"Standard" CF-series vs. Superachromat lenses

[DanielStone]

Hey all,

Just wondering... I'm comparing the Superachromat 250mm and the "standard" 250mm CF-series lenses from Hasselblad. My end intention is to drum sc@n the transparencies and negatives(color + b/w, usually acros/tmx or tmy-2), and print optically(b/w is both optical and scanning, color is scanning only). Printing(lightjet for color, inkjet for b/w) to approx 20x20" square, possibly going to 30"x30". Not small enlargements, but not "huge", at least IMO. No larger than 30x30 size-wise.

So, from people who have USED, not just tech-heads please who can read a brochure , does the superachromat provide a marked degree of performance in terms of overall resolution, color fidelity and/or potential fringing(which I haven't experienced w/ my 50 CF/FLE, 80mm CF, or 150mm CF lenses as of yet...Obviously the "color fringing" is really only with color film(primarily transparencies; RVP50, E100G, and Provia 100f). I love my "APO" Red-Dot Artars for 4x5 and 8x10 work, but that's another matter altogether...

I do not plan on using tele-extenders, just the lenses by themselves. Just FYI

thanks

-Dan

 

[brucemuir]

Daniel,
there is a good deal of info on pnet (from a former/current? zeiss emplyee) that suggests it is worth it if you're after absolute image quality.

For the record I've never been within sighting distance of one.

I have recently picked up a "C" T* version for cheeeep.