Hasselblad X2D and Leica S3 - Update 2: A difficult focus

[MGrayson]

Ok. repeating tests.
X2D, 90 - 3 (hunted), 0.25, 0.25, 0.22, another hunt. No, I have no idea where that earlier 0.5 came from. You know what they say, "A man with one data point knows the answer. A man with two data points is never sure." I've refined my technique and will no doubt do numerous tests that will show what everybody who has used both cameras has experienced directly.

 

[MGrayson]

Ok, 5 trials each. Raw data destroyed. Muahahah!
Abstract: 21 and 45 faster. 90 faster when it doesn't hunt. 120 and 135, who knows?

X1D
21 - 0.5, 0.6, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7
45 - 0.35, 0.4, 0.35, 0.3, 0.35
90 - 0.3, 0.4, 0.35, 0.4, 0.35
120 - 0.6, 0.4, 0.6, 0.4, 0.7
135 - hunt, 0.6, hunt, 0.9, hunt, 0.1

X2D
21 - 0.4, 0.45, 0.4, 0.3, 0.35
45 - 0.25, 0.25, 0.3, 0.2,0.25
90 - 3 , 0.25, 0.25, 0.22, 3
120 - 0.7, 0.5, 0.45, 0.45, 0.8,
135 - hunted almost every time. No idea why.

 

[jng]

Ok, 5 trials each. Raw data destroyed. Muahahah!
Abstract: 21 and 45 faster. 90 faster when it doesn't hunt. 120 and 135, who knows?

X1D
21 - 0.5, 0.6, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7
45 - 0.35, 0.4, 0.35, 0.3, 0.35
90 - 0.3, 0.4, 0.35, 0.4, 0.35
120 - 0.6, 0.4, 0.6, 0.4, 0.7
135 - hunt, 0.6, hunt, 0.9, hunt, 0.1

X2D
21 - 0.4, 0.45, 0.4, 0.3, 0.35
45 - 0.25, 0.25, 0.3, 0.2,0.25
90 - 3 , 0.25, 0.25, 0.22, 3
120 - 0.7, 0.5, 0.45, 0.45, 0.8,
135 - hunted almost every time. No idea why.

Matt,

By my eyeballing of the data (who needs Excel when you have eyeballs?), median times for the 21, 45 and 90 appear to drop by 30-50% with the X2D. I wonder whether the hunting behavior with the longer lenses might change by changing the size of the AF focus target? Just a thought...

John

 

[MGrayson]

Matt,

By my eyeballing of the data (who needs Excel when you have eyeballs?), median times for the 21, 45 and 90 appear to drop by 30-50% with the X2D. I wonder whether the hunting behavior with the longer lenses might change by changing the size of the AF focus target? Just a thought...

John

Good point. The non-hunting was on a straight column edge. The hunting was a more complex scene. And the lighting was indoors. This testing stuff is hard.

Bernhard Riemann, the most influential mathematician of the 19th century, though not the most famous (he founded basically every field of modern mathematics, ok, Henri Poincaré did some too), really wanted to be an experimental physicist. He sucked at experiments. He's my patron saint.

 

[jng]

Bernhard Riemann, the most influential mathematician of the 19th century, though not the most famous (he founded basically every field of modern mathematics, ok, Henri Poincaré did some too), really wanted to be an experimental physicist. He sucked at experiments. He's my patron saint.

LOL. I remember being in a physics seminar a few years ago, where the experimentalists were mocking the poor theorist who was struggling to set up the projector...

 

[baudolino]

I'm not sure what the alternatives to LR there are. C1 has historically not supported the S, but that may have changed. I ended up with Adobe because they always support every camera. I like both Leica's own S3 profile and Cobalt's better than the Adobe profiles, but these are just starting points.

The S3 is very well supported in C1 now - the ProStandard profiles are great.

 

[MGrayson]

The S3 is very well supported in C1 now - the ProStandard profiles are great.

On the one hand, that's great, as C1 has always had my favorite color tools. On the other hand, half of my system is still not supported. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[KurtKamka]

Have you tried changing the size of the AF point size with the X2D? It's possible that could reduce the amount of hunting with the longer lenses. Perhaps if it is on small, it might find it difficult to find enough contrast quickly to make a focus decision. With the larger AF point size, it samples a larger area which could help it find something to focus on quickly. It also could be struggling to find enough contrast difference in the target you have set up with the longer lenses. Just a thought.

 

[Paratom]

Kurt (or others) - In FF I like 28mm for groups of people, scenes, landscape etc.
I often carry 28 and 50mm for FF. 50 for details, short distance portraits (kids, dog, others), or some landscape scenes.
I also liked the little longer 70mm of the S.
Now I think the 38 Hassy is like 30mm in FF. would be fine for me.
The 55 is like 42 in FF. Seems more like something in between 35 and 50 in FF world.

So here is my question - do you find 38 and 55 somewhat too close together?
What's your use case with the 38 and/or the 55?
How do the focal lengths work for you? Does the 55 feel more like a 35 or more like a 50?

 

[KurtKamka]

Hi Tom - It is sort of a conundrum. I picked up both the 38 and 55 as I'm not certain which I'll actually use most often. I'm mostly a 21, 35, 50 shooter in 35mm (with the 135 XCD for longer compressed landscapes ... similar to using the 120 quite often on the S). So far, after a few weeks, I love how the 55 is in a nice space between the 35 and 50. But, after receiving the 38 a few days ago, I'm finding that the 38 offers an excellent, but different choice for hikes and other on-the-go activities like hiking and street. So for now, they both stay as I believe that I'll find enough of a rationale for using both. Also, for maximum depth of field for landscapes, the 38 might offer just a bit more maximum depth of field before diffraction sets in. Nevertheless, either lens is outstanding and you really wouldn't be making a bad decision in choosing just one.

 

[Paratom]

thank you Since they are not available right now I have some time I can see how 55 is quite flexible focal length.
I wonder what else we will see from Hassy in regards of new lenses. Maybe a 24mm and an updated 120 or 135?

 

[MGrayson]

Would it have killed Hasselblad to have produced a 24mm and 35mm like any sane MF maker ? The 21 is amazing, but it's hard to "see" that wide when walking around. I'm getting better at it, but I was a long-time 24mm user and really miss that. My favorite M lens was the 28 Cron, so an XCD 35 would have been perfect. Maybe the 38 will do, but credit card shock after the last lens binge (and lack of availability) may keep me safe.

 

[Photon42]

My take is still that they will come out with a 24 "V" lens. Fits well into their concept of occupying the gaps in the existing focus length line up.

 

[Geoff]

Would it have killed Hasselblad to have produced a 24mm and 35mm like any sane MF maker ? The 21 is amazing, but it's hard to "see" that wide when walking around. I'm getting better at it, but I was a long-time 24mm user and really miss that. My favorite M lens was the 28 Cron, so an XCD 35 would have been perfect. Maybe the 38 will do, but credit card shock after the last lens binge (and lack of availability) may keep me safe.

A guess here is that the 38mm worked in the parameters/dimensions they had set up, and that the 35 would have been larger/heavier? So they compromised on the 3mm, hoping the customers would go along.... or... they are planning (say) a 28-32mm, and didn't want to get too close? Just thoughts tho, no real info.

 

[Photon42]

I'd rather think a 35 would have been to close to the 30. I enjoy my 38 V-ery much and it works great in conjunction with the seemingly not too much loved (older) 65. That's about my preferred combination on the 35mm format (28/50).

 

[Paratom]

What do you not like about the 65?

 

[baudolino]

Interestingly, the new XCD-V lenses are equivalent, in terms of focal length, to the Pentax 31/43/70 Limited lenses. This was a very useful, compact and excellent Trinity in the FF world. Especially great for people photos, providing a slightly different and perhaps more "intimate" perspective than the usual combinations in/derived from the FF world.

 

[Photon42]

What do you not like about the 65?

I like it very much. It just doesn't seem to receive as much love from the community. It is sharp, pretty fast focussing and works well with an extension tube. Does not really need the hood. With 700g thereabouts it is a bit on the heavy side for X lenses, though.

 

[peterm1]

After using the 21m and 38V for a while, I was missing something between them - the 38V feels a bit long for me, and the 21mm too wide, so when I found a good deal on a 30mm XCD I picked one up. The split between the 30mm and 55V makes more sense to me - the 38mm and 55mm seem a bit close. So my small walk around kit will probably be the 30mm plus 55mm. For a really small one lens general lens I will probably continue to use the 38V.

 

[Paratom]

For now 30 + 65 has become my set of choice. I don't use 45 or 90 at the moment. The 80 is great but really big and heavy.
I might add thee 55 and then go 30 + 55 for reduced weight and faster AF. When using 30+55 I could see to also use 90 more often again.