No vignetting after applying the LrC correction that I mentioned above or processing with Phocus (raw files).
Last edited:
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!
Hasselblad XCD 28P
- Thread starter alextsayun
- Start date
usm
Well-known member
tried the files in Phocus 374. With the lens corrections (no LCC) there is a very little magenta cast. When adding the LCC with JUST the "remote cast" button on it is perfect.
But when the lens is also build for this "old" sensor it should work without the LCC!
usm
Well-known member
sorry, wrong computer but same thing with 375...
FloatingLens
Well-known member
FloatingLens
Well-known member
907X and XCD 4/28P, if anybody is contemplating this duo.
Last edited:
areallygrumpyoldsod
New member
I consider D+15, V+92, 50 - +8 distortion leaves too much barrel distortion for me. But while +15 is better it is still not the best.
However, I consider using the lens profile for the HCD 4/28 with distortion at 100 and vignetting 200 and also manual distortion +56 - this gave me equal brightness across the image and almost no distortion. See attached but ignore the Transform settings - these just reflect the fact I had lousy alignment in my set up.
All examples are in LRC 3FR RAW files
First uncorrected:
Then with my manual only settings D+15, V+92 etc.
AND then with HCD 4/28 profile and a small additional manual vignette adjustment
MGrayson
Subscriber and Workshop Member
Well, *I* like the 28mm focal length more than the 30mm. I'd prefer 26 or 24, but even the slight extra FoV of the 28 is a plus.
The 21 *is* too wide for a lot of images, but 100MP allows for quite a bit of cropping - I never felt pixel-limited at 37.5MP. I'll use the 28 as my walk-around lens for a while, but might go back to the 21.
FloatingLens
Well-known member
I think one of the difficulties with the 28P not producing the perfect acuity like the 21 is due to the focussing stepper motor. I find it difficult to be sure through the viewfinder of the X1D to nail the best DoF even if it is a rather long focal length at F4. Essentially, one has to find the optimal focus point 1/3 into the scene and check everything in-between to achieve best DoF. My guess is the individual steps of the focussing mechanism are rather coarse, which makes you think the center is in focus but overall one has not nailed the best DoF compromise. This is turn reduces the overall impression of sharpness throughout the scene. YMMV, I am assuming very demanding work.
In urban settings this might not matter as much, but in landscape it does. On the other hand, the 28P lens elements are so tiny that the AF is rather quickly done and the camera confirms focus.
Given the above, I prefer to go MF with the 28P for landscape scenes.
With respect to focal length, I am a 90 deg. diagonal AoV guy, so the 28P suits me well and further cropping adds even more flexibility.
I think Hasselblads focal length choices are spot-on for the intended uses they advertise. The 28P is not for everybody, I guess.
In urban settings this might not matter as much, but in landscape it does. On the other hand, the 28P lens elements are so tiny that the AF is rather quickly done and the camera confirms focus.
Given the above, I prefer to go MF with the 28P for landscape scenes.
With respect to focal length, I am a 90 deg. diagonal AoV guy, so the 28P suits me well and further cropping adds even more flexibility.
I think Hasselblads focal length choices are spot-on for the intended uses they advertise. The 28P is not for everybody, I guess.
Last edited:
MGrayson
Subscriber and Workshop Member
I have also noticed the 28 AF doing a poor job, even at infinity. But I've been using magnified manual focus check ever since sensors got to be more than 24MP. Still, it's surprising, given that mirrorless is always supposed to AF perfectly
.
tenmangu81
Well-known member
As far as I'm concerned, I am using more often the manual focusing, as it seems to me more reliable than the AF. Of course, this is less convenient when you have MF by wire. But for the 45P and the V series lenses, it works quite well.
tenmangu81
Well-known member
Matt, is the 28P MF by wire or mechanical ?
Thanks
Thanks
MGrayson
Subscriber and Workshop Member
It's by wire, but the response varies smoothly enough that I don't have a problem rocking back and forth over true focus. I'll try a few other XCD lenses - I don't have the 45P or either of the V lenses, alas.
Ok. Quick non-scientific test done. The 21/4, 45/3.5, 90/3.2, and 120/4 have very sensitive slow focus bands. Turn the barrel slowly, and nothing seems to happen. Speed up a bit, and the focus jumps. They are annoying. The 28P is much easier to manually focus, though its response is not linear.
I've never had problems with AF on the 21, 45, or 90. If time is of the essence, I'll AF and shoot, and then try for a second shot with MF. Focus on the 120/4, AF or MF, is hopeless. I haven't used the 135 combo enough to judge.
Last edited:
nazdravanul
Member
I wish I could see a 28 vs 30 f8 sharpness test on an x2d . Hasselblad’s own MTF data doesn’t look too encouraging ….
I did one when I first got the 28P, it was against my friend's 30mm. What we both gleaned from that was that my friend's 30 is completely out of spec, the 28 made a mockery of it. As far as I know, he sent the lens in to Hasselblad.
MGrayson
Subscriber and Workshop Member
I no longer have the lens, my XCD 30 images are from Banff, and it's a long drive to do the comparisons.
They are exceedingly sharp, but then so are the 21, 45, and 90 images.