1930s FOTH Anastigmat (Triplet) 75mm 3.5
1940s Kodak Ektar (Heliar) 105mm f3.7
1950s Zeiss Tessar 80mm f3.5
I had to test some of my medium format equipments. I decided to post these test photos as a comparison of lens from different eras. An anastigmat triplet from the 30s, a Heliar from the 40s, and a Tessar from the 50s. These photos are taken with *almost* the same lighting conditions, apertures are difference especially for the Tessar because it got brighter. On the same roll of film with the same development. Shanghai GP3 in XTOL.
Please do not compare lens sharpness since there are too many different variables between them, such as lights, angle, aperture, distance, hand shake. But rather, compare their subtle differences in aesthetic. And despite their age, they all look highly usable to me.
Very interesting
Glad you find it interesting!
lol not enough of a difference for my eye the ektar and the tessar are slightly more crisp but not enough to notice on MF really
That is also one of the hidden agenda.
The Ektar seems to be more soft, but I don’t know, perhaps I only want to say sth… 😉
The Ektar i think i see a hint of motion blur. But really, can’t talk about sharpness. It could be results from the film back I was using, or the calibration of the camera in general. It was a Crown Graphic, lots of things could shift around.
To each eye is a personal choice. I love the post and would render a guess that there will be a wide variance of opinion (all correct). I would compare this eye test to that of a purchasing speakers. Audiophiles will try to impress upon a certain brand because it has the best technology, R & D or whatever, but close your eyes and listen. Always choose a speaker that appeals to your individual “ear”. You may just keep a boat load of money in your pocket or justify the money you may spend.
In this case I choose the Zeiss picture. When I close my “artsy-fartsy” mind from impressing upon a what my opinion should be, I just like the sharpness and detail the lens captured.