Site Sponsors
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 98

Thread: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

  1. #1
    Senior Member PSon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    908
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    145

    Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    I've been asked for medium format optics on 35 mm DSLR. Below are the spec and images:

    No sharpening applied to the images.

    Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    @F2.0 for front and back bokeh and glow (resized for web)



    @F5.6 (resized for web)



    @F5.6 and 100% view
    ALPA (MAX, STC, TC) | CAMBO (Actus DB2, WRS-AE) | CONTAX | HASSELBLAD | LEICA | DB (CFV-16, CFV-39, IQ180, IQ360, IQ3100, P45+) | Lens (Canon, Fujinon, Leica, Nikon, Pentax, Rodenstock, Schneider, Zeiss)

  2. #2
    Senior Member JimCollum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    santa cruz, ca
    Posts
    936
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    155

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    it won't let you see them unless you register and log into your forum. it probably would be better to either upload them here, or put them in a publicly available area

  3. #3
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    They load here just fine, it's just that the server you have them stored on is very slow, so they take quite a while to load...
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.S. Canada
    Posts
    2,010
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    I was the chap who asked for his thoughts of MF (in my case Mamiya APO) on FF EOS. very nice. Sharp, awesome bokeh. Thank you.

  5. #5
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter, Fla.
    Posts
    1,967
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Great shots Son... now you need to design an adapter so I can use the lens on my D3

  6. #6
    Senior Member PSon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    908
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    145

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by David K View Post
    Great shots Son... now you need to design an adapter so I can use the lens on my D3
    David, your D3 looks good on any good lens and the 110 is also a great choice.

    I have posted more of this subject here on Fred Miranda Forum and at my own place.

    the FM link here: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/623414
    ALPA (MAX, STC, TC) | CAMBO (Actus DB2, WRS-AE) | CONTAX | HASSELBLAD | LEICA | DB (CFV-16, CFV-39, IQ180, IQ360, IQ3100, P45+) | Lens (Canon, Fujinon, Leica, Nikon, Pentax, Rodenstock, Schneider, Zeiss)

  7. #7
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Have to try my 110/2 FE on the 1DsMKIII. Thanks for the reminder.

    Gotta try the 250/4 FE also : -)

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Reykjavik, Iceland
    Posts
    2,310
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    I have never used it on anything other than the 203FE, but the 110/2 is an astounding lens. I think it is best on 6x6, but I suppose it is good on 35mm as well.
    The 110 on 6x6 film:





  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.S. Canada
    Posts
    2,010
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Nice shots - numbers 2, 3 especially.

    That being said, I do think you need to talk to your agency of choice about the girl/guy (?) they sent for shot #1 however.

  10. #10
    Senior Member EH21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    394
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Stuart,
    Saw the second two previously on photo.net ... picked up the 110mm shortly afterwards for my Rollei. Honestly, I think if I only could have one lens for my Rollei this would be it. Its a fantastic optic...fast and sharp, easy to focus, great bokeh, close minimum distance, not flare prone and, great at all focal lengths. The only thing this lens does not do well is macro with tubes.
    Eric

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,008
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by EH21 View Post
    great at all focal lengths.
    hmmm...what am I missing here?

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    314
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Probably great at all focusing distances

  13. #13
    Senior Member PSon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    908
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    145

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by David K View Post
    Great shots Son... now you need to design an adapter so I can use the lens on my D3
    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Have to try my 110/2 FE on the 1DsMKIII. Thanks for the reminder.

    Gotta try the 250/4 FE also : -)
    Marc,
    You should try the 110 FE on your 1Ds Mark III at wide open and at F5.6 for high resolution. I love the way the lens render the skin tone in texture as well as colors. I love it even more than the Leica Summilux 1.4/50 which in itself a great normal portrait lens. Below is an example of the Hasselblad 2.0/110 FE with the Leica DMR.

    Last important note: Becareful with the Hasselblad adapters available out there. Some of them do not get to infinity focus from folks who used them. If you need me to expand more details I will come up with a new scenario for you.

    Best Regards,
    Son

    ALPA (MAX, STC, TC) | CAMBO (Actus DB2, WRS-AE) | CONTAX | HASSELBLAD | LEICA | DB (CFV-16, CFV-39, IQ180, IQ360, IQ3100, P45+) | Lens (Canon, Fujinon, Leica, Nikon, Pentax, Rodenstock, Schneider, Zeiss)

  14. #14
    Senior Member PSon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    908
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    145

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by EH21 View Post
    Stuart,
    Saw the second two previously on photo.net ... picked up the 110mm shortly afterwards for my Rollei. Honestly, I think if I only could have one lens for my Rollei this would be it. Its a fantastic optic...fast and sharp, easy to focus, great bokeh, close minimum distance, not flare prone and, great at all focal lengths. The only thing this lens does not do well is macro with tubes.
    Eric
    Eric,
    I test both of the Rollei and Hasselblad on the same sensor and I love both. The Rollei version offer lower contrast and resulting in even more pleasing image but more test must be done before I can make the absolute conclusion. The Hasselblad is even easier to manual focus than the Rollei on the Rollei 6008 series. On the Hasselbad body this lens is incredible for focus.

    Best Regards,
    Son
    ALPA (MAX, STC, TC) | CAMBO (Actus DB2, WRS-AE) | CONTAX | HASSELBLAD | LEICA | DB (CFV-16, CFV-39, IQ180, IQ360, IQ3100, P45+) | Lens (Canon, Fujinon, Leica, Nikon, Pentax, Rodenstock, Schneider, Zeiss)

  15. #15
    Senior Member PSon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    908
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    145

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    I am currently working on limitation of lens and digital back resolution and the information can be view here until I update more in the coming weeks. Andi from FM forum asked this question before and now I have the opportunity to fulfill the question. The image will be improved upon the correction to the flare on the auto bellows. I have never seen details like this before. After getting some of the highest resolving power lens I have not been able to reach to a new level until the multi shots back was acquired.

    Best Regards,
    Son

    http://popcapture.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=43
    ALPA (MAX, STC, TC) | CAMBO (Actus DB2, WRS-AE) | CONTAX | HASSELBLAD | LEICA | DB (CFV-16, CFV-39, IQ180, IQ360, IQ3100, P45+) | Lens (Canon, Fujinon, Leica, Nikon, Pentax, Rodenstock, Schneider, Zeiss)

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Reykjavik, Iceland
    Posts
    2,310
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    I wish I had the Rollei version as well, but I have only the Hasselblad version. I got it for 1100 dollars when I was in Japan (yes, the FE!), and I have not seen the Rollei version for less than a 3000, so I am not that interested in spending that much to duplicate a lens I already have. Another nice thing about the hasselblad version is that it is significantly smaller and lighter since it does not have a built in shutter. You can also shoot at 1/2000th of a second which makes it easier to shoot wide open outdoors. The downsides are that if you work with strobes, you are stuck with a 1/60th (or is it 1/90th?) sync speed. Also, the Rollei has better film flatness than the hasselblad, and this is the sort of lens where that actually matters...at f/2 and close up, even the curvature of the film can leave you with less than optimal sharpness.

    Anyway, here is another film shot with it:


    Apologies if you have seen it.

    Rob -- the guy in line for a hotdog did not know I was shooting him. But I think he may have been at the tryouts for America's Next Top Model.

  17. #17
    Senior Member PSon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    908
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    145

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by Stuart Richardson View Post
    I wish I had the Rollei version as well, but I have only the Hasselblad version. I got it for 1100 dollars when I was in Japan (yes, the FE!), and I have not seen the Rollei version for less than a 3000, so I am not that interested in spending that much to duplicate a lens I already have. Another nice thing about the hasselblad version is that it is significantly smaller and lighter since it does not have a built in shutter. You can also shoot at 1/2000th of a second which makes it easier to shoot wide open outdoors. The downsides are that if you work with strobes, you are stuck with a 1/60th (or is it 1/90th?) sync speed. Also, the Rollei has better film flatness than the hasselblad, and this is the sort of lens where that actually matters...at f/2 and close up, even the curvature of the film can leave you with less than optimal sharpness.
    Stuart, you are fine with your Hasselblad version and you got a great deal on the FE version. You pointed out all the benefit of one over the other and in the end if you have both you are covered on all ground.
    Son
    ALPA (MAX, STC, TC) | CAMBO (Actus DB2, WRS-AE) | CONTAX | HASSELBLAD | LEICA | DB (CFV-16, CFV-39, IQ180, IQ360, IQ3100, P45+) | Lens (Canon, Fujinon, Leica, Nikon, Pentax, Rodenstock, Schneider, Zeiss)

  18. #18
    Senior Member EH21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    394
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Tom,
    What I mean is that some lenses are optimized for certain focal lengths, such as a macro or portrait lens which will be optimized for closer up, while other lenses such as the Leica 180 f/3.4 Telyt (which was designed for military use) was designed to be its best at infinity focus. The 110 f/2.0 seems to perform equally well at all distances.

    Son,
    That's interesting you think there is a difference between the 'blad and rollei versions. I do understand there were 5 versions of the lens but not sure there was a difference in formula between camera platforms. Was the Rollei version you tested the latest version or an older one? I understand that you can tell if the rear element cover has a square hole it is one of the last two versions and if its round then its older. I have no trouble focusing this lens - its by far the easiest lens of my whole Rollei collection to focus accurately even with the shallow DOF.

    Stuart,
    There were two of these 110 f/2.0 in Rollei mounts that were sold recently on Ebay from reputable camera dealers for pretty decent prices. One from shutterblade for $2175 with hood, caps and filter and another for less than $2k from Neptune (* I think*) I know because I paid a few hundred more for mine without the hood but mine was a demo with boxes and papers (latest version).

    Either way these are great lenses.

    Eric

  19. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,008
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by EH21 View Post
    Tom,
    What I mean is that some lenses are optimized for certain focal lengths, such as a macro or portrait lens which will be optimized for closer up, while other lenses such as the Leica 180 f/3.4 Telyt (which was designed for military use) was designed to be its best at infinity focus. The 110 f/2.0 seems to perform equally well at all distances.
    I see. That makes sense. Another parameter where the hassy lens excels.

  20. #20
    Louvre
    Guest

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    [QUOTE=Stuart Richardson;14328] Also, the Rollei has better film flatness than the hasselblad, and this is the sort of lens where that actually matters...at f/2 and close up, even the curvature of the film can leave you with less than optimal sharpness. QUOTE]

    Has any of you guys ever had his Hasselblad backs tested and corrected for
    optimum filmplane?

    This is what I wonder whenever I read about Rollei or any other make having better film flatness the same goes for vacuum backs.
    Sofar I have not seen one Hasselblad back with a 5 or more years of use that was spot on.
    A back that was dropped will show misalignment 5 to 10 times more than is allowed.
    A total of 35 backs were tested, mine and some from friends, and the results recorded.

  21. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Reykjavik, Iceland
    Posts
    2,310
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    I have not had my Hasselblad back perfectly aligned...I will be honest. That said, it is not the alignment issue alone. The hasselblad back winds the film in the opposite direction of its natural curl, so if you leave it in the back for too long, some of your exposures can have bumps in the film left by the rollers...they will sort of stick up a bit, and this leads to unsharpness. This is one of the reasons David Odess (a well-respected Hassie technician) is down on the 200 series...he thinks that there is no way you can reliably focus a 110/2 at f/2, no matter how good you are, because the film flatness is simply not reliable enough...you may luck out for one exposure, but you cannot reproduce it reliably. I am not entirely convinced, but I normally shoot at f/2.8 or f/4 unless I have to use f/2.
    The Rollei system is simply better in this regard -- the film is wound with the natural curl of the film, so it does not develop kinks if you leave it in the magazine, and the design of the magazine itself has the film pressed against the body of the camera, not the back, so you can achieve accurate, consistent focus on all your backs as long as the camera is set up properly. No need to worry about matching backs to the camera. The pressure plate is also larger and presses more firmly against the film, so it works better. This is ignoring the other nice features like the built in sliding darkslide.
    Anyway, I am not saying the Rollei is a better camera, but the backs certainly are better designed.

  22. #22
    Louvre
    Guest

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    All things mentioned will not mean much as long as a back is not perfectly aligned according to factory specifications.

    Sofar I have not seen any reliable tests that show Hasselblad backs of the last generation deliver worse results than those for Rollei or Contax to name a few.

    I respect David Odess for his standard of work and his knowledge of Hasselblad V series.
    I also know David does not have the testing rig to check the film plane of backs for the 500 series.
    Hasselblad USA in New Jersey has this rig.
    Checking and aligning Hasselblad backs is a matter of 5-10 minutes at the most provided the right equipment is available and the tester has some experience at correcting any deviations.

  23. #23
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Zeiss 250/4FE on a Canon 1DsMKIII. 100% crop with full image inset.
    Last edited by fotografz; 15th April 2008 at 06:44.

  24. #24
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter, Fla.
    Posts
    1,967
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Beautiful capture... seems like the Zeiss glass on the 1DsIII is a winning combo.

  25. #25
    Senior Member JimCollum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    santa cruz, ca
    Posts
    936
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    155

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Zeiss 250/4FE on a Canon 1DsMKIII. 100% crop with full image inset.
    you really do want me to buy a 250.. don't you


    gorgeous!

    jim

  26. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Reykjavik, Iceland
    Posts
    2,310
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    You are making me sad I passed it up. It was offered to me for 600 dollars when I was in Japan, but I did not think I would need a 250. I haven't really, but it still looks like a nice lens...

  27. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.S. Canada
    Posts
    2,010
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    250/4 vs 250/4 FE? FE implies a floating element, but MTF & datasheets on Zeiss site are identical?

    May have found own answer - FE means F model with Electronic coupling to camera vs FLE which means F model, FLoating Element, Electronic Coupling?

  28. #28
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Yes, there are multiple versions of the "F" series lenses for the 200 series cameras. The "FE" has the data bus contacts for use on the later 200 cameras. In many cases, when using them adapted to a DSLR or even MF focal plane cameras like the Contax 645 and Mamiya 645, the "F" non-electronic versions are just as good and a LOT less expensive.

    I have the FE versions of the 50/2.8. 110/2, 150/2.8 and the 250/4 because I still use a 203FE camera.

  29. #29
    Subscriber gogopix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,383
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    well, I do mlike the 250mm hassey

    Here is a MF (P25) for comparison.

    I must say what drove me to dig this out was that the image above looked soft, almost fuzzy.

    I think MF is not really threatened by the canons.



    Victor
    Last edited by gogopix; 25th January 2015 at 17:22.

  30. #30
    Senior Member JimCollum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    santa cruz, ca
    Posts
    936
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    155

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by gogopix View Post
    well, I do mlike the 250mm hassey

    Here is a MF (P25) for comparison.

    I must say what drove me to dig this out was that the image above looked soft, almost fuzzy.

    I think MF is not really threatened by the canons.



    Victor
    i don't know.. given the two images, if they were both used in advertisements.. i'd have to be buying a Canon. Where as your image might be much sharper.. the other has better tonality, light and texture. I don't think that's due to the MF back being inferior, as much as the light in which the images were taken. I think a better comparison/ad for the MF back would be using it to shoot the same image/light with the lens wide open.

    jim

  31. #31
    Subscriber gogopix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,383
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by JimCollum View Post
    i don't know.. given the two images, if they were both used in advertisements.. i'd have to be buying a Canon. Where as your image might be much sharper.. the other has better tonality, light and texture. I don't think that's due to the MF back being inferior, as much as the light in which the images were taken. I think a better comparison/ad for the MF back would be using it to shoot the same image/light with the lens wide open.

    jim
    This is raw>ACR>PS resize>jpg (too lazy to crank up C1 for this) no sharpen, WB etc.

    the resolution and inherent sharpness are the issue here. Light, BTW was harsh morning (see shadow) in early spring.

    It is interesting what you say about tonality etc. The hassey lenes are quite analytical (and 'cool'), so either the tulip image had some adjustment or the AA filter is doing a LOT more than I thought.

    That said, I am sure Canon is not quaking in boots

    Victor

  32. #32
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by gogopix View Post
    well, I do like the 250mm hassey

    Here is a MF (P25) for comparison.

    I must say what drove me to dig this out was that the image above looked soft, almost fuzzy.

    I think MF is not really threatened by the canons.



    Victor
    Victor, you won't get an argument from me concerning 35mm DSLRs threatening MF Digital. No way.

    However, don't gauge that belief on a flower photo lit to maintain the feel of the flower. I personally don't light living things like industrial products ... although that's an interesting idea : -)

    Now camera porn is another matter, LOL ... same camera, same lens, same backdrop, different lighting ... does this look soft & fuzzy?
    Last edited by fotografz; 13th April 2008 at 14:59.

  33. #33
    Senior Member JimCollum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    santa cruz, ca
    Posts
    936
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    155

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by gogopix View Post
    This is raw>ACR>PS resize>jpg (too lazy to crank up C1 for this) no sharpen, WB etc.

    the resolution and inherent sharpness are the issue here. Light, BTW was harsh morning (see shadow) in early spring.

    It is interesting what you say about tonality etc. The hassey lenes are quite analytical (and 'cool'), so either the tulip image had some adjustment or the AA filter is doing a LOT more than I thought.

    That said, I am sure Canon is not quaking in boots

    Victor
    i completely agree that the MF back will beat the mk3 in resolution and sharpness (which is why i don't have a Canon anymore, but and Aptus 75.. thanks to the gentleman with the tulip pic)

    The Zeiss 110/2.0 Planar is anything but analytical (examples in other parts of this thread). It has a softness wide open akin to some of the best 'fast' Leica glass. Stopped down, it is also as sharp as I'd want a lens to be. I don't own a 250, so don't know if it has a character similar to the 110. I do have the 40 Distagon, and it also has that 'low contrast, high res' feel to it that has drawn me to the Leica glass as well.

    jim
    Last edited by JimCollum; 17th March 2008 at 16:26.

  34. #34
    Subscriber gogopix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,383
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Victor, you won't get an argument from me concerning 35mm DSLRs threatening MF Digital. No way.

    However, don't gauge that belief on a flower photo lit to maintain the feel of the flower. I personally don't light living things like industrial products ... although that's an interesting idea : -)

    Now camera porn is another matter, LOL ... same camera, same lens, same backdrop, different lighting ... does this look soft & fuzzy?
    No, but it certainly lacks depth. The hood seems flat against the camera. Maybe my poor 65 year old eyes!
    Now, just so people don't think MF is totally tone deaf, take a look at the 3-D, DR and tonal range of these!

    Am I prejucticed? NO

    just convinced (top is 100% crop BTW, and this IS from C1)

    Victor
    Last edited by gogopix; 25th January 2015 at 17:22.

  35. #35
    Senior Member PSon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    908
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    145

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    i was not going to post but since we are on the subject of resolution I thought you all like to see this:

    1. full view of the image at reduced size


    2. crop and reduced sized


    3. 100% view
    ALPA (MAX, STC, TC) | CAMBO (Actus DB2, WRS-AE) | CONTAX | HASSELBLAD | LEICA | DB (CFV-16, CFV-39, IQ180, IQ360, IQ3100, P45+) | Lens (Canon, Fujinon, Leica, Nikon, Pentax, Rodenstock, Schneider, Zeiss)

  36. #36
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by gogopix View Post
    No, but it certainly lacks depth. The hood seems flat against the camera. Maybe my poor 65 year old eyes!
    Now, just so people don't think MF is totally tone deaf, take a look at the 3-D, DR and tonal range of these!

    Am I prejucticed? NO

    just convinced (top is 100% crop BTW, and this IS from C1)

    Victor
    Again, no argument concerning 35 v/s MF digital. But I think you are confusing different image characteristics Victor.

    My camera photo is with a 250mm on a full frame 35mm which remains a 250mm telephoto. Longer telephotos flatten perspective, especially up-close on items shot straight-on and evenly front-lit with a softbox.

    Your pic is using a wider lens draw which deepens perspective, and your scene is backlit.

    To get the same lens draw as my image using a MF full frame 645, you'd have to use a 350mm MF lens.

  37. #37
    Subscriber gogopix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,383
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Again, no argument concerning 35 v/s MF digital. But I think you are confusing different image characteristics Victor.

    My camera photo is with a 250mm on a full frame 35mm which remains a 250mm telephoto. Longer telephotos flatten perspective, especially up-close on items shot straight-on and evenly front-lit with a softbox.

    Your pic is using a wider lens draw which deepens perspective, and your scene is backlit.

    To get the same lens draw as my image using a MF full frame 645, you'd have to use a 350mm MF lens.
    Yes, all valid points.

    Different tools at different times. I use M8, DMR and MFDB at different times. That said, MF with hassey lenses will have certain advantages, as you have pointed out.

    Rather than a single features, I find there is a look and ease with MF (e.g. P45 resolution alone means almost NO need to sharpen for images less than 11x16). Also DR and lack of AA helps.

    On the other side, lower ISO usable can be frustrating with MFDB.

    When I recently became 3x grandfather I used my wife's D2 Leica, 5MP, with built in bounce flash!.

    Sometimes, you just want the shot.
    Last edited by gogopix; 25th January 2015 at 17:22.

  38. #38
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by Pham Minh Son View Post
    i was not going to post but since we are on the subject of resolution I thought you all like to see this:

    1. full view of the image at reduced size


    2. crop and reduced sized


    3. 100% view
    Son, just to be accurate and not confuse anyone, that shot was NOT done with a 5D. It has to be a MF digital back and a very high resolving lens, right?

  39. #39
    Subscriber gogopix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,383
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    looks like 39MP if the crop is really 100% Son, did you get a P45?

  40. #40
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by gogopix View Post
    looks like 39MP if the crop is really 100% Son, did you get a P45?
    I downloaded the image and the exif information says it was a Sinar 54 digital back on a Contax body using a Hasselblad 40/4 IF (via a very well made adapter I assume.)

  41. #41
    Senior Member PSon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    908
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    145

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    I downloaded the image and the exif information says it was a Sinar 54 digital back on a Contax body using a Hasselblad 40/4 IF (via a very well made adapter I assume.)
    Marc,
    It was done with 16 shots with the 40 CFE IF. Nothing get by you. LOL
    Son
    ALPA (MAX, STC, TC) | CAMBO (Actus DB2, WRS-AE) | CONTAX | HASSELBLAD | LEICA | DB (CFV-16, CFV-39, IQ180, IQ360, IQ3100, P45+) | Lens (Canon, Fujinon, Leica, Nikon, Pentax, Rodenstock, Schneider, Zeiss)

  42. #42
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by Pham Minh Son View Post
    Marc,
    It was done with 16 shots with the 40 CFE IF. Nothing get by you. LOL
    Son
    Well Son, as far as I know there isn't a 35mm digital camera on Earth that could resolve and capture the offset printing dots from that far away : -)

    Freaking amazing.

  43. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.S. Canada
    Posts
    2,010
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    fotograz - thanks. Now what of CF vs CFi? Is the price difference justified for the different mechanics and lower internal reflection? My understanding being that they are optically identical.

  44. #44
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by robmac View Post
    fotograz - thanks. Now what of CF vs CFi? Is the price difference justified for the different mechanics and lower internal reflection? My understanding being that they are optically identical.
    I don't know the absolute answer to that question. Hasselblad/Zeiss makes minor changes to stuff without saying anything. I'd say the CF and CFi are identical, except that the flare resistance might be a tad better with certain CFi
    lenses. The Flash Sync port is most certainly better. The CF one was more prone to damage and failure. If you get a digital back that requires a sync cord from lens to back, then it might be worth the money, since that the weak point of sync'ing a digital back.

    My quest is the CFE lenses. They have all the CFi upgrades, PLUS the data bus contacts for use with my 203FE, and more importantly my H3D cameras when using the CF adapter. The H camera automatically reads which lens is mounted so I don't have to manually input it on the H grip.

    I have all the CFE lenses except the 180CFE ... I have the CFi version of that lens.

  45. #45
    Subscriber gogopix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,383
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by Pham Minh Son View Post
    Marc,
    It was done with 16 shots with the 40 CFE IF. Nothing get by you. LOL
    Son
    think i estimated wrong then (47x pixels x 19 is what i did, but full image was not quite that big.)
    however, that's a 22MP back, same resolution as the MIII canon. So, seems that the MFDB gets better resolving (as was seen in other tests on LL etc.)

    Resolving the print mask is maybe understandable; i think even 35mm 22MP would do that. What makes MFDB better? It may be as simple as this; when pix site is larger, when you are close to CoC the larger site keeps the m'bleed' down and so appears more resolved.
    Son, you should be able to figure this out from aperture FL and site sizes of MF vs 35mm

    If I remember my optics correctly the image will be the same (from lens) but the 22MP of canon are in a smaller area, thus closer to CoC.

    This may be the fundamental item going on.

    Is that reasonable?

    Victor

  46. #46
    Subscriber gogopix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,383
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    I don't know the absolute answer to that question. Hasselblad/Zeiss makes minor changes to stuff without saying anything. I'd say the CF and CFi are identical, except that the flare resistance might be a tad better with certain CFi
    lenses. The Flash Sync port is most certainly better. The CF one was more prone to damage and failure. If you get a digital back that requires a sync cord from lens to back, then it might be worth the money, since that the weak point of sync'ing a digital back.

    My quest is the CFE lenses. They have all the CFi upgrades, PLUS the data bus contacts for use with my 203FE, and more importantly my H3D cameras when using the CF adapter. The H camera automatically reads which lens is mounted so I don't have to manually input it on the H grip.

    I have all the CFE lenses except the 180CFE ... I have the CFi version of that lens.

    Marc

    CF vs CFi I have always wondered about. I have mostly older CF lenses (that match me! ) but when buying new, esp with the P45+ I wonder whether the CFi would be better (I also have FE lenses which are great. the "F" lenses like the 50mm 2.8 and the 110mm are really specially, as we see here)

    regards
    Victor

  47. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.S. Canada
    Posts
    2,010
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Thanks Marc.

  48. #48
    Senior Member PSon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    908
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    145

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Victor,
    You are thinking too hard my friend. It is simple in this case. Currently there is no digital sensor whether 35 mm or medium format that has a 4.5 micron pixel size. When 16 shots are done the Piezo fine control mechanism shift a half a pixel size to give a 4.5 micron. In addition, assumed that one day a digital sensor that has a 4.5 micron pixel, the physical challenge for noise and color is not going to compare to a physical 9 micron pixel size and shift half to give a 4.5 micron pixel size.

    best regards,
    son
    ALPA (MAX, STC, TC) | CAMBO (Actus DB2, WRS-AE) | CONTAX | HASSELBLAD | LEICA | DB (CFV-16, CFV-39, IQ180, IQ360, IQ3100, P45+) | Lens (Canon, Fujinon, Leica, Nikon, Pentax, Rodenstock, Schneider, Zeiss)

  49. #49
    Senior Member PSon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    908
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    145

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Quote Originally Posted by gogopix View Post
    i think even 35mm 22MP would do that. What makes MFDB better?
    Victor
    Victor,
    Despite the file is not with Marc but he saw something that he has not seen before. The 22 megapixel Canon will not come close to resolve this picture. The reason I chose the wide angle to do this is to demonstrate you do not need macro if your sensor has this kind of resolution. The dots are clearly defined and at this distance. I will post more for you to see the point Marc spoke above.
    best regards
    son
    ALPA (MAX, STC, TC) | CAMBO (Actus DB2, WRS-AE) | CONTAX | HASSELBLAD | LEICA | DB (CFV-16, CFV-39, IQ180, IQ360, IQ3100, P45+) | Lens (Canon, Fujinon, Leica, Nikon, Pentax, Rodenstock, Schneider, Zeiss)

  50. #50
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Hasselblad Planar T* 2.0/110 FE + Modified 5D

    Son, are those shot with your Hy6 or Contax???

    They show phenomenal detail
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •