This lens test is totally bogus... here is what I posted about it on FM forum and soon after it was taken down:
Mamiya vs Hasselblad independent lens test
I saw an "independent" lens test between Hasselblad H lenses and Mamiya lenses on the Mamiya website.
The tester claims that all the Mamiya lenses are better than Hasselblad H lenses.
But I found the test to be a bit flawed to say the least.
First of all it was carried out using a rather vintage piece of equipment:
They are pretty much obsolete and can be bought for peanuts:http://www.ebay.com/itm/Pearl-Optical-RPT-15A-Resolution-Power-Test-Projektor-/290567723395?pt=DE_Photographica_Projektoren_Leinw%C3%A4nde&hash=item43a72f9983#ht_1444wt_1139
To start off with it's ancient and is dependent on being manually focused.
It is also a reverse system. It projects the image from behind the lens onto a wall.
The system also has heat problems.
No reputable optical company uses these things.
This is the type of thing that is used these days:
Trioptics Image Master HR.
Modern equipment uses the Modulation Transfer Function method.
The method is far more accurate for measuring resolution in regards to continuous tone images. The antiquated USAF test chart designed in 1951 is simply obsolete.
This is what they used:
A testing screen standard made in 1951.
If you are going to use a target you should at least shoot a more modern target:
The next weird thing is where the lenses came from. Keep in mind it was claimed to be an independent test.
quote from the report:
"The Mamiya lenses were brand new and came off the shelf at the Mamiya warehouse in Elmsford, NY while the Hasselblad H lenses were randomly picked from a New York Rental company."
This is ridiculous as we all know well how rental gear in the photography business in New York gets handled. Just imagine how these lenses have been "cleaned" but who knows how many assistants with everything from a soiled lens cloth to some ones t-shirt. Just think of all the hairspray flying around, smoke, makeup ultra fine powders. Also imagine all the rough handling by rental clients, assistants and deliver staff.
I know that when I rent lenses in New York I make them pull out a few until I find a clean one.
The "readings" were made by someone looking at the projected image on a wall in the dark.
It also seems that no corner resolution was measured...
A much better way to test these lenses would have been to photograph a target like this one:
The same type of back could have been used. There are Phase and leaf backs in both Hasselblad and Mamiya mounts. The tangible photographic results could have been published in the form of downloadable images, rather than using subjective judgements of projected images. Keep in mind that these subjective readings were taken at different times as they only had one Pearl.
What is also interesting is that the "independent tester" works for Mamiya as a marketing consultant.
Here is a quote form the guys linkedin bio:
Marketing Consultant for Tenba / Cinevate / Mamiya / Leafhttp://www.linkedin.com/in/eduardoangel
2009 – Present (2 years)
I was curious to see where this Independent test was published so I looked at the link for the PDF
The link to the PDF document is:http://bit.ly/ncv33q
but it's actually not the link, but a redirect... back to the Mamiya site.http://www.mamiya-usa.com/landing/files/Mamiya_LensTest_Report_Final.pdf?utm_source=mamiya-usa.com&utm_medium=hyperlink&utm_campaign=tens-test-report-eduardo
bit.ly is a service for redirecting links.
Well it seems to me that the test is not exactly an independent one, uses a dubious method with vintage testing gear and pitched brand new Mamiya lenses against heavily used rental lenses.