Could it be? The new Phase/Mamiya 35mm D Series?? And not much fanfare...
Could it be? The new Phase/Mamiya 35mm D Series?? And not much fanfare...
I have a very good copy of the original. Of course I had to go through about a dozen of them to find a really great one Seriously, the 35 is a great focal length. Would love to test one out soon.
I'm almost shocked that it's not another $4000 Mamiya lens ... $1990 is considered "affordable" these days.
I'm in line for one. Cool this was on my very very short list.
Jack and Guy,
I would be happy to send you guys one to try out so that you could share your impressions of it with the group.
Just let me know if you would like to take one for a spin.
35mm on 645 body is one of me favorites.. Still using old one (manual) , and this might actually get me to move to AF version )
Guy or Jack,
I hope you get to test one soon. Looking at the specs, on the Phase One site, they are basically the same as the old 35mm F 3.5. And the lens looks exactly the same as the old one.
Does anyone know what was changed?
I switched to a Cambo RS for anything wider than 55mm, but for all of us let's hope they get this right. If it sings it would be tempting to have it for run and gun. At $1999 it doesn't seem that they started over and probably what BJNY suggested... QC. Let the games begin!
I have an old 35mm that I got with my first Mamiya AFD and it is a stinker. Such a dog I may take it to the ASPCA instead of selling it.
I will send out a lens for you to test on Monday. We haven't had the time to test them yet ourselves so it will be great to hear your unbiased opinion of how it compares to your older version.
As has been mentioned, this "new" lens does appear to be identical to the prior version. However, with the addition of a classy silver band.
Awesome Paul. I would love to test it but with a P40+ back would not be a good test with a P65 FF out there so Jack would be great to run some tests for us since he has a P65 which will tell us how the corners are. I really want this lens since I have a gapping hole in my lineup 28 than a 55. Really need that 35mm in there. Hope this turns out to be a winner.
Awesome Paul, thank you!!!
Mine is grounded in Atlanta snow storm but I don't get home till next Monday anyway. So should be arriving same time. Can't wait to get it
I'll be interested to hear how you folks get on with the new lens, especially compared to the current lens.
I had a chance to get hands on with one today at Optechs Digital for a cursory look at any obvious differences. As Paul mentioned, it does have a swanky polished silver band on it and the Phase engraved lettering etc. The glass looks the same, as in no obvious differences with the external design at least. I'd have to imagine that the changes are internal or with coatings perhaps? The hood is the same plastic job too by the look of it.
Unfortunately I also looked at the 28mm in person too which I think is probably still the focal length I need for the P40+ unless I don the ski mask and hit the local bank to liberate funds for a FF MFDB upgrade.
The demo 35 arrived yesterday, thanks Paul!!!
It was raining however, so I did not get a chance to test it properly -- and today I am busy so it will likely be tomorrow before I get around to testing it.
However, I did look it over of course (). It definitely appears to be "identical" to the original model, with revised PhaseOne graphics and markings. But here's the good news on that:
I have used or tested maybe 6 different copies of this lens at differing times over the past few years. Of those 6, 1 was pretty bad all around. 2 were very good performers except for the extreme corners on full-frame (P45+), but would have been fine on a crop sensor like the P40+. 2 were very good including at least 3 of the 4 corners on the P45+, and I sold one to a friend since I had a good one. Then I sold my remaining one to another friend after I got my 28. But then I went fuller full frame with the P65+ and found the 28 too wide for most of my needs, so reinvested some time in finding another good 35 (!). A photographer I respect posted one for sale, and he claimed it was good, he just never used it much so was making room in his bag. So I bought it, and yes it is VG across the frame at all 4 corners. While none match the 80 LS centrally, they remain good to very good corner-to-corner -- good enough certainly for large landscape prints.
So bottom line is that *IF* Phase took the time to tighten up QC on the assembly line, then I have no doubt these new 35's will be popular.
Stay tuned for a more formal test with pictures!
No, thank YOU Bill!!!
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?
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...
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!
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.
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.
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
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 remind Dave he needs to send me mine.
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.
My pleasure Paul -- and thank you for letting me test it out! Folks, it is a great copy of the 35 if you're in the market for one!
Pretty decent for a 35mm Phase One/ Mamiya lens it doesn't really fall apart until the last 5-10% on the edges from what I saw in the IIQ file. Probably as good as it gets... and on a P40+ it would be OK.
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.
Below is a brick wall shot today with an elderly 35N 250th f11. Facial hair abundantly everywhere!
If the optical design of the lens has not changed, it will distort like this.
Saw this effect many years ago, did not care for it, so bought a 45mm to use instead on my M645 Super.
But I shall reveal a secret recipe when the moment is ripe (twirls his moustaches melodramatically).
C1 has corrections for all it's modern lenses for distortion. Actually this is pretty typical of any wide angle. Now is this worse than others not sure ( probably so)but all lenses from even 50mm wider will distort to some effect. This is a very simple fix in C1 and when my new 35D lens comes today I can show with and without corrections. In this case your talking a very old lens design which dates back to the 80's or earlier. This is not the same lens formula as the newer ones and even the previous AF one.
MediumCool: FWIW C1 does corrections for distortion and falloff for the AF version automatically since it can read the EXIF and knows what lens it is.
I downloaded Jack’s RAW file and applied two of the distortion presets available with the file: “Mamiya AF 35mm 35mm f/3.5” and “Phase One Digital AF 35mm 35mm f/3.5 ”. Zero difference = identical distortion characteristics. Progress, or just another name on the lens?
filter size 77mm since birth, pretty much the same dimensions, and the same small rear element (see below for a rear shot of an AF’s rear end compared with the N unit I have). Many lenses when re-designed change shape (get longer, shorter, thicker, thinner); not this particular black duck!
Maybe jack could comment on the rear element size if he noticed it.
I would have thought a re-engineered [larger] rear element would help combat vignetting and reduction of extreme angle rays to the corners of the frame, therebye reducing colour shift. But of course designers also have to consider the highly reflective glass of a sensor cover vs the matte surface of film as an influencing factor in lens design/redesign.
If the new 35 had a different optical layout (a change from the 9 elements/7 groups it has had since its introduction in ), a larger rear element and maybe some special or aspherical glass it would be worth looking at as something very desirable, and new. Methinks emperor PO is wearing at best a thong re this topic.
And less build variation would be nice too.
BTW I was speaking of a distortion solution for those, like me, who use older lenses; I also have a Mamiya 50mm shift and would like a profile for it; in fact I would like to be able to apply any lens profile to any lens I want to, but it seems C1 prevents this if there is no lens EXIF data. An import solution wouldn’t be too hard to implement, and would assist with handling the view cameras lenses I am beginning to acquire.
Jack, I saw your post after I finished writing mine; as I said, non-EXIF lenses are the problem.
But I continue to believe that the fundamental design of the 35mm has not changed in, what, thirty five years. I believe it is under-designed, though that is somewhat fixable through software these days—look at the astonishing distortion figure of the Olympus 17mm micro4/3 lens of nearly 5%!
Last edited by mediumcool; 21st January 2011 at 06:35. Reason: added “micro4/3”
Last edited by mediumcool; 21st January 2011 at 06:49. Reason: added link
But one thing that good software designers maintain as a goal is simplicity, so adding features (unless you’re Microsoft) is generally done carefully and after much consideration.
But a manual distortion control tool a bit more sophisticated than what is already available would be useful.
Putting it in perspective (no pun intended), I paid only $146US for the 35N on eBay, and the freight to Oz was $45, so it’s probably a short-term prospect for me. Or, I may end up doing a lot of stitching with my new 45mm Rodenstock, or even get a 35mm to use on the Toyo 23.
Love digital. Haven’t had so much photo fun for many years!
Agree last thing we want is bloated software that slows the system down.