On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 01:16:44PM +0100, P?l Jensen wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >35mm lenses sharper than MF-lenses? No way. The DOF is greater due to the > >smaller format. That's all. > >The rest is a question of polishing glass. Of course the 35-mm lenses are > >smaller, thus smaller tolerences - in order to obtain a CORRESPONDING > >quality measuere. That doesn't make them sharper, though. > > Well, my experience is still that MF lenses from Pentax are less sharp than > comparable 35mm K-mount lenses as long as we keep the basement consumer > stuff out of the discussion (equivalents to these doesn't exist in MF).
It rather depends on how you define & measure "comparable", though. If the measurement consists of taking two lenses with a comparable angle of view, one on a 35mm body, and one on a 645 body, and making the same sized print using each system, then I think most people here would expect the larger negative to produce the sharper print. If, though, we're taking two lenses of identical focal length, and cropping to just use the central 36x24 portion of the 645 negative, then most would expect the result of using the 645 lens would be not quite as good - the increase in image circle comes at some cost.
