2:1 so far in favour of the oldies. :-) How many will be there in total, 5?
Edit: oh, 1 see, 4 100/105mm and two 135mm. Nice.
The next one will be less enthusiastic ;-)
I still feel the old-timers might win by penalty shots. :-) Of course, if you had been testing wideangles, the result would not have been assured.
I enjoyed that review more than I would have done of any modern lens ..... takes me back to my Nikon F with the 50mm F1.4 ........ never had enough cash to step into the Nikkor primes ...
I certainly wasn't expecting that level of sharpness from a 5 element lens either including great rendering ....... and it beat the pants off the Pentax which surprised me
I'm loving this historic review series ....... a breath of old yet fresh air !!
Good job Klaus
Looks like the 100s will be tied, depending on the magnitude of the disaster with the next one (Minolta Rokkor, right?) Klaus has already hinted it won't be pretty. :-)
Btw today I got out to shoot with the most unlikely camera/lens combo ever. :-) the lens cost $70 and the camera was two orders of magnitude more expensive.
Well, besides the budget constraints, I also chose the semi-fast 100s because these are usually fail-safe choices.
The story will change very much when we move to the fast 50s and 28s ...
I'm enjoying this series of old vintage lenses as well.
Great idea and thanks for the tests, Klaus :-)
The IQ of this Nikkor, especially the sharpness at 42MP, is truly impressive!
When you see what this lens can manage in term of IQ with only 5 elements in 4 groups.
It makes one wonder why modern lenses couldn't be made with fewer elements, be smaller, lighter and cheaper, especially given the computer aid in lens designs!
What am I missing here?
I'd love to see smaller, less complexe designes while still offering descent IQ. Would that not be possible?
You can find many "simple" Leica M lenses with stellar performance.
e.g. the M 90mm f/2.4 has just 5/4. The M75mm f/2.4 has 6/4. Even a behemoth such as the M 75mm f/1.25 has just 9/6.
Some argue that fewer elements result in higher micro-contrast/3D. Possibly not wrong because every surface transition is a bit imperfect. Although you can counter-argue that this doesn't matter as long as the circle of confusion isn't bigger than a pixel.
However, yes, there seems to be an inflation of lens elements lately. I'd also consider this an unhealthy development.