Same vintage lenses for film vs digital.

[Nikon 2]

There is the assumption that a vintage lens reviewed through a digital camera would not review as good if reviewed through a film camera, the one the lens was designed for.
Does film allow a vintage lens to show more potential than the same lens used on a digital camera…?

 

[BMbikerider]

I think if the lens if of good quality taken under controlled conditions the difference if any would be miniscule and of no real importance unless you are comparing the results on an optical bench. The main difference would be between the sensor and the film - not the lens.

 

[Nikon 2]

I think if the lens if of good quality taken under controlled conditions the difference if any would be miniscule and of no real importance unless you are comparing the results on an optical bench. The main difference would be between the sensor and the film - not the lens.

That’s what I meant. Film should enable the vintage lens to show better results, shouldn’t it…?

 

[awty]

There is no better or worst it comes down to how you use it.

 

[Nikon 2]

That’s what I meant. Film should enable the vintage lens to show better results, shouldn’t it…?

Doesn’t film collect the light from the lens differently than how a sensor collects light…?

 

[Nikon 2]

There is no better or worst it comes down to how you use it.

Light reaching the film from the lens and how the film reacts to the light is much different than how a sensor reacts to the light coming from the same lens…!

 

[BrianShaw]

The assumption is invalid.

 

[awty]

Light reaching the film from the lens and how the film reacts to the light is much different than how a sensor reacts to the light coming from the same lens…!

Its different, not better or worse.

 

[markjwyatt]

The needs of digital sensors are more strict than film. Digital sensors need light impinging normally (close to 90 deg.). Film/emulsion being transparent and 3D (though thin) can tolerate deviation from normalcy much better. Vintage lenses are less stringently designed than most digital lenses (this is largely due to increase in computational capacity in the digital years), and do not do as well on digital sensors.

 

[Pieter12]

It is the opposite. Film doesn’t make a film lens look better, digital just makes a film lens look worse.

 

[faberryman]

It is the opposite. Film doesn’t make a film lens look better, digital just makes a film lens look worse.

If true, the solution is simple. When shooting film, use a lens designed for film. When shooting digital, use a lens designed for digital. What’s the problem?

 

[wiltw]

Film lenses do not have to worry about different wavelengths of light being bent differently, and thereby causing Chromatic abberations seen in the resulting image. Digital lenses, especially digital wide angle lenses, have to be designed so that light strikes the sensor more perpendicularly to the surface of the sensor, so that Chromatic abberations are not as emphasized by sensels which are sensititive to a single wavelength (red vs green vs blue).

So digital sensors will show off chromatic abberations from wide angle film optics which do not need to be corrected as much for film exposure.
When shooting with telephoto focal lengths, the issue of chromatic abberations are general not an issue.

 

[Nikon 2]

Its different, not better or worse.

A agree with that…!

 

[Nikon 2]

Film lenses do not have to worry about different wavelengths of light being bent differently, and thereby causing Chromatic abberations seen in the resulting image. Digital lenses, especially digital wide angle lenses, have to be designed so that light strikes the sensor more perpendicularly to the surface of the sensor, so that Chromatic abberations are not as emphasized by sensels which are sensititive to a single wavelength (red vs green vs blue).

So digital sensors will show off chromatic abberations from wide angle film optics which do not need to be corrected as much for film exposure.
When shooting with telephoto focal lengths, the issue of chromatic abberations are general not an issue.

I was thinking that also, and when a review of a vintage Nikon with a digital sensor is shown, the results would be a negative one whereas the same lens reviewed using a film camera will show a more positive performance for the same lens…!

 

[Pieter12]

My 55 micro nikkor works great on my film Nikons and a d4 and d800. Otherwise I stick to film-era lenses for film cameras and digital-era lenses for digital cameras. What is the purpose of this discussion anywa?

 

[Nikon 2]

The assumption is invalid.

Why not…?

 

[Nikon 2]

My 55 micro nikkor works great on my film Nikons and a d4 and d800. Otherwise I stick to film-era lenses for film cameras and digital-era lenses for digital cameras. What is the purpose of this discussion anywa?

For my understanding of the differences using vintage Nikkor lenses with both formats…!

 

[Nikon 2]

For my understanding of the differences using vintage Nikkor lenses with both formats…!

Furthermore, reviews of let’s say a Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AI-s gets a better review with a film camera than a digital camera…!

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

The potential issue is that if the rays strike a digital sensor at an oblique angle, you can see color fringing that isn't an issue with film. As a practical matter, I'd only be concerned about very wide lenses, and I'm not sure it's so relevant when discussing retrofocus lenses designed for SLRs. It might be a bigger problem with rangefinder or large format lenses.

 

[BrianShaw]

Why not…?

Mostly because it, the assumption, presumes facts with no evidence. If a lot of people believe this, which is plausible, then it’s a general consensus rather than an assumption. Phrased as a question probably is more correct way to broach the topic.

 

[Nikon 2]

If I read a review on a vintage Nikon lens reviewed with a digital camera, showing it to have poor performance, I might not purchase the lens when it will be a great performer with film…!

 

[Nikon 2]

The potential issue is that if the rays strike a digital sensor at an oblique angle, you can see color fringing that isn't an issue with film. As a practical matter, I'd only be concerned about very wide lenses, and I'm not sure it's so relevant when discussing retrofocus lenses designed for SLRs. It might be a bigger problem with rangefinder or large format lenses.

Good information…!

 

[Nikon 2]

Mostly because it, the assumption, presumes facts with no evidence. Phrased as a question probably is more correct way to broach the topic.

I think the evidence has already been shown by other contributors…!

 

[BrianShaw]

I think the evidence has already been shown by other contributors…!

Yes, I agree… but that evidence came after the “assumption” was made.

Is this evidence what you knew already, or expected to read?

 

[Pieter12]

One disadvantage of using older film lenses on newer digital cameras is you need to do stop-down metering with the dof preview or use an external meter.