitz switched its emphasis from the former to the latter. One result was that the 35mm Summicron was redesigned, reducing the number of elements from 8 to 6. The resolving power may have suffered a bit, but the improved contrast made the pictures look sharper. (Later, when improved coatings and optical glasses came out, they were able to increase to 7 elements in the version IV, to get the best of both kinds of "sharpness.")

With that in mind, and without trying to name one lens as "the sharpest," I would nominate my 75mm Summicron ASPH/APO as a contender. And an honorable mention should go to the 35mm Summilux ASPH, the 24mm ASPH, and the 28mm Summicron ASPH. And my old 90mm Elmarit, even as old as it is, is remarkably sharp when stopped down to around f/5.6 to f/8. This goes for both the M and R versions. And I agree about the 180mm APO. These are all lenses I own, that are as "sharp" as I could possibly want!
 
gb hill said:
Apparently you are thinking of V1. VII of this lens just came out a few months ago. This lens is in another league. V1 wont touch this lens. Do your research.
Click to expand...

no need to do my research. it's about logic to me that a lens with what... 20 elements(?) can't beat macro primes. period. another user stated it with research so I think my guess was perfectly right. and it seems like even my 50 lux asph beats it so... :rolleyes:
 
DNG, what's the focus distance going to be for this contest?

If it's close up, then a macro lens will win. If infinity, might be different. If it's 1:1, then the 75mm APO Rodagon D or the Olympus 80mm bellows macro would be contenders.
 
LF may not be a good example as it does not suffer much from diffraction and the negative surface is so much bigger.
 
ColSebastianMoran said:
DNG, what's the focus distance going to be for this contest?

If it's close up, then a macro lens will win. If infinity, might be different. If it's 1:1, then the 75mm APO Rodagon D or the Olympus 80mm bellows macro would be contenders.
Click to expand...

I have asked her, she will get back with me on the other forum.
 
Well, anyway, the sharpest one I can lay my hands on: meaning I own it, is the Olympus 50mm f/2 Macro that I use on the digital cameras. In film it's probably the Carl Zeiss Sonnar on the APS Contax Tix. BTW, I've runners-up on P&S's I bought in Charity Shops.

I reckon, most of the good lenses from the mid 90's are sharp. Please don't ask my definition of sharpness or anything else. It's just my 2d worth about what I see. It could be that the Olympus macro one is the one I pick and use for sharpness, rather than the sharpest; meaning I've probably got the technique sorted out.

For the "surprised by sharpness" prize, I'd pick Minolta, btw.

Regards, David
 
Three points:

1) No 35mm or smaller sensor has been built yet to match the resolution available from many modern lenses. I can give you at least a handful of lenses that are "sharper" than any 35mm sensor. On top of this list is the ZM 25/2.8.

2) "Sharp" has no meaning unless you specify desired contrast as well.

3) As noted above you have to define object distance. Then again, for anything else but infinity, the camera comes into play, via inaccurate mirror or rangefinder alignment, or for a finder/mirror-less camera via accuracy of focus mechanism. When you focus peak, what's your resolution in pixel ? MTF charts and serious resolution tests are usually done using focus bracketing. Which your "Gedankenexperiment" does not account for.

Roland.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom