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 205FCC + Sinar eMotion

woodyspedden

New member
That one is fine. It is the CFE version which is the one I use. The best IQ is the IF version which costs an additional arm ... over and above the arm-and-leg that the CFE one costs :eek:

Using a CFV, I'm not sure how much you gain since the image area is cropped 1.5X on a 200 and 500 camera.

I think Woody has the 40 IF version, so maybe he could better enlighten us.

I want to get the 40 IF because I also use V lenses on my full frame 645 H3D-II/39, and edge sharpness does count there more than with the CFV.

If you go for a CFE, contact me and I'll sell you my mint one ... then hunt down a IF version for myself. :angel:
I just received my 40 IF but have not yet had a chance to use it as I have been on vacation in Pennsylvania and did not take my MF rig. However I will be taking some shots to post. Unfortunately I have only the CFE 16 MPx back so I won't be stressing the resolution limits of the lens. I paid the extra bucks for the IF in anticipation of a higher pixel density back sometime in the future. I haven't shot with the CFE version and don't have access to one so I can't do any comparisons.

Woody
 

PSon

Active member
Marc,
Yes it was Jim and his Navy Yard shots that made me repurchased the CFV back again. I am not sure I should be glad with his beautiful works. The images were taken from a different perspective than we normally see and I congratulate Jim. I really like the square format from this sensor and the Zeiss glass renders beautiful skin tone.

Woody,
I just want to let you know that I am so happy to see you traded the Leica 2.8/15 for your newly acquired Hasselblad 40 mm CFE IF. Both of these lens are rare items but the CFE IF has so much to give you especially with bigger sensor becoming more available as we move forward to the future. On the other hand for me it was the Leica 2.8/15 that led me to cut the first mirror in 2005 and now it's the regular thing to do.

Best Regards,
-Son
 

BradleyGibson

New member
Hi jlm,

Yes there are several versions of the Zeiss 40mm.

Distagon T* 40/4 C
Distagon T* 40/4 CF
Distagon T* 40/4 CFE FLE
Distagon T* 40/4 CFE IF

The IF has an incredible MTF (very good image quality) but does suffer from high distortion. It's markedly different from its predecessor the FLE in IQ (and in price). I have the IF, so let me know if there are any questions I can answer for you about it.

Best regards,
Brad
 
A

AlaBill

Guest
Brad...

When you say the 40 CFE IF is "markedly different" would you please describe what you think the difference is? I have my eye on this lens but the price difference between th IF and others is substantial.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Hey Woody, send me your 40 IF and I'll run a bench test of it against my 40 CFE using the 39 meg back ... :)

My dealer and I just ran controlled test of my new Rodenstock APO 120 Digital Macro on the Rollei Xact because I thought it wasn't as sharp as it should be. I was right, so it's being replaced. My Rodenstock 90 beat it hands down, which just shouldn't be.

He said if I had been using a 16 or 22 meg back I may never have noticed.

Here's the 90mm test shot ... Image 1: full shot; image 2: 130% crop of the focus point which was the "!" mark inside the black circle... which you can hardly see in the full shot.)
 
Last edited:

BradleyGibson

New member
Brad...

When you say the 40 CFE IF is "markedly different" would you please describe what you think the difference is? I have my eye on this lens but the price difference between th IF and others is substantial.
The price difference is substantial--it's a good question.

Objectively, what's 'markedly different'? The lenses themselves, for starters. The 40/4 CF and 40/4 CFE FLE have the same optical formula, MTF curves, etc. The CFE FLE has better internal baffling, electronic databus capability, new mechanical construction and a third ring to adjust the floating elements. The CFE IF has these improvements over the CF as well, minus the third ring. Instead the IF has a mechanism which automatically drives the floating elements in concert with the focus distance (optimized not just for three particular distances like the FLE, but continually throughout the focusing range). Perhaps most importantly of all, a completely new optical formula:

View attachment 4169

Secondly, the MTF curves also tell an interesting story. These MTF charts are measured at infinity and there is quite a difference, particularly with the high frequency (detail rendition) curve. (Speculation: As one focuses closer, one would expect to see the IF distance itself further due to its improved floating element design.) Of note to me is that the IF has significantly flatter MTF curves, but slightly more astigmatism.

View attachment 4170

One final objective difference (this time in favor of the FLE) is the distortion. The IF's distortion is huge. There's no other way to say it. It's double that of the previous design. You won't be able to tell if you're shooting the great outdoors, but anything requiring a straight line will be a problem. It *can* be corrected in post, but if you don't/won't/can't do such things to your images, the amount of distortion this lens produces could be a deal-breaker in and of itself.

View attachment 4171

On the subjective side, I do think the lens is incredible. Worth the extra cash? It depends on your individual needs, of course. The FLE is no slouch. But just to tempt you a bit, here's what Kornelius J. Mueller (Fleischer), of Carl Zeiss at the time, had to say about the IF version:

"Within Zeiss, I was the driving head behind coming up with an improved 40 mm lens for the SLR viewfinder (even though I like the Biogon 38 very much). Compared to the previous 40 FLE, I wanted significantly more sharpness at infinity for landscape and "citiyscape" shooters, sharpness on the level of the 50 FLE - at least. I wanted to get rid of the FLE mechanics with its confusing two focus rings. I wanted a single one. And I wanted it to operate smoothly, similar to the great focusing mechanism in the Tele-Superachromat 350, which I consinder the best focusing mechanism anywhere in the photo industry. On top of that I wanted a good offering for professionals who use digital backs and enjoy the Makro-Planar 120 for their commercial photography, but needed something significantly shorter in focal length. All of this has materialised in the new Distagon 4/40 IF - the first super wide angle lens for the SLR which can sucessfully challenge the Biogon 38.

If you have the opportunity to use it with your best tripod on landscapes with very fine detail at a far horizon, the result will stunn
[sic] you."

I use it for exactly this purpose, and have to concur.

I hope that helps your choice, AlaBill,
-Brad
 

jlm

Workshop Member
"Yes it was Jim and his Navy Yard shots that made me repurchased the CFV back again."

he, he!
 
A

AlaBill

Guest
Brad...

Thanks a whole bunch for your effort to show the differences. The statement by Kornelius J. Mueller (Fleischer) tells the story.

Now I'll have to make a pocketbook decision...
 

PSon

Active member
Brad,
That was a very extensive answer! One note on my part, if you look at the distortion profile you will see that the CFE has a wing pattern which makes it more difficult to correct versus the CFE IF where the distortion is more easier to manage.

Best Regards,
son
 

BradleyGibson

New member
Thanks, guys.

Giving good information that people can use to make good decisions is important--especially these days where everyone can post an opinion somewhere--when searching for something, it can be really confusing and difficult to find good, reliable information.

I'm glad this was helpful.

Best regards,
Brad
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Marc,
I am like you love the Hasselblad 200 series system and so far only Sinar back is willing to give me the extra option to use on the 200 series body even if the outcome is only 1/90s max shutter speed which I hope not from what I remember. The Sinar back will also allow other camera systems to be mounted on so the flexibility is what I like. Today I am still using the Hasselblad CFV 16 meg DB for both the 500 and 200 series without any cable sync requirement.

Regards,
Son
I have the answer at long last.

The 200 series camera can be used with any back sporting a V mount and that provides a sync port. The 200 series camera sync port is connected to the back's "in" sync port (like shown in Son's video).

However, the 200 series cameras only provide sync speeds to 1/90th. So the camera is relegated to 1/90th or less, and according to Hasselblad even that is "iffy" since the timing requirement is "loose." (whatever that means.)

The only back that works with full access to all of the 202, 203 or 205 focal plane shutter speeds to 1/2000th is the Hasselblad CFV and CFV-II ... but only after modification of the camera in Sweden. This involves exchange of the main electronic circuitry in order to provide a sync signal via the interface contacts. The byproduct of this is that the automatic communication between the e type film backs is permanately disabled and ISOs have to be manually inputed like when using a A type film back.

The 200 series cameras CAN be used with C type lenses without modification. In this case, the sync cord is connected from the Zeiss leaf shutter lens sync port to the digital back's "in" sync port, and all shutter speeds to 1/500th can be used. The only advantage of this over a 500 series camera is use of the internal 200 series meter ... so TTL metered work with a waist level finder is then possible.
 

PSon

Active member
Marc et al,
You can also modify the 200 series camera to take the CFV digital back in the US as well. Below is the information:

Best Regards,
-Son

TO: HASSELBLAD USA (1.973.227.7320)
ATTENTION: CAMERA SERVICE CENTER
333 NEW ROAD, SUITE No. 5
PARSIPPANY, NJ 07054

When you call speak to Mary-Ann or John for assistance. They are among the best folks to help you.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Marc et al,
You can also modify the 200 series camera to take the CFV digital back in the US as well. Below is the information:

Best Regards,
-Son

TO: HASSELBLAD USA (1.973.227.7320)
ATTENTION: CAMERA SERVICE CENTER
333 NEW ROAD, SUITE No. 5
PARSIPPANY, NJ 07054

When you call speak to Mary-Ann or John for assistance. They are among the best folks to help you.
I think they just send it on to Sweden Son.
 

PSon

Active member
I think they just send it on to Sweden Son.
hi Marc,
they told me that they can do it for me and the turn around is extremely quick. In the past they were not able to do it and have to send it to Sweden but now they are trained to do the procedure. I am sure you were the first one to have the 200 series camera converted.

Best Regards,
-Son
 
Last edited:

fotografz

Well-known member
hi Marc,
they told me that they can do it for me and the turn around is extremely quick. In the past they were not able to do it and have to send it to Sweden but now they are trained to do the procedure. I am sure you were the first one to have the 200 series camera converted.

Best Regards,
-Son
Thanks Son, I'll give it a try.
 

woodyspedden

New member
Marc,
Yes it was Jim and his Navy Yard shots that made me repurchased the CFV back again. I am not sure I should be glad with his beautiful works. The images were taken from a different perspective than we normally see and I congratulate Jim. I really like the square format from this sensor and the Zeiss glass renders beautiful skin tone.

Woody,
I just want to let you know that I am so happy to see you traded the Leica 2.8/15 for your newly acquired Hasselblad 40 mm CFE IF. Both of these lens are rare items but the CFE IF has so much to give you especially with bigger sensor becoming more available as we move forward to the future. On the other hand for me it was the Leica 2.8/15 that led me to cut the first mirror in 2005 and now it's the regular thing to do.

Best Regards,
-Son
Son

I remember it well as i was one of the early adopters of your adapters for the Contax to Canon systems. I still have the 100-300 (mint in box), 85 1.2 50 Jahre anniversary, etc. Without your wonderful adapters these lenses would still be coupled to the RTS III which I will probably never sell, Phenomenal body for these spectacular lenses.

Now that your school days are over and you will now need to get back to real business I expect to see adapters that are absolutely state of the art!

Best my friend

Woody
 

PSon

Active member
Son

I remember it well as i was one of the early adopters of your adapters for the Contax to Canon systems. I still have the 100-300 (mint in box), 85 1.2 50 Jahre anniversary, etc. Without your wonderful adapters these lenses would still be coupled to the RTS III which I will probably never sell, Phenomenal body for these spectacular lenses.

Now that your school days are over and you will now need to get back to real business I expect to see adapters that are absolutely state of the art!

Best my friend

Woody

hi Woody,
We all go back a long way for the things you mentioned and today Tom also sent me a link to the Fred Miranda Forums, where he gave me a feedback for buying his Canon 17-35mm lens which we still use the lens to this day. I believe in problem, solution, progress and achievement and having forums like this one always bring great supports. Furthermore, every time we enter into a new system, there are issues needed to iron out and thus making reliable adapters is one of the solutions. Thus, I make adapters to extend the flexibility of the systems of interest, which often used by similar folks like yourself. Recently I tried to get the adapters for my Hasselblad lens to the Mamiya 645 AFD and the Nikon D3 but no reliable adapters were available. Thus, I am making these two types of adapters and in 3 weeks it will be available. These adapters will be very precise with the highest quality and at much lower price than the one you bought recently for your Hasselblad lens to the Nikon D3. I only make 20 adapters for the Mamiya and the Nikon D3.

Best Regards,
-Son
 
Last edited:

woodyspedden

New member
hi Woody,
We all go back a long way for the things you mentioned and today Tom also sent me a link to the Fred Miranda Forums, where he gave me a feedback for buying his Canon 17-35mm lens which we still use the lens to this day. I believe in problem, solution, progress and achievement and having forums like this one always bring great supports. Furthermore, every time we enter into a new system, there are issues needed to iron out and thus making reliable adapters is one of the solutions. Thus, I make adapters to extend the flexibility of the systems of interest, which often used by similar folks like yourself. Recently I tried to get the adapters for my Hasselblad lens to the Mamiya 645 AFD and the Nikon D3 but no reliable adapters were available. Thus, I am making these two types of adapters and in 3 weeks it will be available. These adapters will be very precise with the highest quality and at much lower price than the one you bought recently for your Hasselblad lens to the Nikon D3. I only make 20 adapters for the Mamiya and the Nikon D3.

Best Regards,
-Son
Son

Sign me up for one of each.

Woody
 

jlm

Workshop Member
marc:
I'm ready for the 40; almost backed off a pier today getting far enough back with the 110
jm
 
Top