Hi Tim:
Jack, that's exactly my point: this gear is incredibly more expensive than, let's say a D3X or equivalent and it's heavier, slower and much harder to use. It should therefore deliver results notably in excess of the high-end DSLRs.
Mine does -- and did -- deliver superior results right out of the box as compared to any DSLR I have ever shot. But I respect you had a different experience.
Not at all! Joe has had a roughly equal amount of grief. He's had a lot of kit that is simply not built properly and lost a lot of shots as a result.
Joe had a lot of grief getting a TECH camera system to work the way he wanted and did have some early bad luck with his back being out of spec and one of a friend's he tested being out of spec. He then got bad copies of the 80D and AFD3 body I think too -- so yes, he's had some bad luck as well.
I know where you're coming from on this but I have to say that my Cambo/Schneider 35XL combination seems to be the only way of getting results at wide angle that equal those I get with an 80D or longer. Sure, you have to guess focus, but I can and do get results with it even with this guesswork that are, to my standards, as close to perfect as I expect. I might be speaking too soon here since all the above is true of my WDS and the RS has only just arrived but early signs are promising!
I agree here, that used un-shifted, the Schneider 35 Digitar OR the Rodenstock 35 HR (not the non-HR!) Digital are the best options in the 35mm focal length. But you still have to guess focus, and if you look at your files at 100%, I suspect you'll find that RARELY is your desired focus point hit perfectly -- close enough to work at the chosen aperture yes, but rarely will it be perfectly on point. And of course all this assumes your tech body is true and square, which I am not convinced is a good assumption either
Now back to Mamiya glass. As I have said before, there is variability in glass. I test first, usually multiple copies, then keep the best. I tested 3 copies of the 35AF before settling on the one I currently use. I have three friends that own and use equally good copies. (Guy has one he may be selling soon.) I have not seen ANY copy of a 45 AF that was sharp enough to the corners to satisfy me. The Hartblei is so variable in its performance -- I tried 4 copies -- that with the best one, I could take 4 frames in succession without touching the lens, and one would be excellent and the other three variable from okay to horrible. And personally I cannot see how you put up with it, but then that's me
. My 55AF, and all other folks I know that got one, worked great from the start -- this lens seems an anomaly. The old 80 for the most part was very good but still variable, and the newer one excellent, though there have still been a few reports of bad copies -- I believe you got one and Joe's first one was off too BTW -- but my first copy is stunningly good. The 120 Macro later versions all seem to be very good. Ditto the 150/2.8D, excellent all around, perhaps another anomaly. The older 150 3.5 AF is generally good, but again variable. The 210 is variable -- I've had three versions, one was only okay the other two both excellent. I've only had experience with two 300 f4.5 APO's and both were excellent form wide open, so would assume that's a generally good lens too. Zooms are variable and you should expect to got though a few to find good ones, even with the 75-150D -- the first one I had was okay but did not stun me enough to keep it -- finding a good copy to keep is on my short list. If you are a perfectionist -- and I feel I am -- you should expect to try three of any lens you plan on buying and keep the best.
Note that when you test glass, you need to insure your camera body and back are in perfect alignment too. Here perhaps I have been lucky as my back has performed perfectly on three separate bodies, both in AF and manual focus modes; my first AFD2 body, my Phase AFD3 body and a Mamiya branded AFD3 body all behaved identically with respects to focus.
So in summary, I do rigorously test everything I get before I use it for a critical shoot, and sometimes I test it on a critical shoot without relying on it to deliver any finals. But then, that's my point isn't it? I don't expect EVERY lens or piece of kit I purchase to be perfect -- in fact quite to the contrary I expect to have to try a few copies of everything, so I test each lens I get, return any bad copies and keep going until I get a good one. So you see, we're not all that different in this regard other than in our initial expectations. Though admittedly I have been pleasantly surprised with much of my Phamiya kit -- specifically the P45+/AFD3, 80D and 150D -- on the first try... And perhaps was overly generous in my assumption it was a new norm?
Cheers,