I agree with you. Fuji glass is amazing. Most of my large format lenses are Fuji and Nikon. I own 4 Fuji 690 cameras, and a Fuji G617 . I love Fuji glass. .
However, if you look at the resolving power of a Hassleblad lens that cost 3 times what an entire Fuji 690 cost new. You will find that the Zeiss lenses have an edge. I agree with you.
I don't know about the BMW thing. 7 series is too big. I saw a couple of rich college kids here in Iowa City. Daddy bought this 19-20 year old a brand new M5 ,retractable hard top. Holy cow, what a car. The kid put stickers on the gas cap door!
Best Mike
May be I am not up to date, perhaps I am also not right - but the issue with characteristics/optical
quality of lenses from different manufacturers is very clear to me!
At first you should not forget : There are phisicaly restictions with each optical system.
The task today is to come in the near oft that critical border (with high tech. production/manufacturing) Sometimes the results "shine" to break that phisically restrictions.
NASA made exact this experience with "Hubble" (after lens correction).
But in reality you can't break the pysics. So what is Zeiss trying today with lenses?
To come to a maximum from Lens quality.
So as all other manufacturers today. And were is the difference between Zeiss, Leitz, Nikon a.s.o.?
To be faire : There is a difference ! But in relation to pricing the differences are real small.
Perhaps the best Zeiss may reach 91,7% oft what is the today optimum?
Next Leitz have to top that amazing quality with less than a half percentage!
And Nikon came along and reached "just" 88,9% oft those results wich is the todays
technical maximum with human technology. (Alliens may shot with better lenses but they also
fail to the phisicaly border (in this universe).
What does this mean to us if we want to buy a good lens ?
The key is the following : the last single percentages of quality will make a lens extreme expensive.
So Leica, Zeiss and some others go this way and let you pay for.
You want to have advantages in some parameters of your lens system at around 8,5 % - 11,7 %
NO PROBLEM - THEN YOU HAVE TO PAY USD 3800,- for your lens instead of USD. 899,-
?
Notice some posts of Ian Grand pls. then you will soon and easily come to the idea that lenses produced during the period 1930 - 1950 also had very fine characteristics.
So my conclusion is : How would it be to change the focus in direction of "photographical intention"
with regards
PS : What you need is an optical (darkrom) made enlargement at about 70 x 100 (in cm)....as a
minimum. The more size the better. 6 x 9 is quite predestined for a big size print.
Below this size it does make no sence to look at differences between some lens manufacturers.
I can't know - but let me ask : " Do you made this formats in printing ?"
(some do the scanning workflow and have to look on their sreens).
Don't forget : With a modern big sized 4k monitor you are actually just looking to ~ 8MP..
(Full High Definition will show you 2 MP...
)
I am printig big size - because I began with 100x140 cm years ago ~ 1979
..
No manufacturer is selling real bad lenses today.
I personally remember a Pentax SMC 2.0 50mm I used in the 80th. It was a real cheap one.
It has had a little poor quality (with open aperature 2.0) - so what ?
Just as I noticed that shortcomming I decided to a 5.6
!