"I love my Verito lens, but I always have to sharpen everything in Photoshop..."
I opted for dialyte type lenses for everything above normal focal length... 203 Ektar and Fujinon-C's. But it seems that for normal and wide angle needs plasmats are better, for my purposes, than anything else... maybe a 135 WF Ektar which, I think, is a double gauss. I've yet to test my lenses but I'm going to experiment with using older shutters on modern lenses to see how the rounder apertures affects out-of-focus areas.
I'd really like to try a Cooke but it's just too pricey for my budget. I might try a couple of older Tessars, Rapid Rectilinears, Heliars and Velostigmats.
I have no doubt that Commercial Ektars can accomplish this. Those of you who have experience with them; Do you think their nice out-of-focus rendering is due largely to their rounder apertures?
I don't think I can afford later model coated Dagors.
One man's Mede is another man's Persian.
the sharpest lens I have ever own was the first I got for LF:
Boyer "Saphir" 300 4,5.
And beautiful out of focus areas.
But just to be clear: as Mark said, the swirley and the Petzval is not a sure thing. For me it is actually easier to make Petzval shots without the swirleyness than with it... It matters how you use it.
and he is (also) right about the "underrated" RR's...