Thanks for the compliment about my work
Looking at MTF graphs for canon lenses, why would anyone even bother with Nikon
Looking at some of the sample files posted from Doug and others it's pretty obvious the LAST thing the LS 55 is a dog - the images speak for themselves and it's pretty clear how the lens passed through Schneider quality control.
Listening to theories about viewfinder focusing problems with model eyelashes and off center blur from tiny enlargements in a magazine spread (from razor sharp 80MP images at 100% magnification) is wildly
I'm sure most of your comments are directed at some of the dealers on this forum and you probably get a kick out of wry-ling them up, but I think you're doing a disservice to many readers by constantly bashing medium format and specifically phase one. 35mm isn't for everyone, it really isn't. I hate the format. Not out of snobbery, I just can't compose an image with one, not for jack. I have really shitty eyesight and wear contacts with maximum correction for astigmatism. I focus with the magnifying hood (+diopter) on the hassy, then put on my reading glasses so that I can compose the image on the ground glass. I hate the 35mm format's aspect ratio, it just sucks, no matter what any MTF graph might say. While some may like the format for publication, no matter how wide a lens you get you're always cropping the vertical - it's dreadful. I need space, and lots of it, and it's why I shoot SQUARE. I'm an artist and I love the square and if black and white photography wouldn't exist I would be drawing or painting gigantic SQUARES
I once considered a Fuji 680... until I saw one for real. It's a brick, and I can't imagine ever mountaineering with one, or stuffing one in my backpack, or taking one with me on my bike.
The technical cameras made by arca swiss cambo and alpa are fantastic cameras, as are the medium format digital backs made by Phase One. They're not crap - FAR from it, and neither are their lenses. While I find your comments very entertaining - you're doing a disservice to all the other readers who might be considering MFD with your fuzzy math. Not everyone is a fashion or wedding photographer. If there is a valid criticism to the format it's the astronomical cost of entry that makes it prohibitively expensive for artists like me to get into, and that's a damn shame.
So a Phase One photographer who needs to shoot with a 33x44 sensor and wants a normal lens angle of view has to shoot with a lens designed for portrait and lifestyle.
How silly is that?
Same thing goes for the owner of a full frame MF back that want's to shoot architecture with a slightly wide angle lens.
Why in the hell would Phase One / Mamiya / Schneider develop a normal lens for 33x44 backs that is not designed as a general purpose lens?
I think it's more about the 55LS being a bit of a dog and giving it the lifestyle and "editorial portrait" attribution because that stuff is predominantly published smaller,
unlike landscape and architecture.
Regarding descriptions the old non LS Mamiya 55 2.8 is described as a general purpose lens.
The original Mamiya is a 2.8 so still has shallow depth of field and really apart from the leaf shutter there is nothing wrong about it
for shooting "editorial portraits" or "lifestyle".
However I think that especially for file style a fast 24-70mm 2.8 on a 6 to 10 fps dslr would be a far better choice even if overpowering the sun or fill in flash is needed.
The Canon 24-70 II is quite a step forward.
Here is a good example of it wide open and showing nice bokeh.
The 55mm 2.8 does not look to good when compared:
In the Canon graph the thin continuous lines corresponds to 30 cycles. Blue is wide open and black is at f8
In the Phase One/Schneider graph the middle line corresponds to 30 cycles.
Also keep in mind that when comparing a 36mm sensor width with a 44mm sensor witch you will need to enlarge the 36mm image a bit more.
Even with that in mind the modern Canon zoom hold up well against the older 55mm 2.8 LS.
Canon 24-70mm 2.8 II $2,299
Phase Schneider 55 2.8 LS $ 4,290
Even the cheap ass Canon 50mm 1.8 holds up quite well for a $ 150 lens.
Actually at f8 the 30 cycle line is quite remarkable. Sharp dropoff in the very corners, but no big dip roller coaster graph.
And before a riot starts ... I'm not suggesting anyone go out and buy the 50mm 1.8 II....