Kissel vonKeister Loc: Georgia

And that makes no sense at all. Did you mean to post that to another topic?

therwol Loc: USA

I believe he was making a joke.

therwol Loc: USA

I do believe that the output of a DXO test on a lens has some value. All of the parameters tested do translate into differences in image quality. Back in the day when turntables were king, they were tested for things like wow and flutter and rumble, and their tonearms were tested for tracking ability on warped records. You could easily hear these defects in the output. Warped records could throw some tonearms out of the groove. When I was still buying turntables, I found these test reports to be quite relevant in making my purchase.

On the other hand, most amplifiers by the late 70s had so little distortion that double blind testing could prove that listeners couldn't tell the difference between any two of them, so long as they were equivalent in power, yet some people insisted that a miniscule difference in distortion justified spending a fortune on something. Then they started testing for something called TIM, or transient intermodulation distortion, totally inaudible and irrelevant, but it became a religion. The interesting thing about this era of stereo testing madness is that people listened to vinyl on turntables. The process of reproducing sound from a stylus in a groove introduces a massive amount of distortion, said to be up to 5% while amplifiers were already so refined that they introduced perhaps .01% of intermodulation and harmonic distortion. I was smart enough to realize that the only really important parameter in an amp at that time was the amount of continuous power it could produce.

If you love the sound of vinyl, I don't have a problem with that at all, but I don't think that the average person really understands that they love the sound of the distortion, which I'll admit under some circumstances can be pleasing.

I keep an open mind about testing products with graphs and charts. I try to understand what matters, and I include it in the overall picture I get of a product. I too download real pictures and listen to opinions about lenses and cameras. For example, people in this forum and elsewhere rave about the Sony mirrorless full frame cameras. The image quality is outstanding, and there are many pictures posted on the internet to prove it, but there is almost universal dislike of their convoluted menus, as though the cameras are designed by people who don't actually use cameras. I'd like a camera that is lighter than my Nikon D810 that gives the same picture quality, but not one that is more difficult to use. The Nikon is hard enough.

wj cody Loc: springfield illinois

hi Ricker.
i just want to add a little something to this discussion. in the real world of film or digital, it matters very little in re: the sharper lens. it really is not noticeable unless you are looping 16x20 enlargements with an 8 power schneider loupe. canon and nikon make very excellent lenses, as does fuji and pentax. there is no magic bullet in any lens manufactured by anyone. the zeiss lenses perform best on rangefinder cameras, such as leica and fuji. having said that, and having owned a number of zeiss glass, in miniature photography (35mm full frame and lesser formats) i continue to use my leica glass.

for medium format zeiss is definately superior, but that is an apples to oranges comparison. as the larger format supersedes the smaller formats. so, don't think you will see an obvious difference, although you may like the zeiss products better, for whatever reason.

good luck with your search.

pyroManiac Loc: HIXSON,TN

One name seems to have been ignored in this discussion---that's Schneider. I used a 35mm f2.8 screw thread mount on my Pentax Spotmatic for much of my shop photography. Even in the dim recesses of our heavy vessel shop the sharpness was amazing. I was asked by other photographers how I managed to get such great photos under less than ideal conditions. I used an incident meter, exposed for ambient light then added a small flash to give a little fill into dark corners and for color. Some of my pics have been in magazines all over the world, primarily in ads. I rate my Schneider among the very best. I'm 83 years old. My first SLR was a Contax with a 58mm f2 Zeiss Biotar, great lens but no guick return mirror and weak shutter. Went to Pentax Spotmatic (rugged, dependable) then to Nikon FM. Stayed with Nikon because they take abuse well. In all I've experienced some not too dependable cameras but even in the Contax (weak shutter and all) I've not had a really bad piece of glass. Pentax, Schneider, Nikon, Zeiss all excellent.

wj cody Loc: springfield illinois

apologies to you and the folks at schneider kreuznach. i omitted them inadvertently. wonderful glass.

Kissel vonKeister Loc: Georgia

agreed. I omitted them because their range of products is a bit limited in the DSLR field (unless I'm missing something).
Had a friend once who cherished an Angenieux zoom lens on his Nikon about 30 years ago. After he dropped it from a bridge over a rocky riverbed in Olympic National Park he cherished it a lot less. Went back the following day and retrieved it from the rocks in the river bed. I don't know why - and neither does he. Ever pick up a lens with a broom and dust pan?

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

B&H currently lists a Schneider PC-TS Super-Angulon 28mm f/4.5 HM Aspheric Lens for Nikon F. I recently bought their last now discontinued PC-TS Super-Angulon 2.8/50 HM, and would have picked up a PC-TS Makro-Symmar 4.5/90 while it was available had I been aware at the time. For natural perspective wide angle work, I use a 58 f/5.6 Super-Angulon XL on 6x7 or 6x9 120 film. Meyer is reincarnating some of their old lenses (I’ve pre-ordered a couple), and I’m hoping that Schneider and some others will do the same (would love to have a new 150 f/2.8 Astro-Fernbildelense!).

davidrb Loc: Half way there on the 45th Parallel

Interesting to note that this lens doesn't qualify for "Free Shipping." RWR, enlighten me please as to the reason the Sony mount is a &700.00 premium.

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

The Canon and Nikon mount lenses are special order, so no free shipping. The Sony is in stock, so free shipping.
I can only guess that maybe Schneider made fewer in a Sony mount, thus the higher price? Interesting to note that this lens was listed in B&H’s summer 2016 catalog for $8,288 in mounts for Canon, Nikon, Pentax and Sony A. Note that the current $5699 price is after $300 instant savings! B&H says limited quantity, so I suspect the lens has been discontinued. That was the case with my 50 mm PC-TS. I went back to double check a spec less than an hour after ordering, and it was discontinued.

Edit: I suppose it’s possible that Sony could impose a licensing fee or something to account for the higher price. Dunno!

wj cody Loc: springfield illinois

that is just a shme! the angenieux lenses are terriffic and command a very high price, second hand, in today's market. and well worth it, i might add. a lot of the angenieux lenses, blanks and formulae were purchased by tokina, if i remember correctly, and their variants were labled AT-X on their lenses. don't know about the quality of those as i've never used one. one thing i seem to remember is the angenieux lenses, in zoom configurations, were always double the minimun focal length, and no longer. also, the maximum apertures were not what is considered "fast" in today's opinion. i did have a 35mm f2.5 wide angle angenieux on my alpa 6c model slr. the results were always first class!

wj cody Loc: springfield illinois

also meant to mention that i use the schneider kreuznach 120mm wide angle lens on my 4x5 and 5x7 cameras. it is a real standby for me.

therwol Loc: USA

What makes a lens worth $8288? I don't mean what makes a lens cost $8288. Anything hand made in small quantities is going to be expensive. Is it worth it?

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

Sure wouldn’t be worth it to me, even if I wanted a T/S lens that wide, but it may be to someone else. It’s very similar to the 50 T/S, and that lens is a real joy to use. For practical purposes, I’m sure Canon and Nikon T/S lenses would serve as well.