They specifically say lines/millimeter. I don't think that is a typo across many MTF charts. You need to spend a little time with Roger Ciclala's MTF charts, There are very few lenses that get out of the mud at 60 lp/mm. and then usually only in the center. Here are some examples https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/10/more-ultra-high-resolution-mtf-experiments/ . Note that Roger normally only tests to 50 lp/mm and this was a far out special case test.
Yes, few lenses are great at 60lp/mm. And that’s why few companies go that high. But still, 10/30 is just awful. Ignore the 10.
Not really. 10 shows the contrast of the lens and is thus useful. The biggest issue at 60 lp/mm and above is that the slightest bit of field curvature will kill the MTF chart. Roger recently did a couple of articles for DPR on the subject. https://www.dpreview.com/articles/1351719699/roger-cicala-field-curvature-for-fun-and-profit and https://www.dpreview.com/opinion/7031211310/roger-cicala-field-curvature-pt-2 . Many lenses are much sharper at the edges than the standard planar MTF chart would indicate. The edge focus is just not in the same plane with the center focus. https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/11/testing-lenses-best-individual-focus-mtf-curves/ . Enjoy.
The contrast of the lens at almost unusable low resolution. Why not go to 5? The contrast could be almost 100% across the board?
