Door No.1 or No.2?

[ColColt]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I decided to run a simple test pitting the Zeiss 50 f2 Planar *T lens and a 58 year old 50 f2 DR Summicron. Can you tell which is which?(Hint, The DR is the second one)

 

Rod0012Zeissa by David Fincher, on Flickr

 

Rod0011DRa by David Fincher, on Flickr

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[luigi bertolotti]

Modern lens = more contrast,  and that's no surprise... try the Summarits 2,5...

Old Summicron DR apparently stands up fine, and also this isn't a surprise, even if maybe a color picture and some enlarged detail could allow a more in depth comparision.

[250swb]

I think the DR version would have to be the second picture anyway, because it's sitting next to Tigger in the first!

 

It isn't a surprise it is so sharp, lens sharpness hasn't improved a lot in the last century if you take different formats into consideration as well. What has improved are the things that mean a lens can be used in a wider range of circumstances beyond an older lens's sweet spot. So that's coating, minimising optical faults, colour accuracy etc. I have a 1930's 50mm Elmar and at it's perfect best (around f/5.6 to f/8 and used in dull light and mid to close distance) there isn't a lot to differentiate it from a modern Summicron. But go outside those parameters and it can immediately look like an older lens. The recent revival of interest in old folding cameras and large format has shown many photographers the best old lenses aren't any less sharp that modern counterparts, it's just other optical faults that can let them down in comparison.

 

Steve