[toni-a]

https://petapixel.com/2022/08/07/one-of-the-worlds-biggest-camera-collections-is-going-to-auction/

A great auction it should be

[Klaus]

This reminds me that I should get going with the planned vintage lens reviews. 10 lenses are sitting on my desk here ...

[davethebirder]

This reminds me that I should get going with the planned vintage lens reviews. 10 lenses are sitting on my desk here ...

   
      Yes, I'm looking forward to those ........ imperfections and all ........ actually I didn't realize the count was up to 10 ..........

[Klaus]

The biggest problem is not doing the lab tests but finding the time for sample images.

I've done the MTFs for 3 of them. Don't expect wonders from 40-50y old lenses ;-)

[thxbb12]

How about publishing the reviews anyway and adding the samples later?
I remember you doing this a few times in the past.
I'm sure it would be perfectly fine with most of us :-)

[Rover]

Seconded. There was, for a time, a streak of "lab tests" without sample images, and it worked fine in my book. I would hardly have spent hours with the site's loupe tool examining images at 200%. But of course, not everyone is like this, probably, and I would respect whichever decision you make.

Speaking of the original subject: it's always heartbreaking to see something so long established and (presumably) well invested into, effort-wise and emotion-wise, come to an end. I remember it being very hard emotionally when I had to abandon my previous job of 10 years because the company was shuttered.

[Klaus]

I think the sample images are more important with these classic lenses.

Today's primary value-add of these lenses is the image rendering - the bokeh tends to be much softer due to the lack of aspherical elements and there's no clinical sharpness.

If you just look at the MTFs, you can simply conclude that most pre-80s lenses are garbage by modern standards.

[davethebirder]

Given these lenses are more a question of a historic look over the shoulder ........ maybe better to have one complete review with images as technical qualities alone may not entice a return visit .....

[Rover]

I don't think anyone would expect much of them anyways. I've been (jokingly) asking for years to do a humorous review of some really low-end lens just to show the possible discrepancy in quality -- like a Canon film kit lens ala 28-90 on a 5DSR -- but that'll be in the same vein.

[toni-a]

Well, 50 is a long way from a 24... the 24 is a part of my trinity of fast primes (24-45-85) that I use when shooting in the dark. This time it was only 24+85 though and that did get me through the event. There's no point in dragging the 24 out anywhere if there's enough light; the 16-35 is more fitting there, being both more versatile and more predictable.

I don't mean to rail on the 24 - when it's needed there's no substitute - but at times it's comically inaccurate for AF. Sigma 14mm f/2.8 is comparable in being similarly misguided at times, although that one is more "forgivable", well, because it's a Sigma lens from way back in the film era anyway.

I don't think anyone would expect much of them anyways. I've been (jokingly) asking for years to do a humorous review of some really low-end lens just to show the possible discrepancy in quality -- like a Canon film kit lens ala 28-90 on a 5DSR -- but that'll be in the same vein.

Well did worse than 28-90 om 5Dsr, tried old Helios 58f2 on 5Dsr.... you can't really speak of humerous results as they will only look really bad at 100% magnification, for printing if you are not cropping it's basically the same you would have from priniting film