Thanks for that post brimming with interesting info, Carlos.
C writes:
>This is getting *very* interesting... as I mentioned above, a "classic"
>design may perform much better than expected thanks to modern
technology,
>but I'd love to see your results with it...
Yeah,
The original triplets and Tessar glass elements were designed for ease
of fabrication, so they lost some degrees of freedom
to minimize aberration and that is no longer the case. Also the choice
of glass was more restricted. Not to mention the better coatings now
that has already been
discussed.
>And back to CV, the
>APO-Lanthar 90/3.5 (another double Gauss) is very, very, very, very
good --
>not that it's a difficult lens to design, but this one performs just
great.
>Did I say it's very good? :-)
I had sniped after a couple in OM mount but have a viv S1 90 and the Z.
85 F2.
There is still something about the CV 90. I have prolly looked at 50
images from it at least---it seems to render jewel -like iridescent
colors
in saturated subjects. Perhaps the APO design. Bokeh nice at wider
apertures. Drat, smitten again. Haven't seen one for sale in 6 months
though in OM mount.
The SLII versions brought down the price a tad.
Mike
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|