I have been working on this for some time now. I know there is a long debate going on regarding process lenses (AKA flat field lenses) when used for general purpose or product photography. In this topic you will find a comparison of such process lenses with a modern Macro lens (Scheneider Makro Symmar HM 120 5.6) and one of the modern general purpose lenses (Rodenstock Sironar N 210 5.6)
Tested lenses are
Rodenstock Sironar N 210 5.6
Computar Symmetrigon 210 6.3
Schneider G Claron 210 9
Schneider G Claron 150 9
Konica Hexanon GR II 150 9
Schneider Makro Symmar HM 120 5.6
Lenses tested at fmax, f11, f22 and f45.
The camera is a Cambo Master PC with a PhaseOne Powerphase scanback attached.
Scans are performed at 8400x6000 pixels resolution.
No USM (unsharp masking), no noise reduction, no cleaning at all.
I will comment briefly.
The biggest problem was focusing. These lenses are both very good pieces of optics and one pixel precision focusing was essential to be able to see the differences. I have done many trials and these are the best focussed ones among many trials. The focal plane is the surface that Linhof logo resides and the front faces of the winding dial and the shoes.
Schneider Makro Symmar and the Rodenstock Sironar are MC lenses and they produced better contrast. This is evident on the histogram since at both ends there are clips which means the dynamic range of the scanback (which is real wide by the way) is not enough. Process lenses must be single coated hence produced slightly less contrast.
G Clarons are good but they are both prone to flare however Konica Hexanon GR-II is not. Konica Hexanon GR-II also has a huge image circle. I loved this lens.
Anyway see for yourself.
Fmax results here
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks