Sharpest lenses?

The sharpest lenses have razors built into front element.

I have learnt a lot from this essay:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorial​s/sharp.shtml

And maybe I have saved some money too.

tiziano wrote in post #2103509
I have learnt a lot from this essay:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorial​s/sharp.shtml

And maybe I have saved some money too.

The guy who wrote that bit is a hero. I've been saying the same.

http://www.photography​-on-the.net …hread.php?t=198​220&page=3

That one allways has been a nice article.

lol although a good articl is doesn't negate the fact that people do have the right to discuss lens sharpness without being told the obvious IE that technique is more imporant than equipment etc, this we all know. We can however still discuss what technically is the sharpest lens, and no amount of articles like this can really or should try to subdue that.

DocFrankenstein wrote in post #2102958
Well... as long as you're judjing from the photodo ratings...

thats why i said a few other source, chiefly the comparison of the 85 1.2 and the zeiss 85 1.4, now assuming that there were no adaptor problems, i can't see this as being the culprit or else people wouldn't have gotten superb results from a zeiss lens on an eos before, and i know of a few distagon 21 owners who have lol
Anyway judging by that test, in most aspects the canon thrashed the zeiss, quite honestly in most regards it was a walkover.

baybud wrote in post #2103620
lol although a good articl is doesn't negate the fact that people do have the right to discuss lens sharpness without being told the obvious IE that technique is more imporant than equipment etc, this we all know. We can however still discuss what technically is the sharpest lens, and no amount of articles like this can really or should try to subdue that.

I think the article is not meant to subdue the discussion of sharpness per se, but to mitigate the preoccupation and obsession with sharpness over other important elements of photography. Sharpness, for many, is a bane rather than a boon.

If I may quote the author...

Lord_Malone wrote in post #2103652
I think the article is not meant to subdue the discussion of sharpness per se, but to mitigate the preoccupation and obsession with sharpness over other important elements of photography. Sharpness, for many, is a bane rather than a boon.

If I may quote the author...

No thats very fair, you make a good point, i should not have phrased that such as i did. In retrospect i prempted " and badly" that this discussion would become a disparagement to those who wish for whatever reason to test lenses for sharpness.
As it happens i do think that article is right on many levels, and alot of people " myself to a certain degree" obbsess almost habitually over just one facet of a lenses charaacter : sharpness.

I think the sharpest lens I have is the Canon 300 f 2.8.
However, the sharpest in comparison to other lenses of similar focal length is the Zeis 21mm. It just trashes my Canon 16-35 and others - and don't get me wrong I love my 16-35, its a good lens. And I use it more than the Zeiss. For all its sharpness, it just doesn't zoom very well.

baybud wrote in post #2103667
No thats very fair, you make a good point, i should not have phrased that such as i did. In retrospect i prempted " and badly" that this discussion would become a disparagement to those who wish for whatever reason to test lenses for sharpness.
As it happens i do think that article is right on many levels, and alot of people " myself to a certain degree" obbsess almost habitually over just one facet of a lenses charaacter : sharpness.

Thank goodness there's a place like POTN for all of us photography fiends to convene, wallow in our self-pity, and seek justification and moral support for our sickness then, eh? Next beer is on me, brother.

Lord_Malone wrote in post #2103700
Thank goodness there's a place like POTN for all of us photography fiends to convene, wallow in our self-pity, and seek justification and moral support for our sickness then, eh? Next beer is on me, brother.

LOL next time i'm in the US

baybud wrote in post #2103401
don't quite know how you figure that, 42 zeiss lenses more if you count the blad lenses rated, and 56 leica optics.

Bad piloting I guess ... still on a recount 30 out of 58 listed Leica lenses are not rated.

hmv wrote in post #2109665
Bad piloting I guess ... still on a recount 30 out of 58 listed Leica lenses are not rated.

still works out at 30 compared to the L primes which i think favours the leica still.

What is this now? A context on which is the sharpest brand?

Gilette!!!