Sharp 75mm (no diffraction) ???

[Anders_HK]

I should add; my Rodenstock 150mm 5.6 Sironar-N seem plenty sharp (albeit less than digital/digitar, as I assume). Interesting was I had an older Chinese gentleman I hold trust for clean it in Shanghai, and he showed me his cotton budds after cleaning, pointing out how dirty it was. He used TEA on cotton budds to clean it! - Real.

If dust, I assume no problem, but... any other blemishes would be detrimental... right, or? One never knows...

Thanks

Anders

[Anders_HK]

Email reply from Schneider-Kreuznach

Me - "... what are the actual differences on following Schneider lenses in regards to my use. I am seeking a lens that has a suffice high resolving power and much better such than my Nikkor 75 SW 4.5.
- Schneider 75mm Super-Angulon 5.6, e.g.?http://www.kenrockwell.com/schneider/75superangulon.htm
- Schneider 75mm Super-Angulon MC 5.6
- Schneider 75mm Super-Angulon XL 5.6"

S-K - "The only lens we would like to recommend is our Super-Angulon XL 5,6/72mm which is an superb wide-angle lens with excellent resolution."

Me - "1. What was optically improved with the 72 XL compared to its predecessor 75mm SA 5.6?
2. Do you have info on how the 72 XL compares to the optical quality of the Rodenstock 75 Grandagon-N (green stripe) 4.5?"

S-K - "the 72mm lens is a complete new design and calculation and in comparison to the older calculations of Schneider 75mm lens as also Rodenstock 75mm lens the resolution is higher and the color separation in the width is much smaller."

Me - "How is the 72 compare to your 80 XL?"

S-K - "it’s a different design.
The XL aspheric design was made for field photographers and gives the quality of a standard taking lens and coverage of a wide angle lens, but both moderate.
If you are going for a wide angle lens with best performance and best resolution with minimum distortion you should use the 72mm lens.
If you are looking for general purpose the 80mm is more convenient for you."

Seems 72mm is the choice, I ordered mine.