HCD 4/28 vs HC 3.5/35

[PeterDendrinos]

Any opinion on the merits of one over the other? I realize they are decidedly 2 different lenses, however is there more going on here than 6 degrees of coverage. Hasselblad touts the 28 rather highly. Is the image quality truly better than the 35? Does the built in integration with the H3D really make for an impressive match up, beyond what is capable with the 35?

Or another way to put this is, I’ll be purchasing a wide angle lens. I was initially thinking the 35 was about right. Should I rethink that decision?

P

[Khun_K]

Any opinion on the merits of one over the other? I realize they are decidedly 2 different lenses, however is there more going on here than 6 degrees of coverage. Hasselblad touts the 28 rather highly. Is the image quality truly better than the 35? Does the built in integration with the H3D really make for an impressive match up, beyond what is capable with the 35?

Or another way to put this is, I’ll be purchasing a wide angle lens. I was initially thinking the 35 was about right. Should I rethink that decision?

P
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129214\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The HCD 28mm share the similar optical design as the 35mm. It was done so because 35mm was beleived to be a good lens and a good foundation to start with, and speed to market. Teh 28mm is noticeable smaller than the 35mm, achieved so by allowing the distortion to be dealt in software level (however without the DAC I fonud the lens to be OK for a wide angle lens) thus Hasselblad is able to avoid a super big front element - size, cost, and etc, and concentrate on other area such as chromatic aberrations. And since only the rear lens group is moving for focus, making the AF reasonably fast.  With the idea that extreme distortion correction can be delat at software level, the 28mm lens became an exclusive of H3D lens and it is also safe to assume the much rumored tilt-shift lens will also share this exclusivity.
Both 35 and 28 mm lenses are of little fault but lack of clear character , but both lenses are quite sharp, even in close focus.

[PeterDendrinos]

Thank you for your input. I hadn't heard of the rumered tilt shift lens, it's been 17 years since i last shot hasselblad. i havent paid much attention to them since i moved out of the format.

As for the lenses, i lilke your statement here. am i correct in interpreting that to mean "good but nothing special" "no uniqueness" to either lens?

P

...it is also safe to assume the much rumored tilt-shift lens will also share this exclusivity.


Both 35 and 28 mm lenses are of little fault but lack of clear character...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129267\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[David WM]

From what I've gleaned so far,  the 28mm lens is a half stop darker than the 35mm , is 35% more expensive, utilises DAC, sounds like it produces similar results to the 35mm,  it doesn't look like the savings have been passed on to the user, or am I missing something? Is this a special lens or an average one with some software corrections being sold for a special price?  I wonder how it stacks up against the Mamiya 28mm?

David

 

The HCD 28mm share the similar optical design as the 35mm. It was done so because 35mm was beleived to be a good lens and a good foundation to start with, and speed to market. Teh 28mm is noticeable smaller than the 35mm, achieved so by allowing the distortion to be dealt in software level (however without the DAC I fonud the lens to be OK for a wide angle lens) thus Hasselblad is able to avoid a super big front element - size, cost, and etc, and concentrate on other area such as chromatic aberrations. And since only the rear lens group is moving for focus, making the AF reasonably fast.  With the idea that extreme distortion correction can be delat at software level, the 28mm lens became an exclusive of H3D lens and it is also safe to assume the much rumored tilt-shift lens will also share this exclusivity.
Both 35 and 28 mm lenses are of little fault but lack of clear character , but both lenses are quite sharp, even in close focus.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129267\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Gary Ferguson]

I'll say at the outset that I haven't used the H28mm, but based on long experience with Hasselblad I tend to trust their MTF charts. And the MTF chart for the H28mm is indeed a thing of wonder!

On paper at least the H28mm is significantly better than the H35mm. It's the kind of difference that exists between the older 40mm V series lenses and the latest V40mm, in other words the kind of difference that's easily visible in even modest sized prints.

Interestingly the new 40mm V series lens, although delivering astonishing resolution, has by far the worst distortion in the entire V lens range. It's perhaps no coincidence that the H28mm needs digital correction for distortion. It seems the wide-angle lens designer wrestles with a trade-off between many conflicting priorities, including resolution versus distortion. On the H28mm the designers had a digital option for distortion correction and therefore they've been able to lift wide-angle resolution to new highs.

[cerett]

The MTF data seems to favor the 40mm CFE IF over these two lenses. Am I correct or comparing apples to oranges?

[Gary Ferguson]

The MTF data seems to favor the 40mm CFE IF over these two lenses. Am I correct or comparing apples to oranges?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129324\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

In terms of the MTF charts you're probably right (and as Hasselblad produce their own MTF charts using Zeiss MTF test equipment and a standard process then comparisons between their H and V optics are valid).

However, I'd imagine that delivering that kind of performance in a 28mm focal length is a lot harder than with a 40mm focal length, and probably impossible at any kind of halfway affordable price without allowing optical distortion to fall where it may and substituting digital distortion correction.

[Khun_K]

I'll say at the outset that I haven't used the H28mm, but based on long experience with Hasselblad I tend to trust their MTF charts. And the MTF chart for the H28mm is indeed a thing of wonder!

On paper at least the H28mm is significantly better than the H35mm. It's the kind of difference that exists between the older 40mm V series lenses and the latest V40mm, in other words the kind of difference that's easily visible in even modest sized prints.

Interestingly the new 40mm V series lens, although delivering astonishing resolution, has by far the worst distortion in the entire V lens range. It's perhaps no coincidence that the H28mm needs digital correction for distortion. It seems the wide-angle lens designer wrestles with a trade-off between many conflicting priorities, including resolution versus distortion. On the H28mm the designers had a digital option for distortion correction and therefore they've been able to lift wide-angle resolution to new highs.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129314\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

In case you guys wondered, this is a quick snap shot of the HC 35mm and HCD 28mm side by side physical comparison.  For a wider angle, the 28mm is noticeably smaller, although the filter size is also 95mm. Making it more compact, focus faster and more travel friendly.  I would not say the optical performance of 28mm is better than 35mm, at least from what I have tried, but both lenses are capable of deliver sharp images.
I think perhaps Hasselblad did make snese to use digital correction assistance to reach an otherwise much larger and much more expensive lens.

[Khun_K]

In case you guys wondered, this is a quick snap shot of the HC 35mm and HCD 28mm side by side physical comparison.  For a wider angle, the 28mm is noticeably smaller, although the filter size is also 95mm. Making it more compact, focus faster and more travel friendly.  I would not say the optical performance of 28mm is better than 35mm, at least from what I have tried, but both lenses are capable of deliver sharp images.
I think perhaps Hasselblad did make snese to use digital correction assistance to reach an otherwise much larger and much more expensive lens.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129328\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

May be this will show the size better, to have the H system wide angle lenses to compare with the Zeiss 35mm/3.5 for Contax 645. The three lenses all use 95mm filter. I would say I still like my old Contax 35mm lens better, equally sharp but render more smooth color between highlight and shadow, although some may disagree.

[Mike W]

Does anyone know what kind of crop factor you have to take into account while talking about these lenses?

Phase One sells the (I think) P45 as a 1.1X sensor, while Hasselblad and Mamiya try to sell their backs as being full frame, with no crop factor. Even though it's the same format sensor!

Since the H28 lens is a strictly digital lens for the H3D, is it adapted to the digital back, to discredit the physically present crop factor?

Long story short...when you get te H3D and the 28mm, do you get the advertised 95' and 28mm focal lenght or a cropped 28mm: being equivalent to a 30mm MF lens?
does the same go for the Mamiya 28mm?

Just to understand where I'm coming from, I need a 20mm (for full frame DSRL) equivalent for a future medium format system.

regards

Mike W

[PeterDendrinos]

Good question mike, i was wondering the same thing. being the sensor is only 36x48 with a diagonal of about 60, how is that to be looked at when thinking lenses.

P

Does anyone know what kind of crop factor you have to take into account while talking about these lenses?

Phase One sells the (I think) P45 as a 1.1X sensor, while Hasselblad and Mamiya try to sell their backs as being full frame, with no crop factor. Even though it's the same format sensor!

Since the H28 lens is a strictly digital lens for the H3D, is it adapted to the digital back, to discredit the physically present crop factor?

Long story short...when you get te H3D and the 28mm, do you get the advertised 95' and 28mm focal lenght or a cropped 28mm: being equivalent to a 30mm MF lens?
does the same go for the Mamiya 28mm?

Just to understand where I'm coming from, I need a 20mm (for full frame DSRL) equivalent for a future medium format system.

regards

Mike W
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129381\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Khun_K]

Good question mike, i was wondering the same thing. being the sensor is only 36x48 with a diagonal of about 60, how is that to be looked at when thinking lenses.

P
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129385\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think Hasselblad's term of "full frame" is indicating that there is no masking (cropping ) inside the view finder as most other medium format camera with digital backs, and the full 48X36mm is aroud 1.1X of the film size of 645.  The 28mm is an exception for this since it was designed to use on the (full frame) H3D so it is still 28mm on H3D39. But the other lenses for H3D39/22 will be cropped, for example, 35 becomes 38, 50 becomes 55, 80 becomes 88 and so on. And for H3D31, 35 becomes 45, 50 becomes 65, 80 becomes 100 and so on.
The only lens, HCD 28mm is the only one without the crop factor but it cannot be use on H1/H2 camera. I do not have the film back for my H3D so I am not sure if the 28mm will show some vignette on the film or can it be use at all I am not sure.

[PeterDendrinos]

Thanks for the input.
p

I think Hasselblad's term of "full frame" is indicating that there is no masking (cropping ) inside the view finder as most other medium format camera with digital backs, and the full 48X36mm is aroud 1.1X of the film size of 645.  The 28mm is an exception for this since it was designed to use on the (full frame) H3D so it is still 28mm on H3D39. But the other lenses for H3D39/22 will be cropped, for example, 35 becomes 38, 50 becomes 55, 80 becomes 88 and so on. And for H3D31, 35 becomes 45, 50 becomes 65, 80 becomes 100 and so on.
The only lens, HCD 28mm is the only one without the crop factor but it cannot be use on H1/H2 camera. I do not have the film back for my H3D so I am not sure if the 28mm will show some vignette on the film or can it be use at all I am not sure.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129407\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Khun_K]

Thanks for the input.
p
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129411\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I can reconfirm the 28mm (exactly 28.9mm) on H3D39/22 is indeed a 28mm lens, no crop factor. So even though H3D can accept film back, the 28mm cannot be use for such combination, it is only for digital use. No crop factor.

[PatrikR]

I can reconfirm the 28mm (exactly 28.9mm) on H3D39/22 is indeed a 28mm lens, no crop factor. So even though H3D can accept film back, the 28mm cannot be use for such combination, it is only for digital use. No crop factor.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129473\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It's the sensor that has the crop factor not the lenses. Crop factor means that a 35mm lens on a 1.1x sensor is equivalent of 38.5mm lens with 645 film.

Since the H1 was intended as 645 film camera and the sensor size is not quite film size this is why we have the crop factor. If the camera was designed for digital back only then the crop factor is mundane - there's nothing to compare. But since most DSLRs are based on film cameras  we like to compare how it performs to the film. A Nikon user regrets that his used to be wideangle 20mm lens is now only equivalent of a 30mm or so but on the other hand is greatful that his 200 f2.8 is now equivalent of a powerfull 300 f2.8.

Also a 35mm lens in 645 format is equivalent of a 20mm lens in the familiar 35mm (135) format. The lens focal length will remain the same no matter how big or small the sensor. If you put a Hasselblad wideangle (40mm for example) lens to a Canon 5D thru a converter that lens will be exactly 40mm on that 5D and not become by some magical transformation a wide angle lens. 210mm lens is cosidered a wide angle lens when shooting 8x10"

Even though the H28mm lens is made for the H3D39 it still is equivalent of 31mm lens even on H3D39. You just can't have one lens with a crop factor and another without it on a same system. Hasselblad is calling their H3D39 full frame because they think it's a great idea. This means that according to Hasselblads statement the H3D39 does not have crop factors, but H2 with P45 will have even though they use the same Kodak sensor... But crop factor depends on what you compare to.

This ofcourse is Hasselbald's marketing. If a bigger (physical size) sensor becomes available maybe Hasselblad wont use them since they have already reached their full frame. This probably is what Hasselbald is telling us by calling their H3D39 a full frame camera. They are probably designing new lenses for this sensor size only and putting their efforts to this sensor size system. They just decided that this is their full frame. This would be fine but locking others like me (avid PhaseOne fan) out by making them H3D only is stupid.

My H35mm is very sharp with my P45+ and gives good enough wide angles even with the crop factor  .

Patrik

[PeterDendrinos]

Thank you,

At the end of the day this issue comes down to selecting a lens. I am about to purchase a system, and am trying to pick the appropriate lenses for the type of work i do. I shoot predominantly landscape. I believe i will go with the 35, 50-110 and the 210. sounds like a good mix. a bit wide, and bit long, and a good zoom for the middle. about the only issue left is DoF concerns with these lenses.

The real problem is the nearest dealer is 400 miles away from me. so i cant easily try these things out. that would be the best way to play this game naturally.

Thanks for all your help guys

P

It's the sensor that has the crop factor not the lenses. Crop factor means that a 35mm lens on a 1.1x sensor is equivalent of 38.5mm lens with 645 film.

Since the H1 was intended as 645 film camera and the sensor size is not quite film size this is why we have the crop factor. If the camera was designed for digital back only then the crop factor is mundane - there's nothing to compare. But since most DSLRs are based on film cameras  we like to compare how it performs to the film. A Nikon user regrets that his used to be wideangle 20mm lens is now only equivalent of a 30mm or so but on the other hand is greatful that his 200 f2.8 is now equivalent of a powerfull 300 f2.8.

Also a 35mm lens in 645 format is equivalent of a 20mm lens in the familiar 35mm (135) format. The lens focal length will remain the same no matter how big or small the sensor. If you put a Hasselblad wideangle (40mm for example) lens to a Canon 5D thru a converter that lens will be exactly 40mm on that 5D and not become by some magical transformation a wide angle lens. 210mm lens is cosidered a wide angle lens when shooting 8x10"

Even though the H28mm lens is made for the H3D39 it still is equivalent of 31mm lens even on H3D39. You just can't have one lens with a crop factor and another without it on a same system. Hasselblad is calling their H3D39 full frame because they think it's a great idea. This means that according to Hasselblads statement the H3D39 does not have crop factors, but H2 with P45 will have even though they use the same Kodak sensor... But crop factor depends on what you compare to.

This ofcourse is Hasselbald's marketing. If a bigger (physical size) sensor becomes available maybe Hasselblad wont use them since they have already reached their full frame. This probably is what Hasselbald is telling us by calling their H3D39 a full frame camera. They are probably designing new lenses for this sensor size only and putting their efforts to this sensor size system. They just decided that this is their full frame. This would be fine but locking others like me (avid PhaseOne fan) out by making them H3D only is stupid.

My H35mm is very sharp with my P45+ and gives good enough wide angles even with the crop factor  .

Patrik
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129483\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[josayeruk]

Even though the H28mm lens is made for the H3D39 it still is equivalent of 31mm lens even on H3D39. You just can't have one lens with a crop factor and another without it on a same system. Hasselblad is calling their H3D39 full frame because they think it's a great idea. This means that according to Hasselblads statement the H3D39 does not have crop factors, but H2 with P45 will have even though they use the same Kodak sensor... But crop factor depends on what you compare to.

Patrik
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129483\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Not so Patirck.

The angle of view is not compromised on the H3D39 / HCD28 like it would be with the HC35mm.

Probably easier to talk in terms of angle of view than it is with focal length as a 28mm will be a 28mm regardless of what it is used on.

Jo S. x

[PatrikR]

Not so Patirck.

The angle of view is not compromised on the H3D39 / HCD28 like it would be with the HC35mm.

Probably easier to talk in terms of angle of view than it is with focal length as a 28mm will be a 28mm regardless of what it is used on.

Jo S. x
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129490\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Ok, Sorry my mistake - I didn't know that. I do agree angle of view would make much more sense.

Patrik

[Khun_K]

It's the sensor that has the crop factor not the lenses. Crop factor means that a 35mm lens on a 1.1x sensor is equivalent of 38.5mm lens with 645 film.

Since the H1 was intended as 645 film camera and the sensor size is not quite film size this is why we have the crop factor. If the camera was designed for digital back only then the crop factor is mundane - there's nothing to compare. But since most DSLRs are based on film cameras  we like to compare how it performs to the film. A Nikon user regrets that his used to be wideangle 20mm lens is now only equivalent of a 30mm or so but on the other hand is greatful that his 200 f2.8 is now equivalent of a powerfull 300 f2.8.

Also a 35mm lens in 645 format is equivalent of a 20mm lens in the familiar 35mm (135) format. The lens focal length will remain the same no matter how big or small the sensor. If you put a Hasselblad wideangle (40mm for example) lens to a Canon 5D thru a converter that lens will be exactly 40mm on that 5D and not become by some magical transformation a wide angle lens. 210mm lens is cosidered a wide angle lens when shooting 8x10"

Even though the H28mm lens is made for the H3D39 it still is equivalent of 31mm lens even on H3D39. You just can't have one lens with a crop factor and another without it on a same system. Hasselblad is calling their H3D39 full frame because they think it's a great idea. This means that according to Hasselblads statement the H3D39 does not have crop factors, but H2 with P45 will have even though they use the same Kodak sensor... But crop factor depends on what you compare to.

This ofcourse is Hasselbald's marketing. If a bigger (physical size) sensor becomes available maybe Hasselblad wont use them since they have already reached their full frame. This probably is what Hasselbald is telling us by calling their H3D39 a full frame camera. They are probably designing new lenses for this sensor size only and putting their efforts to this sensor size system. They just decided that this is their full frame. This would be fine but locking others like me (avid PhaseOne fan) out by making them H3D only is stupid.

My H35mm is very sharp with my P45+ and gives good enough wide angles even with the crop factor  .

Patrik
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129483\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The HCD 28mm is not the case. It was designed to be a 28mm on the 36X48 mm sensor size, so if it were to use on true 6X4.5 size sensor it will be wider than 28mm, but it can't. The 28mm is an exception, because it was not designed as other lenses to be also useful with film. It is either 28mm for H3D39 or H3D22, or with H3D31 it becomes 31mm while a 35mm lens on H3D31 will be a 45mm lens, or 1.3X factor. Other  H lenses were designed to be useful with film, therefore when use on the 36X48mm sensor they have the 1.1X factor.
I am not so sure if Mamiya 28mm lens is useful for Mamiya's film back, if it is, then it is not equal to a 28mm on the existing digital back.

[Barry Goyette]

Hasselblad's marketing is misleading. I did a double take myself when I read it. The whole thing starts when they "define" the 36x48 as full frame. Sure it's fine that they are putting things in a digital perspective and not comparing the sensor size with that of film in a MF camera....but by eliminating the 1.1 crop factor from the numbers listed in the marketing, they are misleading people. The 28mm is just a 28mm...not, somehow a special (and truly magic) 28mm for the 36x48 frame. It may be true that the image circle is smaller and wouldn't cover a full frame of film. But the angle of view is essentially the same as any other MF 28mm would  provide on the "Full-frame 36x48" sensor-- approx the same as a 31mm would on film.

A 28mm lens designed for a 645 system should have an angle of view of appox 102 degrees. The Hasselblad has an angle of view of 95. Mamiya list's their 28 as having 102 for film/ 94 for the zd.