Here's another informal lens comparison at macro range, this time putting a 120mm/8 Super Angulon (Linhof select) against a Nikkor AM 120mm/5.6 macro lens.
See http://www.largeformatphotography.in...ad.php?t=33117 for a discussion of the point of all this. Summary: The point is not to show off how much better a macro or process lens is for the ideal conditions for which its designed, the point is only to compare the lenses I happen to have available under the conditions under which I tend to shoot. In particular, 3d tabletop work at between about .5x and 2x magnification, which is at the margins of the designs for both general purpose and macro lenses.
In this case, the subject is a Diebold mechanical vault timelock, shot at 1.5x with a 4x5 Sinar P onto a BetterLight 6000x8000 digital scanning back. Moderate movements were used to control focus and perspective. The plane of focus was on the mainspring at the top of the subject. No post-capture sharpening was performed. There's a slight perspective change between the two images due to the slightly different nodal point locations of the two lenses, but I re-focused reasonably carefully for each lens. Both shots were at f/22.
Here's the full frame Nikkor AM-120mm/5.6 image (at f/22), downsized to 650x488:
And here's the Super Angulon 120mm/8 image (at f/22), downsized to 650x488:
The edge of the image circle is visible in the lower right of the Nikkor shot, but otherwise both images are pretty similar at this low resolution.
But, as expected, a closer look gives the edge to the Nikkor. Here's a 650 pixel square crop (at 100% resolution) of the Nikkor shot:
And from the Super Angulon; note the overall softness and edge chromatic aberration:
Anyway, no big surprises here, but take it for what it's worth as a practical example.
Bookmarks