>>2979331Did I say that the photo would have been better or different if the lense was sharper?
>it's a test roll m8 :^)It's an 800px downres, Brownie photos are sharp at this size.
I'm saying it just doesn't have the microcontrast ;) of a more modern lense, or even other vintage tessars I've tried.
I think that shrub was at 5.6, this scene is at f11.
To be fair, it was a very bright day, and I think it's either an uncoated lense, or very primitive coatings. It's an OG Rapid, not an M or other later model, so '64 - '67.
My point of reference is the GW690 and its 90/3.5, which is fucking bonkers sharp at every aperture.
On the plus side though, this Konishiroku lense does give you the 3D nose.
