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!

35 and 45mm lenses on DF/IQ180?

tashley

Subscriber Member
Hi all,

Anyone tried either the Phase or Mammy versions of either of these on the 180? My 28mm doesn't cut it really, it runs into diffraction before it out resolves it's own design weaknesses and I need something wider than the 80mm options but that can be used on the DF body. I am particularly interested in edge sharpness, and in where people think diffraction limits set in: I would like DOF more or less three metres to infinity, like I can get with tthe Schneider 35XL but on a body that allows for no LCC AND FOR AF.

All opinions most gratefully received!

Best
Tim
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Hi Woody,
I missed that thread, some great shots... But I am after info on the SLR body lenses from Phase and Mammy in 35 & 45 mm focal lengths...
 

Bill Caulfeild-Browne

Well-known member
Tim, I have been using the 45 mm on my P65+ and am very impressed by it. I used to have the 35 mm too but sold it when I realized I hardly ever used it. (I like my 28 mm better.)

But your question is with respect to the IQ180; as of tomorrow I will be give you a valid opinion as it's trade-in day!

Bill
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
I've been using the 35, it is my widest DF lens. It's fine for prints up to say 24", but don't look too close at 100%. IOW, it works and the final print is certainly acceptable, but it aint in the same league as the LS or newest Tech lenses. The 40HR kicks it's butt from my local bar to your local pub! To put it in UK parlance, it's Aston-Martin v Morris...
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Thanks chaps,
isn't it interesting how few answers there are to this question though... I guess some gear combinations are less frequent than one might imagine.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
My 35D is pretty good and tested with the 180 and 35XL on a Cambo which is certainly better and more detailed. Corners are softer than the 35 XL . It is pretty good though to a 20 x 30 but yes I would rather be shooting the 35 XL.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Tim, the longer answer for me is this: While my 28 was good, even on the P65+ I needed f16 to get the best corners, and even then the very corners were marginal. I regularly cropped it to about a 30/31 FoV to eliminate them. I had a decent 35 and sold it when I bought the 28 which turned out to be a mistake -- the 28 is physically large and the 35 is small, and the 35 wasn't that much worse than the 28. The 28 has better contrast, but then almost too much contrast. Anyway, because of the size of the 28, it was almost never in my bag when I wanted to go that wide. By contrast, the 35 was always in my bag. Back to this in a second.

I also had a very good 45, and why I elected to sell the 35 when I got the 28, but again the extreme corners of the 45 were just out -- usable in print but not critical. So when I got my 55LS, I realized the 45 was pretty close to and definitely not as good as the 55LS. But if I sold it, my "gap" was 31 (28) to 55. So I hunted for another good 35. I had to go through three of them but I found a great one. (The latter Mamiya manufactures seem to be as good as the Phase branded versions, but again you need to test.) Now that I had it, this one was almost as good as the 45, and better in the corners cropped to the same total FoV as the 45; and then from a practical PoV it was more useful than the 28. So this is the longer story as to why the 45 and 28 were sold and the 35 resides as my wide. Now when I need more critical wide performance from the DF, I can stitch with the 55 or 80 LS in a pinch. Of course the gold standard is just to pull out the Tech camera -- the 40HR-W is a phenomenal optic, even on the IQ180, and even shifted 15mm...
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Btw Tim I have that test between the 35d and 35xl. Maybe I will load the raws up so you can download them
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Thanks Guy... I am trying to shoot a scene that I have wanted to get the right capture of for years and my Hartblei rotator is damned nearly good enough but too soft on one side, though the tilt does let me get the DOF exactly right. If the 35 or 45 were stellar I'd get one but increasingly I suspect that for anything wider than the 55 area, a tech cam is the only way to go for really large prints...
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
The 45 is a good lens also but so close to my 55ls not worth getting. My choice next is a tech cam with a 35 or 32 and it most likely will be a Cambo unless I can get a screaming and I mean screaming deal on something else. Lol

But honestly for me I see no reason to shoot tech past my 55 going up all those LS lenss are just so close to the equivalent tech lenses. My biggest concern as a shooter is slowing me down and effectively losing my love for composing in a finder. I'm just A much better shooter with a DF in my hands
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
This is the scene I need to get, when the players and the light are right. I am as far back as I can get (fence behind) and I need full focus from the very foreground to infinity, which with a bit of crop to 6674 pix square I have here. In fact the original shot was sharp throughout were it not for the soft right hand side of the Hartblei. I could get this shot with the 35XL but I prefer the 45mm focal length for the framing and perspective and I don't think I could get enough DOF with a non tilted lens of that focal length without running into diffraction. I guess the 40HR w on a tilt board is the answer...
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Probably so with this extreme . Your pretty dang close to subject and here tilt would pull it off from foreground to background.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
But honestly for me I see no reason to shoot tech past my 55 going up all those LS lenss are just so close to the equivalent tech lenses.
Agreed, but they don't tilt and the right tech-cam/lens combos do.

This is the scene I need to get,
And for that scene Tim, forward tilt and a bit of drop would be the perfect answer. And the Arca RM3D -- or possibly Cambo depending on how wide you need -- can supply appropriate amounts of both...
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I know but thinking maybe the new 120 from scheider on the DF might be worth exploring. Need To see if I can't get a lens to test this out
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Thanks guys,

The Hartblei did a sturdy job under the circumstances though - such a useful lens to have for tight corners even if far from perfect. Astonishingly sharp on centre, too. Nonetheless, I think I have to make some serious buy and sell decisions now so that when the 'light is right' I get the shot I need...
 
Top