Those would I am sure not be likely be adopted.
I wonder how one would put down a lens humanely?
-bob
The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
New Phase 35mm D series??
- Thread starter kdphotography
- Start date
I wonder how one would put down a lens humanely?
-bob
GrahamWelland
Subscriber & Workshop Member
Wow, that brings to mind those other great Acme products http://looneytic.com/products_explosive.html
-bob
ddanois
Member
I'm not trying to start anything here BUT...why isn't there more discussion about why these vendors don't produce better quality optics.
I own a P65+ and a 645DF. I've been consistently disappointed with the quality of the body and it's autofocus. Bottom line...the back is fantastic but the body leaves much to be desired.
Why should I have to buy a tech camera and lenses in order to realize the benefits of this great back?
I own a P65+ and a 645DF. I've been consistently disappointed with the quality of the body and it's autofocus. Bottom line...the back is fantastic but the body leaves much to be desired.
Why should I have to buy a tech camera and lenses in order to realize the benefits of this great back?
Bill Caulfeild-Browne
Well-known member
Sorry to hear that, ddanois - my DF is not as good quality as my M9 but it's pretty close and the AF is way better than previous incarnations - by MF standards of course!
And Bob thanks for the link...
Bill
And Bob thanks for the link...
Bill
It rained here all day again today. I hope to get some quality time behind it over the weekend, stay tuned!
Okay folks, quick report for you:
I am in a Starbucks waiting for a meeting, so no time to upload photos, but I shot a basic landscape image today with both lenses, all apertures, all from the same spot. While that is not a complete "test" I can at least give you my first impression. And that is my copy of the Mamiya 35 and the new Phase lens are essentially IDENTICAL in performance, at all apertures, corner to corner. IOW, the new lens matches my copy, which was one of the best I ever shot with. That's the good news. The bad news is the best 35 is not what I'd call a stellar lens. It is a good lens, but needs to be stopped down to f11 to get usable corners on FF. F16 starts to show diffraction, and I'd call the added DOF about a wash with the loss of central clarity from diffraction. Obviously f22 is worse. F5.6 is good centrally, but softens up about 2/3 out. F8 is better, softening up about 90% out. Either would probably be fine on a P40+ crop at the corners.
When I say good centrally I mean good, not excellent. This lens is simply not quite as crisp and has lower contrast than the longer primes. In fact, the 28 is sharper with more contrast centrally than the 35; the 45D even more so. However for most landscape type scenes, with a little contrast and clarity boost in the raw processor, and maybe a bit harder capture sharpening, the 35 holds up very well corner to corner at 24x32 print size. It's also a lot smaller than the 28, and even a bit shorter than the 45D. What that means for me is it's always in the bag when I need it -- I could not say that for the 28.
I will shoot some more images with it tomorrow and Sunday and then get it back to Paul on Monday. So, if anybody wants a confirmed "as good as it gets" copy of this lens, contact Paul at Optechs ASAP!
Cheers,
I am in a Starbucks waiting for a meeting, so no time to upload photos, but I shot a basic landscape image today with both lenses, all apertures, all from the same spot. While that is not a complete "test" I can at least give you my first impression. And that is my copy of the Mamiya 35 and the new Phase lens are essentially IDENTICAL in performance, at all apertures, corner to corner. IOW, the new lens matches my copy, which was one of the best I ever shot with. That's the good news. The bad news is the best 35 is not what I'd call a stellar lens. It is a good lens, but needs to be stopped down to f11 to get usable corners on FF. F16 starts to show diffraction, and I'd call the added DOF about a wash with the loss of central clarity from diffraction. Obviously f22 is worse. F5.6 is good centrally, but softens up about 2/3 out. F8 is better, softening up about 90% out. Either would probably be fine on a P40+ crop at the corners.
When I say good centrally I mean good, not excellent. This lens is simply not quite as crisp and has lower contrast than the longer primes. In fact, the 28 is sharper with more contrast centrally than the 35; the 45D even more so. However for most landscape type scenes, with a little contrast and clarity boost in the raw processor, and maybe a bit harder capture sharpening, the 35 holds up very well corner to corner at 24x32 print size. It's also a lot smaller than the 28, and even a bit shorter than the 45D. What that means for me is it's always in the bag when I need it -- I could not say that for the 28.
I will shoot some more images with it tomorrow and Sunday and then get it back to Paul on Monday. So, if anybody wants a confirmed "as good as it gets" copy of this lens, contact Paul at Optechs ASAP!
Cheers,
etrump
Well-known member
I am a little disappointed by your tests Jack. I was hoping for a 45d quality lens out of the new 35. Over the last few years I have come to really appreciate the 35 I have. It is an excellent copy as far as the 35s go and was hoping the new 35 worth an upgrade. More in terms of clarity than resolution.
While waiting for my Antarctic cruise I had about 36 hours to kill and spent the better part of the day testing the 35 against the Schneider 35xl on the cambo rs1001. I photographed the same scenes at infinity and hyper focal distance with both lens at every aperture available to both lens.
In the end, the mamiya 35 was never as good in terms of clarity but with a slightly stronger sharpening in C1 the resolution got close to the XL which was a surprise. Close enough that I suspect you couldn't spot the difference unless you printed lower than about 180dpi and compared side by side. Noticeable in extreme corners but with a little care in post a normal viewer would never see it.
While waiting for my Antarctic cruise I had about 36 hours to kill and spent the better part of the day testing the 35 against the Schneider 35xl on the cambo rs1001. I photographed the same scenes at infinity and hyper focal distance with both lens at every aperture available to both lens.
In the end, the mamiya 35 was never as good in terms of clarity but with a slightly stronger sharpening in C1 the resolution got close to the XL which was a surprise. Close enough that I suspect you couldn't spot the difference unless you printed lower than about 180dpi and compared side by side. Noticeable in extreme corners but with a little care in post a normal viewer would never see it.
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
I'm still buying it myself. I need the focal length and with the P40 it should be good besides I can do some things in post.
kdphotography
Well-known member
As I recall, the new 45mm D lenses were not very well received initially, but seems to have established itself as a very good lens. I'd love a 35mm D on the same hallowed ground as the 150mm D, but hopefully the 35mm D will be at least as good as its 45mm D brother....
Here you go folks. This is representative of about "the best you'll get" from the 35. This is shot off a tripod at ISO 50, 1 sec at f11. Obviously in brighter light with say a 1/250th exposure things would be better, but realistically this isn't that far off. Focus point was the edge of the pallet just below center frame about 10 feet away, lots of junk to see detail -- or lack thereof. From this raw file you can experiment and see for yourself what the lens does and how it falls out at the corners at its best aperture.
I've included a 1200 pixel jpeg just to toss up, processed "as-shot" in C1 with lens corrections ON. The Raw file thus contains more image to look at. Here is the link to download the raw: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8029401/CF002601.IIQ
I've included a 1200 pixel jpeg just to toss up, processed "as-shot" in C1 with lens corrections ON. The Raw file thus contains more image to look at. Here is the link to download the raw: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8029401/CF002601.IIQ
Steve Hendrix
Well-known member
Actually in the blink of an eye's time I had between completing our internal inventory and the Cancun/Ice Storm, I did a quick test of one of the 35mm D lenses we received against our stock 45mm D. The 35mm D appeared to my eye to be slightly sharper in the center, and the right side seemed also slightly sharper up to the edge of the 45mm D coverage, then tailing off slightly with the extra coverage of the 35mm. However, the left side seemed at best, no better than the 45mm D, and perhaps slightly less sharp.
This was an extremely quick test with no real time for extensive procedural adjustments. It is possible something was bumped while I shot the 35mm or perhaps the sample I shot with is not 100% in alignment.
At any rate, I was somewhat encouraged by what I saw. It did not appear to be a miracle lens, but it certainly seemed to be a potential match at least against the 45mm D.
I'll try to get some more testing in later this week.
Steve Hendrix
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Steve remind Dave he needs to send me mine.
O
Optechs Digital
Guest
Hi Jack,Here you go folks. This is representative of about "the best you'll get" from the 35. This is shot off a tripod at ISO 50, 1 sec at f11. Obviously in brighter light with say a 1/250th exposure things would be better, but realistically this isn't that far off. Focus point was the edge of the pallet just below center frame about 10 feet away, lots of junk to see detail -- or lack thereof. From this raw file you can experiment and see for yourself what the lens does and how it falls out at the corners at its best aperture.
I've included a 1200 pixel jpeg just to toss up, processed "as-shot" in C1 with lens corrections ON. The Raw file thus contains more image to look at. Here is the link to download the raw: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8029401/CF002601.IIQ
I really like what you have done with your backyard there. Grass and trees are very over rated.
Thanks for the review and your candid opinion of the lens. it is very helpful.
And now, the Jack Flesher copy of the 35mm "D" lens is officially for sale.
Best Regards,
Paul
Best,
Paul
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Mine will be here Friday and will run a few tests with a P40+. Add another lens to the collection. And FYI if anyone wants to know what I have it is 28D,35D,55LS,80LS,150D and next lens is a 300mm. That will round it out nicely. I'm certainly a prime shooter.
kdphotography
Well-known member
I think the 110mm LS and 120mm D or the Schneider 120 might be calling out to you...Mine will be here Friday and will run a few tests with a P40+. Add another lens to the collection. And FYI if anyone wants to know what I have it is 28D,35D,55LS,80LS,150D and next lens is a 300mm. That will round it out nicely. I'm certainly a prime shooter.