The Sputnik lenses do have problems with astigmatism,
in the peripheral areas, at all f/stops.

Did the Sputnik shots, look as sharp, as the TL-120
slides ?

The TL-120 slides should have exhibited, significantly,
better overall sharpness, especially in the peripheral areas.

If one is to attempt to compare the Sputnik with the TL-
120, it should be taken into account that they have little
in common with each other, except that they both use 120
roll film. The TL-120 costs about 10x as much, as the
Sputnik. I believe the TL-120 is priced below its true value.

The TL-120 does offer an accurate viewfinder, plus it does
offer a precise point of focus. The sputnik does not offer
an accurate view finder, nor does it offer an accurate point
of focus. The TL-120 does contain lenses that offer an overall
resolution capability that is far superior to the resolution
capability offered by the Sputnik, (triplet), lenses.

IMO. the differences in, "OFD", (Sputnik versus TL-120), when
the near point is at 10 feet, should not have been discernible,
in a standard MF viewer, as the difference would be only about
0.2mm.

The lack of a precise focus capability does make it difficult
to predict what the actual OFD of a Sputnik slide will be,
whereas the TL-120 DOES OFFER a precise focus, and therefore a
predictable OFD.

I consider the Sputnik, (if well tuned), to be a camera capable
of producing decent MF stereo slides, when used by a competent
stereo shooter. It is in a different class than is the TL-120.

DON

> Did the Sputnik shots, look as sharp, as the TL-120
> slides ?

i reshot the same location yesterday with same film, so will know when
its finished and back from the lab.

what it does remind me of is the difference of viewing my Realist 35mm
slides in the cheap plastic viewer compared to the original bakerlite
viewer.

so maybe its a magnification difference between source material in the
chinese viewer.

M