Bipin
22-Jul-2018, 16:16
I've been looking at a small 135mm lens to complement my current lineup of Technika V lenses. I shoot 4x5 every now and then with this camera, though 6x12 panoramas most often. I've been looking at the 135mm f/4.7 Xenar for it's speed and with the assumption I'll at least get a little bit of movement on 6x12. My current understanding is this: That the Xenar, while of a single-coated tessar design, has good sharpness in the center of the frame even when shot wide open. More modern lenses such as Fuji, Rodenstock, Nikon and Schneider's f/5.6 offerings are of a Plasmat design. Despite multicoating, I've read that a Plasmat would not perform as well as the Xenar when used wide-open. However, the Plasmat offers significantly more coverage than the Xenar, and excels when stopped down.
Basically, my question comes down to this: I plan on using whichever 135mm lens I chose wide open. Is the Xenar is a poorer performer wide open than a modern Plasmat design of the same focal length? If a Xenar likely won't outperform the Plasmat offerings, I may as well go with a modern lens that is somewhat slower, but provides greater coverage. Some advice regarding my question, and the validity of what I've read online so far, would be very helpful!
Basically, my question comes down to this: I plan on using whichever 135mm lens I chose wide open. Is the Xenar is a poorer performer wide open than a modern Plasmat design of the same focal length? If a Xenar likely won't outperform the Plasmat offerings, I may as well go with a modern lens that is somewhat slower, but provides greater coverage. Some advice regarding my question, and the validity of what I've read online so far, would be very helpful!