What is "professionally sharp"? This is very subjetive. The following
images are professionally sharp for me. That means going to the full limit of
the film resolution (ISO 100 color neg in this case.), with a good old tripod.
So here are the lenses tested: 135/2.8, 200/2.8 IF and 24/2.8. I should note
that, despite i don't have examples right now for the 50/1.8, i'm 100% sure it is a top
performer, a really sharp lens that is also dirt cheap, compact, light and
fast.
The images were made on a Canon A-1; the scans were made using the Fuji Frontier system. The closeups are 13 Megapixel scans of the full frame.
Very compact and light, always delivering a sharp image. Inexpensive.
Here is an example at f2.8, on Superia 800.
Exposure is 1/60 or 1/30. With monopod.
You can nearly read the chords on the score... Surely i could get a sharper
image with a tripod; but this is more than adequate for me.
A close up of the photo reveals a bit of the score... Grain and slow shutter speed limits the sharpness here but it's more than OK for me.
This is the latest version of the 200/2.8, this one has internal focus.
This lens has excellent reputation among FD users and here you can clearly see why.
Here is an example at f4, on Fuji Superia Reala 100.
Exposure 1/250 on tripod.
A close up of the photo reveals the mouthpiece maker, and hairlines.
1/500, f5.6. Film: Kodak Supra 100
You can clearly see even the tinyest hairlines
This is a very compact and light lens. Focuses to 0.3m and close focus
performance is very good thanks to the Canon Floating System (which compensates in this
cases.)
Here is an example at f5.6, on Fuji Superia Reala 100.
Exposure should be more less like 1/500. A monopod was used.
The central part is amazingly sharp, the rest of the image being almost
equally sharp; there is not too much loss of sharpness at the corner.
This is a closeup of the section marked with a red arrow. Now this is
much, much, more resolution than we, mere mortals, deserve!
