Any Alpa 35mm Alpar 4.0 Users?

[Smoothjazz]

I was curious to know if there are any Alpa camera users that have the 35mm HR Alpar f4.0 lens, and if they would recommend this lens for landscape work. I am considering this lens as my wide-angle choice, to pair with my 50mm HR lens. I know that it has an image circle of only 70mm, so no real movements with my IQ 180, but I wanted to consider this lens for a few reasons over the much loved 32mmHR lens. I like the 35mm perspective somewhat more, and also appreciate that this lens is smaller, and more portable.
In terms of trying my first very wide lens, it helps too that this lens is thousands less than the 32HR.
Thanks for your input!

 

[dougpeterson]

This is identical (except in name) to the Rodenstock 35HR. While the 32HR is in a league of its own the 35HR is a very fine lens by nearly any standard. If you're looking for something that is very good and smaller/lighter/less-expensive than the 32HR and you know the limitations of its image circle then you won't be disappointed.

It's also the lens included with most Phase One A Series. You can see some web examples here: Phase One A Series Sunny Sample Files and Phase One A Series Moody Sample Files We shot these and have the raws if helpful (email me).

FYI - the 35HR, like several Rodenstock lenses, has a lens profile in Capture One for distortion.

 

[Smoothjazz]

Thanks Doug!

 

[voidshatter]

Very few people in this forum use the 35mm lens because most people would prefer a larger image circle for shift capabilities. The 32mm is the most popular choice and is the best choice for architecture.

Personally I would not consider the 32mm not only because it's bulky and delicate, but also more importantly because its center filter is too huge for ordinary filter holders (which is a deal-breaker for long exposure landscape).

According to Rodenstock's official MTF charts (35mm and 32mm), the 35mm performs better than the 32mm when you look into the corners of the 70mm image circle, that means within the 70mm image circle the 35mm is sharper everywhere. (This is consistent with my experience, i.e. the 32mm is softer in the corners than the 35mm.) The 35mm also has less chromatic aberration and less distortion.

Though the 35mm is my friend's favorite lens, keep in mind that most people would prefer a larger image circle, so the re-sales value of the 35mm is not great. With this taken into consideration, I picked the 40mm over the 35mm.

 

[Alkibiades]

35 mm is really a great lens when little movements are needed, maybe 5 mm on the big sensor.
Also no need of center filter.
The Alpa selected lens would be great choice as the calibration quality of alpa should be the best one.
I had once a very bad copy, the corners needed app 16 to become really sharp. than I get a better one, so calibration of the lens is very important.
I also have a 28 and 23 mm of the digaron S and they are all very good.
But nothing to compare with my 32 mm W. all 90 mm are sharp at app 8,5- sharp as a hell.
So the guy who have the 32 mm and 35 mm should send the 32 mm to rodenstock for calibration.
My 32 mm have same or better performance as my two 40 mm Hr W.
I think it is the best wide angle lens now on this planet, but is very expensive....

 

[narikin]

Yes, it's a very good lens to walk around with - fast at f4, no center filter needed, and excellent resolution. You just can't shift/stitch much with it. But with a TC, like it is in the Alpa package, you cannot shift or stitch anyways!

I have this lens for sale, p.m. me if you are interested. (In Alpa Mount, with box). I just never shoot wide - all my work in 50mm or longer, so its stayed here unused.

 

[voidshatter]

But nothing to compare with my 32 mm W. all 90 mm are sharp at app 8,5- sharp as a hell.
So the guy who have the 32 mm and 35 mm should send the 32 mm to rodenstock for calibration.
My 32 mm have same or better performance as my two 40 mm Hr W.

Among the Digaron HR-W series (90mm image circle), there's no way the 32mm is the sharpest in the corners while it's the widest. It's a general physics rule that the wider, the softer in the corners. Even Rodenstock's official MTF charts confirmed this, along with multiple published results by Capture Integration and Digital Transitions.

If you find your 40mm HR-W softer than your 32mm HR-W then you should send your 40mm HR-W for calibration.