this is seeming more and more like vaporware - has anyone got a sighting of one in the wild as yet?
this is seeming more and more like vaporware - has anyone got a sighting of one in the wild as yet?
Still waiting patiently. I don't think the announced LS lenses from Schneider are in the same class of vaporware as the 45-90 or 45mm T/S....... I'm much more confident the 80mm LS will soon have company with the 55mm LS and 110mm LS.
I suspect Phase have been a little overwhelmed by taking on Mamiya. and Leaf. and releasing C1 5.0.
they seem to be slipping way behind with delivery of many items, I can only hope a serious restructuring is underway, and that a raft of new products will come out at Photokina.
bump - in the hope that someone has some news?!
I got the 80 and just had a chance to play with it a bit -- and I'm really liking the look it produces. Unfortunately it means I'll want the 110 and 55 as well... Here's one from yesterday, wide open:
I realized I should have included a 100% crop from the f2.8 focus plane for reference. Here is an unsharpened 800 pixel crop from a different image of the same door where I focused on the door of the old structure:
I have the 110 on order and have been told that the first ones will ship as soon as late this month but in limited numbers.
I want the 110mm but I want a 200mm AF D 2.8 with it, than I can sell my 150mm. Obviously the 200 is a dream lens but if Phase is listening this would be the next one to make. Does not have to be a LS lens either. After that folks I just can't see any better than the 28D, 45D and 150 D so those lenses they can ignore and work on the gaps 35mm, New 55 LS coming , 110mm LS coming, 80mm LS here so the gaps i see are 35, 200, 35-90 zoom or that range , T/S lens. Obviously love to see a 21mm F5.6 rectilinear in a small package for interior work and such.
a certain dealer here in NYC wanted me to sign a purchase contract (with cancellation fees) to get in line for one! Its a lens for goodness sake - since when do you sign an order contract with a page of legal terms, to get in line for a lens?
I walked away.
Don't blame you and I would have done the same.
You are leaving out the 80 1.9 AF "D". With what new prices was for that MF lens, one can speculate in how much they will do their mark up? Is it a smell of lots of profits for lenses they make into AF "D"???
I know folks are listening at Phase One and Leaf...
Yaya, is there any way you please could raise my suggestion for them to try to keep prices more reasonable compared to what older lenses originally was? That obvious go for the 200 2.8 as well... Very much kind thanks!
Yea a AF D 80 1.9 focal only would be awesome
Maybe Kevin and Yaya can pass these on to the powers that be on this. I would kill for the 200 2.8 AF D version
All I can say is if the 110 and 55 are as good as this 80 of mine, I'm already in for both!
My problem is that I have the 75-150 D zoom which is excellent and covers the 110, as well as the 120 D Macro which is excellent and close to 110 -- of course the latter is manual focus and neither is LS. Next is the 55 is also close to the 45 D I have, also excellent. So do I really need LS in those two focals given costs and budgets? Honestly I can do about 80% of everything I shoot with the 45, 80 and 120 I already own...
Hi...I know you are waiting on the new 55mm and 110mm LS lenses and you seem to as impatient as I am. I am one of the people that get the emails and calls on these so Iíll let you know what I know. The 110mm LS lens should be shipping by May 7th. And, the 55mm LS lens around May 22nd.
I am sure the wait will be worthwhile. I have shot with both and I know our engineers have been working hard to make sure the lenses are of the highest quality. These are beautiful pieces of glass and you wonít be disappointed.
When we start shipping we ship to dealers first for their demo orders then ship in the order we have received orders. Also, as the weeks go by the production volume will also increase and these will be moving fast. Iíll let you know the day we have confirmed shipping.
Truly sorry for the delays, but we some committed people in DK making sure the delivered product is the best it can be.
Thanks Kevin for the report that is very good news to us end users. Please consider sending my above request for a 200mm 2.8 AF D. i think that one would certainly go over well with end users and you can put me down for the first one. LOL
As well as others. I know many requests come in for new gear but it something to toss around and see what folks think. Again I think it is very important to have Phase representation here as well as Hassy, Leaf, Leica and so on and this forum does encourage very highly that participation.
You poo-poo'd that. And you were the one who convinced me to buy one more lens...
So I'm here to tell you that you need to add both the 110mm LS and 55mm LS to your 80mm LS. You wouldn't want to break up a set would you?
On screen it looks to me like there was some degree of sharpening applied. The micro contrast really pops out.
I can see some random white and black single pixel artifacts in the crop. I don't think they would show in any form on a print but it looks distracting on screen. Are those artifacts coming from the raw conversion?
It was capture sharpened at my normal setting in C1 only --- 160%/0.6/2.0... This in and of itself creates no artifacts, so anything you're seeing there is the result of jpegging (I jpeged this at 10 in CS). The increased micro-contrast is actually fairly obvious when you compare this lens directly to the 80 D and one of the reasons I decided to keep this over the D.
Here is the same crop processed for max detail. Note that in the wood "sign" above the door, you can see some minor artifacting -- this again is only visible in the jpeg, not in the tiff. This lens is "cut your eyeballs" sharp -- again, this is wide open at f2.8:
And for further reference, here is the full frame -- as you can see, it's unlikely even the artifacts above would show in a print:
Got my 110!
well.. a manual focus Sekor C lens for $104!
First impressions are, well, impressive!
What is expected price of the new 110mm lens?
Always love MF portraits in the 110-120mm range.
The new 150mm 2.8 is mightily impressive but may not be my cup of tea.
Thanks for the demonstration, Jack. The version that you processed for detail is obviously much sharper than the other crop that had only the pre-sharpening applied. But now there are many single black and white pixels that pop out like sparkle. AFAIK jpeg compression may introduce blocking and banding artifacts. I haven't seen something like this from jpeg compression. But if those sparkling pixels do not appear in the tif then there's no other explanation.
Just to make sure we talk about the same thing here, the odd pixels I'm referring to are also obvious in one of the crops from your WR S + Rodenstock 40mm review where almost every bolt of the train has one white pixel on top and even more so in the bush background:
It looks like the sharpening software is creating some artificial highlights to increase the micro-contrast in certain areas. This may be quite effective to increase the sharpness impression in a print but it looks artificial to me on the monitor. But then of course the appearance of sharpness itself is a matter of personal taste.
Sorry for going a little OT with this.
The 80mm LS is indeed impressively sharp, especially considering that this is f/2.8.
How is the corner performance wide open?
Does is it get noticeably better in the center when stopping down?
Good points Dominique,
I think we tend to process for our normal output medium, and mine is print. So many of my jpegs will appear over-sharpened at 100% screen resolution. The sparklies are one characteristic for sure. I think my issue with the train shot was I applied my normal workflow to the raws, and that 40HR is so freaking sharp that it ends up over-done for 100% web, and probably for print too. Chalk it up to learning curve with a piece of equipment I had access to for 48 hours only. On the other hand, the train car was freshly waxed and those rivets are lit by direct sun, as are the waxy leaves on the bush in the background, so at least some of those are likely to be true speculars...
Back to the 80LS.
Edge sharpness is very good wide open, but it is not anything close to what the center is. I'll try and post a comparable crop from that above frame if there is something near the corners near the focus plane. If not, I'll find another f2.8 and post the corners. The extreme corners go soft on my P65+ at f2.8.
Honestly, I think it's already resolving better than the sensor at the center wide open, so stopping down doesn't add much there other than DoF. However, contrast pops up a little and that can add the appearance of being sharper. Again, I can try to post some crops if I can find some that are relevant.
Ok, knowing that the crops were processed for printing explains the slightly oversharpened appearance on screen.
In my own workflow with drum scanned film I do not apply any sharpening to the master file. Every image gets individually sharpened after resizing according to the output medium. It also depends on the film type, magnification ratio, contrast range (all those variables that affect the grain pattern of the final image) and of course the content of the image itself. Some images can take more sharpening while others may not need any sharpening at all. There's no batch processing routine, except maybe for very small size web output.
With that kind of contrast as shown in your crop there's no doubt that the 80 LS easily outresolves the sensor wide open in the center. It's more important how much contrast is transferred within the range of the sensor. That's what you need to resolve very low contrast detail.
An f/2.8 crop from the edge of the frame would be interesting if there's anything in focus. I think the corner performance of a lens, especially at wider apertures, is where the quality of a lens design really shows aside from the price tag ;-)
Do you think the overall performance is on par with the Digaron-S and Digitar lenses of comparable focal lengths?
That is, it will until we reach some actual limiting factor such as diffraction. What is going on in this case?
The resolving power of a sensor is ultimately limited by the Nyquist frequency which is determined by the sensor's pixel pitch. A 6 micron sensor for instance cannot resolve more than 83 lp/mm. So a lens that resolves more than that at decent contrast outresolves the sensor. It means that you could resolve finer detail with a sensor of higher pixel density or with film but that's another topic.
I think the Digiron HR's and latest Schneider's are still a notch or maybe half a step above this. But this and the latest D lenses from Mamiya and Phase are really pushing that distinction. While the differences are there, you need side-by-side pixel-level comparisons to see them, and thus they won't be realized differences until one prints very large. Factor in the use/convenience advantage and IMHO the scales tip back.Do you think the overall performance is on par with the Digaron-S and Digitar lenses of comparable focal lengths?
Here is another frame from the 80 LS at f2.8 that I had some corner detail at least near the PoF. This is not a perfect example as the camera is angled downward slightly, we do not have a planar subject but rather a series of "stuff" in and out of the focus plane in these regions. But I think it will hopefully give some insight to your main question on corner performance as well as some insights to Bokeh. These are not process sharpened, only the basic capture sharpening as per the earlier image.
Here is the full image:
Now Upper Left corner, Lower Left corner and Bottom Center crops:
Bottom line is I think this is pretty commendable wide-open corner performance from any lens in front of a P65+ sensor. The more I use this lens, the more I like it.
Thanks for showing these, Jack. I find that subtle glow near the edge really beautiful.
BTW, I like how the different greens are rendered in this image.
The green tonal rendition is a property of the Dalsa sensor I really appreciate. FWIW, I processed this image at neutral WB, and the greens pop even more if you warm the WB up a few points (which I normally do for landscape type images). I don't have any logical explanation as to why the response in greens is different from the Kodak sensors, since I would assume it's profile-dependent. But whatever the reason, it is there and I like it too
Jeeze, I'm starting to sound like the cameraholic version of a wine snob
However, this is a special case in that we are not usually imaging Nyquist-limited data. At any spatial frequency above the Nyquist limit a lens does not outresolve the sensor and the multiplicative MTF relationship maintains.
Interesting and instructive as to why the new digital lenses perform so well on any sensor pitch. Except under a very limited set of conditions a lens cannot ouresolve a sensor. Or have I missed something?
What is true, is that we won't be able to tell how much better the lens is if we continue to test with that sensor. All we can know is the lens is at least as good as the sensor, or better, but not how much better. OTOH, if the image in the above example only resolves 40 LPmm, then we know the lens is the limiting factor since our sensor can resolve up to 67.
Finally, we do not need a sensor or film to determine a lens' resolving power -- we can alternatively derive it by testing it on an optical bench where we view the projected (aerial) image of the test target through a loupe. Extreme optics are tested this way since some can resolve well beyond what even the finest grain film can render.
Make better sense now?
Actually Phase is trying to get me one for testing now. So hopefully soon i can run it through the mill and report fully on it.
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?
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.
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.
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!
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?
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
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.