There is a sample to sample variation, and a used lens can even lack the trimming shims...
Anyway at f/22 it happens that good 4x5 lenses are diffraction limited, so all may resolve near the same. IMHO a multicoated Sironar may favor microcontrast, so fine textures may have an slight better depiction, particularly when bright light sources are in the scene. Perhaps for portrait one may prefer a softer look... Anyway a softer look is easy to obtain in post. With PS it's straight. In the darkroom one can expose paper with "soft focus" effect, this is slightly defocusing the enlarging lens in the middle of the exposure. It is not the same than a Soft Focus lens, but it softens the portrait... this is something I'm still investigating...
A V700 scan at 2400dpi has way less than 2400dpi optical resolving power, with V700 you need higher dpi to obtain such a resolving power. IMHO no flatbed is to notice much difference, perhaps the Cezanne may notice something if you scan a 35mm strip of the 4x5 negative, but near nothing if scanning all negative in one time.
In the darkroom, to notice something you may need a very good enlarging lens, a well aligned enlarger, big paper and a refinated technique.
When you decide... IMHO the factors you can consider are (beyond the look you see...) the technical excellence of the Sironar vs the /4.7 Speed of the Xenar.
The Sironar offers a way larger circle of image allowing more movements, and this is way enough to decide. Then you have the multicoating advantage.
Single coated or uncoated are a theoric technical drawback that it can also be an artistic resource... and the /4.7 can be useful if you seek a narrower DOF for portrait. Also bokeh nature may be different for you.
Bookmarks