Single blind, double blind, quadruple blind ... I still haven't seen any of x-rays photos which illustrate the original post. Or am I all blind?
I had a full schedule today and will be on a business trip untill monday. When I return I will reshoot the test wit the same batch of film and run it, scan the two in the same scan and post them.
Please don't get me wrong, I love the Summicron. I've made some great images with it and it's no less of a great lens because the Nikkor has less flare. It's not like 50% more but there was a noticable difference.
I really don't think I have a bias as to lens or camera maker. I've ownes so many systems over the past 40+ years as a professional. I've always loved some of the Nikkor glass (24mm 2.8, 35mm 1.4, 50mm micro, 85mm 1.8 (old version), 105 2.5 (old version) and the 180mm 2.8 ( any version). There are others like the 35mm f2 and 24mm f2 plus a few others that I never felt were more than average. The same is with Leica. I've never had a love for the 28mm's or tele elmarits although they are good lenses. However I love my 90mm 1st version Elmarit and later versions of the 35mm f2 Summicron. I particularly loved my 35mm 1.4 Summilux first version and 21mm 3.4 Super-Angulon. I liked the 21 SA over my 21 Elmarit. I wouldn't say these lenses were sharper than the others but had a special character or quality that I love. I don't own any of the new ASPH lenses because I feel they're too harsh and I like the character or personality of the older glass.
To me what makes a superior lens is a combination and proper balance of characteristics of a lens. Contrast doesn't have to be extremely high and resolution doesn't have to be super sharp. To me it's all in the balance of sharpness, contrast and illumination fall off as in the 21mm SA.
I feel the same about my canon glass. Some of it's outstanding and some average
My little informal test hasn't burst my bubble about my 50mm Summicron. It still makes stunning images.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=5045