Hasselblad HC 28 vs CZ 40

[Woody Campbell]

I finally got a Hasselbad CZ Distagon 40 and a CF lens adapter. The lens fits onto the H3D via the adapter with no problem. There is a somewhat stiff lever on the adapter to cock the shutter - the camera reminds you to cock the shutter if you haven't. Autofocus indicators appear to work accurately as you move the focus ring. You can compose and meter wide open - the camera knows what f-stop you've set, but you have to transfer the shutter speed from the camera to the lens. Altogether the ergonomics aren't bad, especially on a tripod.

I ran comparison tests with the HC 28 out my dining room window - this is a brick wall torture test. All exposures on a tripod, ISO 50, f11 at 1/60, daylight WB. I processed normally in Phocus (which means a sharpening setting of 350). I've composed to put the microwave dishes in the upper right of both images.

Here are the full images.

28mm
View attachment 3675

40mm
View attachment 3676

Center crops

28mm
View attachment 3677

40mm
View attachment 3678

[Continued on the next post]

 

[Woody Campbell]

Here are the corner crops:

28mm:
View attachment 3679

40mm:
View attachment 3680

40mm with -8 red cyan CA correction in Lightroom
View attachment 3681

 

[Graham Mitchell]

I must say I prefer the Zeiss, especially in the centre.

 

[Woody Campbell]

A few observations: both lenses are sensational performers. The 40 has a slight edge in accutance and contrast at f11 - but this may be merely as a result of the fact the Fuji faced a larger challenge with the 28mm focal length. The minor CA exhibited by the 40 is "tame" - it can be corrected without causing other artifacts in the image. So too with linear distortion - it's easily corrected in Photoshop. The 28 has neither CA nor linear distortion straight out of Phocus, probably because of the corrections applied by the software.

On all three corner crops note the color moire in the railing - I had moire correction turned off in Phocus.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

The 40mm looks to have more bite to the images

 

[gogopix]

Very nice and surpring comparison. Thought the 28 was more detailed than showing.

well another test may be to get the scene in the same FOV. Here, from same POV the 40 has almost 50% more pixels of information; for every 7 PX of 28 there are 10 PX of 40

that said the difference is a lot more than I thought. ALthough 28mm (18mm 135 equivalent) is an intriguing FOV the 25mm equiv of the 40mm is pretty wide.

Also, Woody, do you work in the theater?

'right'??

as in "stage right" correct

regards
Victor

 

[BJNY]

Thank you, Woody.
Informative.
Any chance you can post a 28mm file without DAC to see before & after?
Billy

 

[BJNY]

On all three corner crops note the color moire in the railing - I had moire correction turned off in Phocus.

Does turning moiré correction on fix it?
If not, then would a multi-shot back handle it?

 

[Woody Campbell]

Very nice and surpring comparison. Thought the 28 w

Also, Woody, do you work in the theater?

'right'??

as in "stage right" correct

regards
Victor

I was surprised as well - I'll run the 28 again. I've had trouble with right and left all of my life!

 

[Woody Campbell]

Here are corner crops with and without CA correction in DAC for the 28. This is very interesting: uncorrected the CA is very, very slight. But the uncorrected image doesn't exhibit the color "moire". The corrected image does. So the "moire" appears actually to be an artifact of the DAC CA correction. The moire slider in Phocus does nothing to it. Conclusion - turn off the CA correction in Phocus, at least for the 28. The HC 28 is amazingly well corrected before the software reaches it. By the way these are screen shots from Phocus - I've done nothing to optimize their appearance.

Crop without CA correction (note very slight red fringing):

View attachment 3683

Crop with CA correction turned on:

View attachment 3684

 

[BJNY]

Woody with Way too much gear,
Do you have a Digitar 35mm to throw in the comparison mix?
Billy

 

[David Klepacki]

Hi Woody,

Which version of the 40 is this? IF or FLE?

 

[mark1958]

This is what I was going to ask for. I tried a 40mm on my old H2 with leaf back and thought it did not do as well as my 35mm HC. Now i have the 28mm HC. I am using an H3DII-31 now and slightly cropped sensor.

OOPS i see you posted this now

Thank you, Woody.
Informative.
Any chance you can post a 28mm file without DAC to see before & after?
Billy

 

[Jack]

Amazing difference Woody, thanks for posting these. That 40 looks like a winner :thumbs:

 

[Woody Campbell]

Woody with Way too much gear,
Do you have a Digitar 35mm to throw in the comparison mix?
Billy

I wish - don't nudge me that direction!

 

[Woody Campbell]

Hi Woody,

Which version of the 40 is this? IF or FLE?

The IF.

 

[gogopix]

i have the 40mm IF as well as the digitar, but for alpa.

is there a mount for hassey glass on the alpa?

Victor

 

[BJNY]

Thank you, Woody.
Informative.
Any chance you can post a 28mm file without DAC to see before & after?
Billy

I'm more curious to see with the distortion correction turned off and on for comparison.

 

[mark1958]

OK if this is the IF lens... I understand the differences. THe comparison I made was with the version before that one---- and a lot less money. Son and a few others have always been a big fan of that lens.. but boy is it pricey...

 

[fotografz]

Shouldn't the test be done between a HC/35 and the V40?

A MF28 is a heck of a lot harder to correct than a 35 or 40.

In my controlled studio bench tests, the HC35 is the equal to my V40CFE @ f/8 ... so, I'm sure the 40IF would beat it ... and hopefully would at that price.