Menu
What's new
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!

Phase One Lens Updates

Guy Mancuso

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Anders_HK said:
2.8 and 2.0 is a difference in DOF and light to camera... :toocool:
Click to expand...
The difference in DOF in the real world is millimeters. And really can you see that difference in a image on its own. If it was a F2 add 2k more( if were lucky) and another half a pound of weight. Sure it maybe nice to have F2 but there are penalties as well. Also the whole lens formula changes and at those wide F stops a whole barrel full of lens astigmatism will come in to play.

Would I want one sure but this 110 2.8 is nothing to sneeze at.
 
Bob

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
The 110 LS has turned into my standard lens for people in studio.
I am looking for longer for head shots, the 240 looks interesting for that or maybe a 150.
too many toxic-to-wallet options here.
-bob
 
lance_schad

lance_schad

Workshop Member
vjbelle said:
Could you please elaborate on this? Why would there be specials on this lens?

Victor
Click to expand...
David Klepacki said:
And yet, Contax was able to produce a really nice Zeiss T* 45-90 for around $3k on their 645 camera.
Click to expand...
I know I wish the Contax was still produced. It still is a great platform and excellent optics. There are still a great deal of people using it as a digital platform. We have received quite a number of IQ upgrades since it's introduction.

Yes and Hasselblad has a 35-90mm that sells for $7,495 that features corrections through their system only and does not cover the full 645 frame..

Lance
 
C

coulombic

New member
David Klepacki said:
And yet, Contax was able to produce a really nice Zeiss T* 45-90 for around $3k on their 645 camera.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don't get it. I really wish they'd bring a good 45-90mm to the market, though. All of these LS primes are great, but a truly versatile "normal" lens would be tremendously appreciated.

Does anyone have any experience using Contax-to-Mamiya adapters? Is there any issue focusing to infinity with them? Is the Contax image circle large enough to fill full-frame 645?
 
A

Audii-Dudii

Active member
coulombic said:
Does anyone have any experience using Contax-to-Mamiya adapters? Is there any issue focusing to infinity with them? Is the Contax image circle large enough to fill full-frame 645?
Click to expand...
The (rare) Mamiya lens-on-a-Contax body adapter only works because the diameter of the Contax lens mount is wide enough to allow the narrower Mamiya lens mount to be recessed slightly into the mirror box and thus maintain infinity focus.

Going the other way, the difference in lens registers for the Mamiya and Contax bodies (less than 1mm) doesn't provide enough room to fabricate an adapter that will allow a Contax lens to be mounted on a Mamiya body and, of course, there's also the problem of figuring out some way to control the Contax lens' electronic aperture. In theory, it can be done -- where there's a will, there's an inheritance! -- but it will be neither easy nor inexpensive.
 
ondebanks

ondebanks

Member
Graham Mitchell said:
What are the max apertures of these lenses? Just curious.
Click to expand...
Me too - very curious.

The leaf shutter must impose a major constraint. These fast LS shutters are all the modern equivalent of a size #0 shutter, right? That's a 24mm iris bottleneck that all the light must squeeze through.

Now optical tricks like magnification of the entrance pupil by a strongly convex front group can get you so far, but I would be astonished if the 240mm lens comes in faster than f3.5. Scaling from the aperture achievement of the Rollei Tele-Xenar 180/2.8 would yield a 240/3.7 lens. This being a longer lens, 250/3.5 should be achievable. At a price!

Ray
 
Last edited:
C

coulombic

New member
ondebanks said:
That's an odd question. Why would Contax 645 lenses designed for the full-frame Contax 645 camera NOT have an image circle large enough to fill full-frame 645?!

Ray
Click to expand...
Well, being that I don't actually know much about the Contax system, the question was akin to asking whether or not a Hasselblad lens would fill a full frame 645. Plus, I seemed to have mentally skipped over the "645" thing. My bad.
 
T

Tim Ernst

New member
"Schneider Kreuznach 120 mm Macro TS should be volume shipping by June"

Anyone have updates for any of these lenses?
 
G

goesbang

Member
When is the message going to get through that the older designed-for-film lenses just don't cut it for current generation digi backs? As a rule of thumb, if your sensor has a pixel pitch of 6.8microns or less, you are going to need digi lenses. Even then, there are some misnomers such as the Schneider 35mm Apo-Sironar digital, which is a film-era design, rebadged "digital". It is only suitable for sensors of 9micron or larger (If I'm not mistaken, P25 era sensors)
All those so-called "legendary" lenses are just that, legends.
Probably not what you want to hear if you have a bagful of these lenses and just ordered an IQ back, but c'est la vie.
This is why the likes of Hassy and Phase are suddenly releasing a flurry of new lenses - they have to!
Cheers,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top