Need Info on Focal Plane MFD solution.

[fotografz]

Marc,
I have used a Mamiya 645 AFD (version 1) with the 350FE, 150 FE and 80 FE and the adapter and it has focus confirmation with all of these manual lenses. I'm using them on a P45+. The only lens I don't quite like the results I'm getting is the 350FE. Mind you I have not done extensive tests with this lens so it could be that I need to change my shooting style but I'm getting results that are a bit soft for my tastes, which is in line to the results I was getting on film with this lens too so it could be my copy. On not exhaustive tests I didn't see marked differences between the 150FE and the 80FE and their Mamiya counterparts. After I bought the Mamiya lenses I have not used the Hassy ones.
The 1st gen AFD is slow as a dog but dirt cheap on the "virtual flea market" but I have found it doesn't bother me much, for studio work I need to wait for the packs to recycle anyway, and for landscape work slowness is not a big issue. Obviously, YMMV.

You could rent any of the Mamiya or Phase One bodies and the adapter and test for yourself. After all, we all have different requirements and we are willing to accept different trade offs.

Good luck,
Rafa

Thanks for all the great info ... I'm familiar with the Mamiya AFD cameras ... I had a AFD-II and Aptus 75s and used the FE lenses on it ... including the 350/4FE which was quite good also.

The questions were aimed more at how the integrated D camera works.

 

[Jack]

Jack,
The last 110mm you sold got optical problems which was eventually got resolved. Thus it may not be the lens to put the final conclusion on.
Best Regards,
Son

Son, the last 110 I sold was just a little bit better than the one you sold me -- which I thought was pretty darn good too, so I am confused. Furthermore, the person I sold my last one to was very happy with it - another puzzle? I am not sure which 110 you are referring to that had issues, unless it was the one you sold me originally, but it seemed pretty decent to me...

 

[PSon]

hi Jack,
I am not surprise that you may be able to see some differences in the image from the two versions. There are several issues when using this type of lens on a third party camera. 1) most of the 2.0/110 F and FE lens were made from any where 10 - 40 plus years ago and thus the flange distance has been shifted unless the lens get calibrate it. I did a studies of 20 plus of these lens from all different generations (1-5th) and found that most of the lens has shifted. If you have a digital back where you can shim to the shifted registration your lens will increase in both macro and micro contrast and attenuate the chromatic aberration at wide open F2. 2) Using adapter for third party camera will again increase or reduce the error depending on the combination of lens and adapter thickness. Thus again it is very difficult to determine the absolute resolution of the lens unless all variables are eliminated for your set up. How do you use your 110mm lens? For example do you use it for close up or for landscape. Can you provide some samples of your 2 versions of the lens as well so I can tell the degree the lens has shifted in your system (lens + adapter)? This again will be interesting data. I believe PeterA bought your F version which is the older version than the one you sold recently (FE). I believe the F version in Peter's system works for him (from what I saw on his report) but I still would like to help him if it does not deliver to its fullest potential (all cost on me on this one of course). I attached an image to show the calibration of one of the 110mm lens by using the shim for my Sinar digital back.
Best Regards,
Son

 

[Jack]

Son,

Re the shim, it was irrelevant on my system as the focus confirmation dot was spot on for my focusing screen and digital back combo on my Mamiya body. So any differences in lens flange focal are irrelevant as the focus system simply lights up at precise focus at the screen regardless of the lens in place -- even worked perfectly for macros with the manual bellows and an old LF lens mounted

That out of the way, the main differences I recall between the 110 F you sold me and the latter 110 FE I picked up was a slight bit more microcontrast from the FE lens. Peter did get the original F version I bought from you, and it had no issues at all that I recall -- was very sharp even wide open. After I sold it to him I missed having "the look", so started looking for another one and that's when I got the FE copy that showed up on my local dealer's shelf a few months later. That last 110 FE lens was also free of any issues and another excellent performer, aside from the noted slightly higher micro-contrast. Then a few weeks after that, I got the Mamiya 150/2.8 and decided the look from it wide open was as good on portraits as the 110 wide open, and I then sold that last 110 FE copy to another party. (It was the version 4 I think, the one before the square baffle version and precisely the version that buyer was looking for -- he claimed the earler versions delivered better bokeh.)

So I remain confused about your earlier comment, "The last 110mm you sold got optical problems which was eventually got resolved." IOW, I have no idea what lens you are talking about since neither of the 110 F/FE lenses I owned ever went back to you -- perhaps you are confusing me with somebody else you sold a 110 lens to? However, if you recall, I also bought a 50FE from you and returned it immediately because it had serious optical issues -- perhaps that is the lens you are thinking of?

Best,

 

[PSon]

hi Jack,
Yes despite you can focus whether using your eyes or with focus confirmation which is not always perfect (another topic). However, if the registration for the lens has been shifted no matter how in focus you are the performance of the lens has been attenuated. This is why most lens when not calibrated properly the performance is significantly attenuated and why Alpa took so much effort in precision with their camera and lens. We also dealt with these issues when we put the Contax Zeiss and Leica R lens on the Canon EOS via thick adapter before.

Yes I heard the new Mamiya 2.8/150 is a very good lens in terms of pure resolution. I like to test this lens one day especially with the P65+ back. I may consider buying your Mamiya 150mm lens to test with the Rollei and Hasselblad lens if I get the P65+. Do you still have this lens?

Do you remember which adapter you use for Hasselblad 2.8/50 F lens because on my system it works fine. However, after receiving the lens from you I sent it to Hasselblad for second opinion and get recalibrated for the original Hasselblad camera. Normally the older lens should get calibrated especially if using at wide open such as the 110mm lens at F2. Do you remember who you sold your last 110mm FE lens to? I am not trying to say you sell defective lens because most of the old lens does need calibration to get the proper performance from the lens and this is what I am trying to tell you before we can make the absolute conclusion on the lens. It is important that we do make the correction once we found there is an error in the lens. This is why places like the forums we can do this for each other.
Best Regads,
Son

 

[Jack]

However, if the registration for the lens has been shifted no matter how in focus you are the performance of the lens has been attenuated.

Only for INTERNAL focus design lenses. For normal group-focus lenses, irrelevant. And IIRC, the Planar is a symmetrical lens and therefore is NOT an IF design, but regular group focus -- which is determined solely by lens extension, so minor variances in flange focal are irrelevant...

This is why most lens when not calibrated properly the performance is significantly attenuated and why Alpa took so much effort in precision with their camera and lens. We also dealt with these issues when we put the Contax Zeiss and Leica R lens on the Canon EOS via thick adapter before.

As I understand it, Alpa took the time to insure their focus mounts accurately reflected the actual focus distances on their camera systems. Here, diferences in flange-focal will affect the marked focus distance, but will not change the performance of the lens. However internal group spacing BETWEEN the elements is critical, and both Schneider Rodenstock may not take as much care here as they could. This is where I suspect Alpa spends the extra effort and thus reflects the higher cost of their versions of the S and R glass.

Yes I heard the new Mamiya 2.8/150 is a very good lens in terms of pure resolution. I like to test this lens one day especially with the P65+ back. I may consider buying your Mamiya 150mm lens to test with the Rollei and Hasselblad lens if I get the P65+. Do you still have this lens?

Yes, it is stellar. And actually, now that I have the P65+ coming I've decided to keep it .

Do you remember which adapter you use for Hasselblad 2.8/50 F lens because on my system it works fine. However, after receiving the lens from you I sent it to Hasselblad for second opinion and get recalibrated for the original Hasselblad camera. Normally the older lens should get calibrated especially if using at wide open such as the 110mm lens at F2. Do you remember who you sold your last 110mm FE lens to?

I don't recall exactly which adapter I used, but it worked fine, achieved infinity focus, etc. Nor do I recall who I sold the FE to, but I know they were very happy with it when it arrived. It sounds like the 50 needed the recalibration you gave it for sure.