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!

Vibrations & the Contax 645

fotografz

Well-known member
Oh, and since this thread is becoming an archive of test samples for medium format telephoto lenses, here is a comparison shot between my "vibration free" samples done with the Contax Tele-ApoTessar 350/4 and the Hasselblad FE Tele-Tessar 350/4.

Now it's pretty obvious to me why they went ahead and developed the Apo version...

Comparison Shot.jpg

-Brad

P.S. By "vibration free" I tried to remove all vibration from the image by leaving the mirror up, opening the shutter for a long time and moving a large card out of the optical path for a moment before returning it (without touching the optic). Obviously not how I'd do it in the field, but it would serve as a reference for (near) zero vibration.
I have no doubt that the APO will out perform most any non-APO out there bar none ... and it darned well better. But I must say that I never never gotten as fuzzy a shot with the 350/4 FE as you show either ;) I've owned both, BTW.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
I'll just add that IMO the Mamiya body has a far better dampened shutter than the Contax. I don't currently own the 300, so can't readily post a direct comparison, but don't recall ever getting a not critically sharp image with it the few times I actually used it. Hopefully I can dig around and find a 300 shot at around 1/15th for thread posterity -- even though I generally avoid 1/15th -- or maybe Guy or Bob can post one?
 

BradleyGibson

New member
So...Bradley...in the end..it WAS faulty hardware....
? I'm a bit confused.

What was faulty hardware?

(If you mean the Contax 350/4, I have just the one sample to judge from. If my results are typical, as at least one other poster confirms, then the issues I'm having are endemic to the whole lens line. I'd call that a design flaw, which I guess still amounts to faulty hardware, but picking up another copy of the lens wouldn't resolve the issues I'm seeing.

If you mean the Hasselblad 350/4, pretty much the same thing applies. Not being apochromatic, it is possible that they all behave the way my sample shot shows...)

Either way, no good options if the designs are flawed... I'm holding out a bit of hope that I just had a bad copy of the Contax, but we'll see...

I have no doubt that the APO will out perform most any non-APO out there bar none ... and it darned well better. But I must say that I never never gotten as fuzzy a shot with the 350/4 FE as you show either ;) I've owned both, BTW.
Thanks, Marc--that's good to know. As I mentioned to Peter, there's a small corner of my brain holding out hope that the copy of the lens I had was bad. Were you shooting digitally with your Contax? If so, I can give you my e-mail address if you wouldn't mind sending me a copy of a file shot with the 350, if that makes it easier for you.

As for the apo vs. non-apo, yes I was expecting a difference, but didn't know how much. Now I know! :bugeyes:

I'll just add that IMO the Mamiya body has a far better dampened shutter than the Contax. I don't currently own the 300, so can't readily post a direct comparison, but don't recall ever getting a not critically sharp image with it the few times I actually used it. Hopefully I can dig around and find a 300 shot at around 1/15th for thread posterity -- even though I generally avoid 1/15th -- or maybe Guy or Bob can post one?
Hi, Jack,

The longest I had for the Mamiya was 200mm APO.

Keep in mind that I'm not seeing this issue with my other lenses, just with the 350. I suspect the foot on the 350 is not sufficiently rigid, but I cannot say for sure.

Of the Mamiya lenses I tested critically (150 and especially the 35) neither delivered enough fine detail for me to stay on the platform, unfortunately. So despite not having encountered a vibration issue, (the AFD III's mirror was *exceptionally* well damped--best in the business, I'd say--I can only believe they did a good job with the shutter as well) I still wasn't getting the subtle rendering of detail I was looking for in the final image.

I picked the 1/15th shutter speed for a reason--I know that speeds in this area are particularly demanding--if the right technique can deliver a critically sharp result here, then one can tackle any speed with confidence. I can mask the problem somewhat with higher shutter speeds, but as you know, available light doesn't always give you good choices here.

-Brad
 
Last edited:

gogopix

Subscriber
Victor - compare each of these shots. you say the second is a 'fixed' - I see LOTS of totally blown highlights..
i know you said that before
I went to the image and found no 255 255 255
there WERE many highlights as the sun reflected off the rocks (white)
I think we need to be care in judging blown hlts since jpgs are 8bit and screen can be as low a 6-7 net. The files are 16 bit
to get the texture in the 'blown hlts' you just use th hlt drop in PS and get the 16 bit detail down into the 8 bit range (sort of do a log is what PS is doing)
BTW as I said in a prior post, I just raised the expose to see better the detail in the foliage as Bradley correctly points out the files are a bit dim to see the blur.

best regards
Victor
 

gogopix

Subscriber
I have no doubt that the APO will out perform most any non-APO out there bar none ... and it darned well better. But I must say that I never never gotten as fuzzy a shot with the 350/4 FE as you show either ;) I've owned both, BTW.
In the past I've tried tele tessar vs apo tessar (e.g. 500mm f8) and the 350mm f4 and it was clearly inferior to the SA
I think the SA is better than the 350 FE but I must agree it didnt seen that much fuzzier than the apo contax.

Victor
 

gogopix

Subscriber
MFnLF,

I've only seen Victor's Contax? 350/4 at 100%--happily, his does not appear to have the vibration issues I had, but his shutter speeds were much higher than I'm trying to explore (high shutter speeds mask the issue(s) I'm exploring). Nevertheless I couldn't evaluate critial sharpness on Victor's subject matter.

Thanks, everyone,
-Brad
There are vibration issues but maybe more 'system than mirror. with 2s mirror up at 1/125 you can see it
Since I use for wildlife I always want high shutter because of subject movement (birds jiggle sometimes!)

Overall for wildlife I am waiting for the R-10. There is nothing Like the Leica modular and now my only alternative would be a Canon with adapter. I am happy temporarily with the R9/DMR and the Kodak 14MP I have.

What I REALLY want is a way to use my MF with the Visoflex lenses! (talking to some people about a Viso to Contax custom adapter.

In the meantime I thing your sample Contax 350/4 was 'the exception that proves the rule"

just a bad copy

Regards
Victor

Victor
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Hi, Jack,

Of the Mamiya lenses I tested critically (150 and especially the 35) neither delivered enough fine detail for me to stay on the platform, unfortunately.
I assume that was an older 150 f3.5 and not the 150/2.8D. You no doubt gave up too soon ;). The new 150/2.8D is perhaps the best lens I have ever used period. The older 150/3.5 is known to exhibit sample variation -- the best ones are excellent from about f5.6 up and the worst maybe equal the average 35, which is arguably the poorest lens corner-to-corner in the Mamiya AF line-up. (45 AF is very sharp centrally, but even the best ones I've seen are poor in the corners on full frame sensors, though the bad is mostly cropped out for the 1.3 crop sensors.) With the 35 there is also sample variation, but even the best never quite approach the other primes in the center of field and remain marginal in the corners on full frame backs -- IOW the best ones fall into the usable or "nice to have for when you really need that focal" category.

Best of luck going forward,
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I will shoot one with the 300mm at 1/15th which BTW i never have any issue with but I will run a test. Frankly I think the vibration issue between focal and leaf shutter with Mirror lockup with a slight delay until shutter release is nothing but I am staying out of this dog fight. LOL
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Just looking at some results I don't really see anything between the shutter speeds that is a vibration issue. Nothing really to post actually
 

PeterA

Well-known member
i know you said that before
I went to the image and found no 255 255 255
there WERE many highlights as the sun reflected off the rocks (white)
I think we need to be care in judging blown hlts since jpgs are 8bit and screen can be as low a 6-7 net. The files are 16 bit
to get the texture in the 'blown hlts' you just use th hlt drop in PS and get the 16 bit detail down into the 8 bit range (sort of do a log is what PS is doing)
BTW as I said in a prior post, I just raised the expose to see better the detail in the foliage as Bradley correctly points out the files are a bit dim to see the blur.

best regards
Victor


hahhahah-:)

In the first shot you actually have the highlights in the rocks ( see left hand side as you look at images ) in the second shot lifting exposure to get detail in foliage sees the rocks go white..is all I am saying

this is why I have invested in a bunch of Lee filters recently btw...I am enjoying shooting as much as possible withing 4-6 stops of EV and NOT needing to FUSS with slider this and slider that in C1 or Phocus etc etc..

sure software can help a lot in a pinch but I prefer not to have to over rely on PS stuff..

I am slowly getting into landscape - it is a totally different mindset for shooting new to me....much more technical and fussy.

and I can understand landscape shooters lusting after EVERY megapixel they can get their hands on.

pete
 

gogopix

Subscriber
I thought I would go the filter route too. I have a mount set ofr 95 and 105mm and about a grand of Sigh-Ray custom filters

They sit in their original pouches, unused. 16 bit, 12 stops and PS just make it too easy.
Oh well, maybe I am even more of a collector than I thought!

regards
Victor

PS When I have the time though I want to compare results. I am going to trek Mt Blanc in June and may take the filters with me.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I don't think my results are really on par since they are 1/15 at 5.6 and the second at 1/8 at F8 it is more a DOF issue than a vibration one. I want to test more just to be sure with more light so F stop is not a issue

FF image 1/8 at F8

Than the crop of it

Than 1/15 at 5.6

Than I shot one outside and saw no change at all between the shutter speed so need to try it again
 

Dale Allyn

New member
Must be a day of for love, Guy. We have a pair of alligator lizards engaged in the same activity in our yard today.

Boy, that first crop (second image) looks pretty good. The last crop looks less sharp regardless of DoF to me, but still not horrible. On my display it looks like a bit of movement of some type.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
I looked through my files, and cannot easily find any from the 300 at under 1/125th, so I am of no help.

Guy, your lizards at 1/8th looks pretty darn good, but the 1/15th is worse. Clearly movement from something, either the camera or the reptiles. My historical experience with 1/15th leads me to assume the camera, and why I generally avoid 1/15th ;).

And FWIW, 1/15th is problematic even with large format, where all the lenses have leaf shutters, so it is not a leaf or focal-plane specific problem. I *NEVER* used 1/15th (and rarely even 1/30th) with LF as I wanted critically sharp images, so almost always stopped down more or added filters to get at least to 1/8th -- and 1/4 was even better. (If the period of motion is less than 1/4 the duration of the exposure then it rarely shows in the image; where the period of motion is equal to the shutter speed, the result is at its worst; and of course as the shutter gets faster, only corresponding fractions of the period of motion are captured. For most shutters, my experience -- meaning my gut and nothing empirical to support it -- tells me that a full period of vibration is somewhere between 1/15th and 1/30th.)

One last tip --- if I have to shoot at 1/15th with MF or DSLR, I rest my left hand on top of the lens at the lens/camera junction, hanging the weight of my arm on it. Being dead-weight somewhere forward or behind the center of support this dampens vibrations appreciably, but of course you need to keep perfectly still when doing it. And because I am not always perfectly still, I take multiple frames and usually one out of three will be pretty good.

All FWIW,
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Hate to have to agree with you which is worse than taking two shots a day in my belly. But can't avoid the needle here 1/15 does suck. Looking at some tree shots looks like 1/15 is just not so hot even 1/8 and 1/4 seem better.

In order 1/4,1/15 and 1/60
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I agree also with the hand or a sandbag idea which i brought up way earlier in this thread. I honestly think the leaf /focal thing is not even in the cards issue.

BTW all mirror lockup with 4 second self timer delay as i always do and find the handiest of techniques
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Guy,

Do me a favor and try one of my old long tele wildlife tricks at 1/15th. Use continuous drive mode without MLU or delay, but with your hand resting as I mention above, and take 6 or so frames in succession as fast as your MF outfit allows. I suspect one or two will be enough better than the rest to be acceptable...

;),
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I will try that sometime today . Have a shoot actually later on and bringing the 300mm with me . I should find a few minutes to try that. Honestly I do damn well with this thing on a monopod or handheld all the time and just letting it rip although not near the 1/15 shutter speed.

BTW there is a difference between my P25 + and P30 + that something we have talked about with the different sensor sizes 6.8 and 9 micron. I do have to add more clarity with the 6.8 to come close to the 9 micron sensor. Interesting to see the slight change between these sensors. C1 needs to make the clarity settings a option for setting it at default that you like. We need MORE default control so when you bring in images these settings are already there like sharpness for instance. We need to bitch a little more on this one to Phase
 

PeterA

Well-known member
Jack - that has to be one your most interesting and thoughtful food for thought posts re technique - thanks mate.

Guy - appreciate your examples T@

I am inspired to shoot and post a few test shots on the weekend myself! mayeb a few different lenses too.
 
Top