It might have the same MTF in general. But MTF varies copy to copy. I don’t know but I’m happy to think that ZF-I lens finish more precise as it has to be used for industrial applications. Let it be my delusion )))
vaptre wrote:
It might have the same MTF in general. But MTF varies copy to copy. I don’t know but I’m happy to think that ZF-I lens finish more precise as it has to be used for industrial applications. Let it be my delusion )))
Yes, MTF varies copy to copy. This implies that a ZF.2 sample could be better than a ZF-I sample, being identical both the lens design and the "official" MTF plots Zeiss has published 😁
Love the brilliance and colors! Out of curiosity - I see you using both the Distagon 2.0 and 1.4 for a similar subject (leaves). What makes you pick one over the other?
Ripolini wrote:
Yes, MTF varies copy to copy. This implies that a ZF.2 sample could be better than a ZF-I sample, being identical both the lens design and the "official" MTF plots Zeiss has published 😁
Leave the man to his dreams. Who knows, maybe the Industrial versions are assembled to tighter tolerances. IIRC, the 50 Summicron Rigid DR was subject to more attention in assembly than the standard Rigid. Unlike all other lens makers who publish only calculated MTF graphs, Zeiss reports measured results for a weighted average of many samples tested.
Yesterday I spent one hour and half relaxing in Centrale Montemartini.
It's always a pleasure to be there with my MF lenses. The ZF 100/2 Makro-Planar still rocks on my Z6. What a beautiful lens!
)))
