If you take a 100% crop from a corner so, well, that is different. I'd argue so, that in this case, you should have composed your shot differently in the field. And again, you have to print huge to actually see the difference.
I'm primarily doing videography, but most of the vintage lenses I've tested are too soft to crop a 1080p vertical "short"-style video out of a 4K landscape video (even though the landscape video may look fine).
It's not just my old konica minolta lenses, though, the more affordable Sony lenses from 2015 are just as bad.
I'm now using contemporary fujinon cine lenses and they're tack sharp all the way to the edge, even fully open at T/2.8
That said: If you've got hidden gems, or like the less clinical look of vintage lenses, go ahead, have fun!
And yes, not all vintage lenses are good. One has to go look for the good ones, usually the top line pro lenses of the day, those are still very good.
The one, cardinal thing about gear is so, once it hits a certain threshold of performance, e.g. "good" 4k video, whatever makes you feel good is great gear. Doesn't have to be the newest and shiniest, nor a specific brand or something.
My vintage glass so is neither soft nor sub-par, for my purposes, optically. Well, they do have a certain clarity to them, especially for blavk and white, that I like. I also know it is in my head, as I actually cannot tell those lenses apart from new glass by just looking at the pictures. I do like the incredible mechanical build quality so, they are master pieces of precision mechanics in all metal, and I like that feeling using them.
While not always true, there is a connection between price and quality: cheap / affordable products are generally less good than expensive ones, at the same time there can be incredibly good cheap products and crappy expensive ones, also the expensive ones can be bad value by virtue of being overpriced.
I heard good things about Fujinon, never tried them so.
