My aim is definitely not to criticize Lens Rentals, whose professionalism is above any doubt.
Yet, I keep wondering whether tests performed at maximal aperture are really relevant in daily life. They certainly are, if one is using 1,2 lenses, more even for the likes of Noctilux 0,95 lenses, but what about macro or landscape photographers, whose favorite aperture is rather around f. 11 .
I know that a lens which is, like the RF 1,2/50, excellent at f.1,2, can't be bad at - say- f.8.
But, what about an ultra wide-angle, which could be poor at f. 2,8, couldn't it be great a f. 11? Additionally, I still recall Leica's optical- division head saying that lenses were made to shoot 3D objects, not charts or MTFs.
Any opinions?
Yet, I keep wondering whether tests performed at maximal aperture are really relevant in daily life. They certainly are, if one is using 1,2 lenses, more even for the likes of Noctilux 0,95 lenses, but what about macro or landscape photographers, whose favorite aperture is rather around f. 11 .
I know that a lens which is, like the RF 1,2/50, excellent at f.1,2, can't be bad at - say- f.8.
But, what about an ultra wide-angle, which could be poor at f. 2,8, couldn't it be great a f. 11? Additionally, I still recall Leica's optical- division head saying that lenses were made to shoot 3D objects, not charts or MTFs.
Any opinions?