35mm lenses are higher resolution (at least the better ones) than MF glass. That's not to say that MF glass wasn't designed for high resolution.
-Adam Jack Davis wrote: > Why do you suppose.."it never hit the resolution of the 35mm lenses"? > Only a curiosity, not my characterization. =)) > > Jack > > --- Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I'd disagree with that characterization. The MF lines that ended up >> dominating the market (Hassy, Pentax, Mamiya) all are known for being >> >> quite high resolution and sharp for MF glass. It simply never hit the >> >> resolution of the 35mm lenses. >> >> -Adam >> >> >> >> Jack Davis wrote: >>> Image size off-set is, of course, the savior of MF. Interesting to >>> consider that the MF segment wholly accepted lower resolution >> lenses to >>> dominate as a way of increasing profits. >>> >>> Jack >>> >>> --- Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>> 35mm lenses are typically of higher resolution in terms of lpmm as >>>> compared to MF lenses. However MF still has higher effective >>>> resolution >>>> because the increase in negative size is larger than the decrease >> in >>>> lens resolution. a 25% decrease in lens resolution per mm (pulling >> a >>>> number out of a hat, based on lens resolution numbers I've seen in >>>> the >>>> past) is much less notably when the size of the negative is >> increased >>>> by >>>> 75% or more in each dimension. And that's only the case of 645, >>>> larger >>>> formats have more notable increases (6x9 for example has more than >>>> 100% >>>> increase in both dimensions). >>>> >>>> -Adam >>>> >>>> >>>> Jack Davis wrote: >>>>> This may not be true any longer, if it ever was, but 35mm lenses >>>> have >>>>> been tauted as having greater resolving power than MF lenses. >>>> Reason >>>>> that I heard offered many years ago was that wedding >> photographers >>>> used >>>>> mostly MF and they found a "creamy" image more acceptable to the >>>>> customer. >>>>> Lens tests, over the years, seemed to bare out the disparity. >>>>> LF lens resolving power v image size is another matter, >> obviously, >>>> and >>>>> one I'm not even prepared to guess about. >>>>> >>>>> Jack >>>>> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
