anyone got a Phase 110mm Schneider LS lens yet?

[cunim]

A lens can outresolve a sensor. If you have a sensor that has 200 pixels per linear mm, then before Nyquist it can theoretically "resolve" 100 line-pairs per mm. If your lens now can resolve 120 LPmm, then it "outresolves" the sensor. Nyquist takes the actual resolving ability down to about 67% theoretical, or in this case, 67 LPmm. So all we'd really need in this example is a lens capable of resolving anything better than 67 LPmm and it will be outresolving the sensor.

Make better sense now?

Thanks, Jack. I was unclear as to how photographers use the term "outresolve". This thread has helped me to understand. Sorry to raise geekoid material in what started as a practical discussion of a specific lens.

One day, over a beer......

 

[KurtKamka]

Jack, that last image you posted is gorgeous. You covered both points that I find most interesting about the image. 1) The lens has some serious mojo ... even in jpg form. Sharpness as well as a bit of dreaminess at the same time. I am also struck by the clarity that I see in the image. 2) I've taken a break from medium format for the past 6 months, but am intrigued by the color of the greens you are getting with the Dalsa sensor. I never quite warmed to the greens I was getting with the P45+ back (too yellow for my taste) ... but this looks very nice.

Damn, why did I need to click on the medium format link?

Kurt

 

[Jack]

Hi Kurt:

I understand your dilemma for sure. I love the look of MF over DSLR, and it's not just about having more pixels or better detail, but more about smoother tonality and the color. I preferred the convenience of my Canons for sure, but at the end of the day the files simply didn't wow me. With MF by comparison, I am regularly wow'd... And there is definitely something to the Dalsa greens, but I cannot explain it.

 

[KurtKamka]

Sorry to move this thread off-topic, Jack, but how do you like the newer Phase DF body? I loved the smoother tones, color and extra detail (from big files) I was able to get with the Phase back. The ergonomics of the AFDIII, however, didn't do much for me. With a better body, Schneider lenses, better greens, and higher ISO values with a P40+, I might have to take a closer look at my options.

Kurt

 

[Jack]

IMHO, the DF simply ROCKS! AF is about 2x as fast and more accurate with less hunting, and shutter lag is cut in about 1/2. Note however with the LS lens, I can in fact perceive the added release lag-time for that added steps required for the leaf shutter to fire -- it all begins immediately after the shutter press though, just takes longer to accomplish everything necessary before the actual fire.

And the P40+ is amazing too!

 

[KurtKamka]

Thanks Jack. Some nice options out there right now that I need to explore.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Sorry to move this thread off-topic, Jack, but how do you like the newer Phase DF body? I loved the smoother tones, color and extra detail (from big files) I was able to get with the Phase back. The ergonomics of the AFDIII, however, didn't do much for me. With a better body, Schneider lenses, better greens, and higher ISO values with a P40+, I might have to take a closer look at my options.

Kurt

Kurt have to say bud. I am seriously impressed by the P40+. By far the best back I have owned and personally much better than the P45+ except the long exposure part. Other than that it beats it in every way. Tremendous ISO latitude , much more ACCURATE color is more the word for it. Simply put I'm on a high that I won't come down from and the DF is by far much better. Is it the best they can do No but it is far more workable and i am a fast shooter and have yet to yearn for a Canon/Nikon on all counts.

 

[KurtKamka]

Good to hear Guy. You shoot the same types of things that I like to shoot, so I really value your opinion. After shooting with the new camera and back for a little while (and I think that it always takes a few weeks/months to form a valid opinion of the strengths and weaknesses of a system), how are you finding the high ISO performance? Do you ever utilize the Sensor + option or are the files looking good enough for you to not have to utilize the setting as often as you thought?

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I use the Sensor Plus a lot on the event /Pr stuff and I am good all the way to ISO 1600 without any help from 3rd party noise reduction programs. That alone buried any thoughts of Canon/Nikon and at full res ISO 400 is singing very well too. Need to play around a little more with full res. ISO 800 it's clean but does have some noise. I'm being picky here as well. I honestly think you should demo it and see the improvements over the AFDIII and P45+. This seems to be the perfect balance of speed/ISO/ color/tonality/DR and I don't recommend anything lightly in MF but this system i do highly recommend it. A few folks here took my advice and went P40+ and they are singing the praises which makes me feel good i gave them the right direction to look. From me to you as a friend i think you should take another look. Now your going to kill me. LOL

I'm so bad

 

[KurtKamka]

I know you've demoed the S2, but I can't seem to get around that price tag. The H4D-40 might be the other option that I may look at ... but the down-side there is that I'm a C1 user and I'm familiar with the Phase system, lens line-up and files. As I'm currently tied to no system, however, maybe I just need to find a killer deal I just can't refuse.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

You won't like S2 files in C1. That i can assure you of even a good profile for color will not get rid of the artifacts. The S2 is nice but my opinion only and for me not ready. I want bullet proof but that's me.

 

[gogopix]

David Farkas has an icc for C1 that works pretty well; matches LR default fairly well.
However, even though I am not a great fan of LR for overall workflow, it's not a bad "raw processor" . Seems to work on the samplke S2 files.

Victor

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Does nothing for artifacts,Noise, tonal range just color. Bottom line nothing totally dedicated to the S2.

 

[faneuil]

Agree. I shot AFD II (unusable shutter lag), AFD III (better but still laggy).
The DF with much improved shutter response and AF actually comes close to the feeling I have shooting my 5D MK II. Just wish my P45 back could perform better at higher than ISO 200.

I have absolutely NO regrets about spending the $$ on upgrading to DF.

Eric

IMHO, the DF simply ROCKS! AF is about 2x as fast and more accurate with less hunting, and shutter lag is cut in about 1/2. Note however with the LS lens, I can in fact perceive the added release lag-time for that added steps required for the leaf shutter to fire -- it all begins immediately after the shutter press though, just takes longer to accomplish everything necessary before the actual fire.

And the P40+ is amazing too!

 

[FredBGG]

The Schneider Phase lenses certainly produce very fine detail, but the overall look of the whole image is crisp and clear, but does not have a particularly nice look to. More straight forward technical clarity. Seems to be designed for ultra high res rather than beauty.

Personally I find the Contax 80mm looks far more interesting.

Of the Mamiya lenses I like the RZ80mm 2.8 and the older 80mm 1.9.

I also have a Schneider 480mm 8x10 lens at it is simply beautiful.
I just don't find that in the Phase Schneider lenses.