After huge troubles with Phase One 645DF+ system, I need new toys for my backs

[esox]

Hello from France,

I bought one year ago a complete Phase One system (half used, half new) : P65+, P45+, 645DF, 80mm SK, 28mm Phase One and 150 mm Schneider K. The first day the 645 DF body died when mounting the 28 mm Phase One (weird burned electronics smell). The body was changed for a 645 DF+. One week later this body died also when mounting the 28mm Phse One lens. New 645 DF+ body. 2 month later the 645DF+ burned again when mounting 28mm Phase One lens... Exactly the same problem in all cases : focal plane shutter out of order. The issue happened only with the 28mm, not with the 80mm, the 150mm or the Mamiya 300mm apo I also have. It happens when this lens is mounted when the body is still turned on. The problem is that the power knob sometimes goes in the off position but the body isn't turned of... But I don't think it is a good point for a professionnal camera to be so fragile in case of you forgot to turned it off before mounting lenses... Anyway, this system isn't reliable for me. I'm not a studio photographer, I'm a landscape and architecture photographer, plus sometimes some art reproduction (paintings, sculptures...).

So I'm negociating with my seller to keep the backs and get refund for the lense + body.

Why 2 backs ? Because the P45+ does long exposures and I had both of the for 1/3 of the price of a IQ260...

So as I don't want to go down 24x36 FF (once one tastes the blood it is difficult to go back standard dog food...).

I'm looking into the dorection o technical camera, more precisely Arca Rm3di. But I'm lost in the middle of the jungle of tech camera lenses.

Ragarding the wide angle, I think that the HR DIGARON W 4,0/40 mm Rod is far better that the equivalent by Schneider. More expensive but the difference seems to be quite obvious.

The for a "regular" lens (around 80mm), is there a big image quality difference between APO Digitar L 62° 5,6/72  by SK or HR DIGARON W 5,6/70 mm by rod ?

And for a short tele same thing : APO-SIRONAR-DIGITAL 5,6/150 mm, APO-SIRONAR-DIGITAL 5,6/135 mm, APO Digitar N 5,6/120 aspheric, APO Digitar N 5,6/150 ?

Thanks a lot !

[Doug Peterson]

Ragarding the wide angle, I think that the HR DIGARON W 4,0/40 mm Rod is far better that the equivalent by Schneider. More expensive but the difference seems to be quite obvious.

Which Schneider are you judging against the 40HR? The Schneider 43XL is a truly excellent lens.

[Doug Peterson]

The body isn't fragile - it sounds like you have a 28mm lens with an electronic issue that continues to damage the body.

With a correctly functioning 28mm lens and a DF+ with correct firmware there is no problem changing any lens with the body on or off, or with the switch between the two positions - just like you'd expect.

You're working with your dealer or a private individual??

[torger]

Schneider Digitar series does not have a 40mm lens, the closest are 35mm and 43mm. The 35mm is not as sharp or as friendly concerning colorcast as the 40mm Rodenstock, but AFAIK the Schneider 43mm is very competitive, as it's a new design. There's also a 47mm which is an older design, it's fine but not as sharp as the 43.

I haven't used the 70 Digaron-W, but I own the 72mm Digitar and have heard stuff from people with better backs than me that talk very positively about it, it's a sharp lens. Generally there are less problems with longer lenses, ie older designs are also fine there. Digitar has some new lenses there too though, the fantastic 60mm and the new 120mm aspheric (the old 120mm was good too).

I'll have to leave the 135-150mm question to someone which have tested the sironar-digital lenses. You won't be disappointed with the Digitar 120 and 150 that's for sure, but I don't know about the sironar-digital, my guess is that they are fine. The sironar-digital 35mm is not so good (much worse than the Digitar 35mm), but as said longer focal lengths with old designs tend to work much better than short. While the Digitar 120 and 150 indeed are more expensive than the Sironar-Digital alternatives they are still quite economical lenses, so it would be more a question of a performance than a price question, and I'm quite sure that the Digitars are slightly better, especially the new 120mm aspheric. If you need a large image circle it's worth noting that the Sironar-Digital 150 has 150mm while the Digitar has "only" 110mm. The digitar 120mm aspheric has a 150mm image circle, which is larger than the old digitar 120 (which I own myself). I'd say that the Sironar-Digital's larger image circle and older design indicate that the peak resolving power is less than the Digitars.

[yaya]

The body isn't fragile - it sounds like you have a 28mm lens with an electronic issue that continues to damage the body.

With a correctly functioning 28mm lens and a DF+ with correct firmware there is no problem changing any lens with the body on or off, or with the switch between the two positions - just like you'd expect.

+1

[esox]

+1

I would love you are right. But my 28mm went back to Phase One and the only thing they did to it is to tune... the autofocus... They didn't find any other problem. Me seller gave me another 28mm in between and in South Korea, very far away from home, the body totally locked, didn't recognise any lenses (80mm SK, 120 SK) right after having removed the 28mm. I had to remove all batteries, unmount the back, mount again, put again the batteries, no success, remove everything and then after having let the body with nothing on it for 15 minutes, I put back the battery, the back and then it recognized the lenses. I was right in the middle of a shooting with one of most famous Korea painter waiting for me to be ready to continue to shoot the paintings... That was with another 28mm than mine. So I don't know what to think about it except that the P1 28 has a conception issue and that the body has also an issue because it can be severely damaged by a lense issue.

I'm not a studio photographer, I'm a landscape and architecture photographer that makes very long walks sometimes in difficults weather conditions (cold, warm...). I'm not sure that Phase Body and lenses are designed for that and can support that.

[jerome_m]

If problems were common between the Phase One body and its 28mm lens, I suppose that we would have heard of them on this and other forums. But that is not the case, so I do not think that problems are that common.

[tho_mas]

Ragarding the wide angle, I think that the HR DIGARON W 4,0/40 mm Rod is far better that the equivalent by Schneider. More expensive but the difference seems to be quite obvious.

The Apo Digitar 43XL, as mentioned, is excellent on the 39MP and 60MP backs. The image circle is much larger than that of the Digaron 40. Depending on how you shoot you may need a centerfilter for the 43XL (not required on the HR 40).
The HR40 is faster.
The 43XL exhibits very little (almost no) distortion the HR40 shows visible moustache distortion.
Both the lenses are supportet in Alpa Lens corrector ... so distortion may not be a consideration here.
The 43XL is possibly only limited usable on a 80MP back, the HR 40 clearly is usable.
The 43XL has a much nicer look (at least to me)... and it's pretty small compared to the HR.

There's also a 47mm which is an older design, it's fine but not as sharp as the 43.

The sharpness of the 47XL is different... not less. The 43XL is usable at f5.6 (although even without movements the edges will go somewhat soft) and it's tack sharp at f8 all over the image circle. The 47XL is not really usable at f5.6, at f8 it's great but there is still some sharpness falloff in the edges of the large image circle. At f11 the 43XL and the 47XL are almost the same. The 47XL is pretty good at f16, the 43XL is not (well ... maybe you consider the 43XL usable but it's clearly softer at f16 than the 47XL). IMO ...

[Paul2660]

Schneider brackets the Rod40mm with the 35SK and 43SK.  Both lenses are excellent and on center you won't notice any difference in sharpness between all three on either your 60 or 40 MP back.  

Rod 40mm will offer more usable shift on your 60MP back then either the 35 or 43mm Schneider.  Whereas the Schneiders will have less distort not correct.  

Sk35 expect about 8mm max shift. SK 43 expect 12 to 13mm shift.  Rod 40mm expect 15mm of shift before vignetting on disc Rod places inside lens.  18mm to 20mm total if you don't mind cropping corners.

35SK will need CF and I would recommend it on the SK43.  Rod 40mm will not.

35SK will have a lot of color cast especially on shifts.  LCC will get most of it.

I have used all three of these lenses in the field on 60 MP backs.  All landscape shooting.  

Sorry to here about the issues on the 28mm and DF+

Paul Caldwell

[Doug Peterson]

I don't know the details of your trouble or your service checks.

But I can tell you this, if you were our customer we would not accept that your system fails when you put the lens on when the body is not off, whether the unit was repaired or replaced.

We have many customers with this exact combination of equipment without issues. We also have three 28mm lenses and 4-8 bodies in rental inventory at any given time and do not have issues with any combination of them. We also have many customers using the DF+ for exactly what you describe - long landscape treks.

Your system has a problem; that much seems very clear. But it is a resolvable issue, and not one indicative of a systematic problem.

I'm still not clear if you purchased this body/lens with warranty from a dealer (you mentioned some of the gear is new  and some used but you say "seller" rather than "dealer" so I don't know if you mean some private individual). If so, do not accept anything short of a system which works normally; a dealer is there to make sure you get exactly what you pay for and have someone to hold to the fire if not. Again I repeat, with a correctly working DF+ with current firmware and a correctly working 28mm lens there should be no issue with putting the lens on with or without the body on (with the only exception I can think of being that the lens contacts can't be wet when you put it on.

----

SEPARATE from that: I do love tech cameras and they are a great tool for landscape imagery. They also have the benefit of having no batteries and a kit with 2-3 lenses can be quite small and compact compared to an SLR system, especially if using the Schneider lenses.

[esox]

Thanks a lot for those very precise informations on tech camera lenses. I have now a clear view point on this toys.

Doug, my view point on the relation between customers and sellers are exactly mine. I bought the equipment with warranty to the official french Phase One importer (I prefer not to name it on public forum).

I bought the backs and the DF+80SK used with a 6 month warranty, that was january 25th 2013. The first DF body broke the day I purchased it (the same evening). They changed it for a new DF+ body wich I appreciated. One week later this body broke. They changed it for a new one (as they said). In fact it was not a new one but a demo one. I don't know how many people used it before, but my original was a used one so I accepted. This one broke a few month later right in the middle of a photo trip I had to cancel. They told me they would send me a new one, in fact it was again a demo one. Ok, I bought a used camera so I didn't say anything. This time I asked strongly the 28mm lense to be checked up by Phase One, also with the body that broke at that time. They did it and in the mean time they sent me another demo DF+ and demo 28mm P1. When I was in Korea the body locked (lenses not recognized by the body showing  f-- in the viewfinder). As I said before after almost 30min struggling with batteries, back, lenses, the body finally satret properly again. This was with another 28 and body that the original one... The body went back from P1 with just the focal plane shutter fixed. No investigation (that what the seller said), and the 28mm came back just with AF tuned. My seller said it was perfectly OK.

Hopefully the parts are still under warranty (in France a professionnal seller is obliged to a 6 month warranty on used equipment, and whane something happens in this 6 month time the warranty extends to 2 years, that is the law).

What should I think ? What would you do in such a case ?

I had the 2 backs + body and 80sk for a very good price. Maybe they new there was a issue ? But anyway I bought the 28mm new (I mean I hope it was new;.. because this importer seems to mix together demo equipment and new equipment...). Now my lawyer is on the deck.

[torger]

As far as I know the 47XL is an analog design, the only difference making it digital is that it has had higher precision requirements in manufacturing than its analog counterpart, while the 43 is a true digital design. I own the 47XL and it's one of my favourite lenses on my 33 megapixel back, but I can't say that it reaches the best (in tech camera terms), sometimes there can be some slight chromatic abberation when pixel peeping etc, and at large shifts degradation is noticeable.

Here an example shot with my 7.2um/33 megapixel pixel back: midframe f/11



ie very sharp. Here the same f/11 shot with a crop at the edge of a 90mm image circle (I think the 47 is claimed to have 110mm image circle):



ie noticably blurrier, with a 6um back (P65+) it will be slightly more visible. For practical photography I don't think this slight blurring is a problem, but you will see it when pixel peeping. I prefer the smaller and more robust low/no distortion Schneider designs, shooting with a tech cam and having to correct for distortion is just not my idea of how the tech camera format should work. For that reason I'd only get the rodenstock retrofocus lenses only if absolutely required, I rather have a little bit worse corner performance than distortion, but we all have different considerations on what's important.

Unfortunately I don't know for sure how the 43mm performs in comparison, but I'm quite sure it's noticably sharper in that shifted mode.

I often get back to that the uncompromising quest for resolving power as only driver is about to kill the tech camera format (which started out as "large format digital"), if we only care about resolving power tech cam medium format is risking to end up looking like an overgrown Sony A7r with Zeiss Otus optics (as extreme resolving power require extreme optical designs):


and I hope we don't go that path, although ALPA FPS and similar cameras is on good way. The Digitar wide angle range is more true traditional "large format", while the Rodenstock wide angle digaron range is all about resolving power.

[jerome_m]

I am not sure I understand. Esox, you said that you can kill any DF body by mounting this lens on it while the body is switched on?

[jerome_m]

I often get back to that the uncompromising quest for resolving power as only driver is about to kill the tech camera format (which started out as "large format digital"), if we only care about resolving power tech cam medium format is risking to end up looking like an overgrown Sony A7r with Zeiss Otus optics (as extreme resolving power require extreme optical designs)

It seems that the native 55mm f/1.8 in E-mount is already giving extraordinary results when stopped down a bit.

This being said, the A7 is only 34 Mpix when state of the art MF is 80 mpix. The difference in resolving power between formats is still there.

[esox]

Potentially yes... It happened on 4 diffrent 645 body. You want to try with yours ? In fact when the body is "on" and if you hesitate a bit to lock the lens into the body, pooooof !

[jerome_m]

Potentially yes... It happened on 4 diffrent 645 body. You want to try with yours ? In fact when the body is "on" and if you hesitate a bit to lock the lens into the body, pooooof !

I don't have a 645 body, I use the competition. But if you can reproduce the problem at will, I cannot understand the attitude of your dealer. There clearly is something malfunctioning in the lens. If the problem happened with all 28mm lenses, we would know about it.

I recall having read about your problems in Korea on chassimages. Did you ask on this forum? I can't access this site any more.

[Wayne Fox]

The body isn't fragile - it sounds like you have a 28mm lens with an electronic issue that continues to damage the body.

With a correctly functioning 28mm lens and a DF+ with correct firmware there is no problem changing any lens with the body on or off, or with the switch between the two positions - just like you'd expect.

You're working with your dealer or a private individual??

I have changed lenses including the 28mm hundreds of times without powering the camera off.  I agree, the problem isn’t with the body, it appears to be with the lens.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

There is no replacement for square centimetres. But, I think Jerome has a good point, the reason the for the size of the Distagon 50/1.4 is probably that they wanted to reduce vignetting at large apertures. Many large aperture lenses have significant longitudinal chromatic aberration, giving greenish fringes at large apertures and that is almost entirely eliminated in the Distagon 50/1.4.

So I guess that much of the cost, effort and mass is going to make the lens almost perfect at f/1.4. Living with a smaller aperture means a smaller lens.

I guess that Anders feels that small pixel sizes don't work well on technical cameras, forcing retrofocus designs and he is probably right. I have old Hasselblad lenses so for me this is not an issue.

Best regards
Erik

It seems that the native 55mm f/1.8 in E-mount is already giving extraordinary results when stopped down a bit.

This being said, the A7 is only 34 Mpix when state of the art MF is 80 mpix. The difference in resolving power between formats is still there.

[torger]

Yes, forgot that large aperture and low vignetting are also important drivers for large complex optics. And that's nice to have when working with live view, so alas, my beloved symmetric small aperture large format designs may not have the future I like it to have.

Hi,

There is no replacement for square centimetres. But, I think Jerome has a good point, the reason the for the size of the Distagon 50/1.4 is probably that they wanted to reduce vignetting at large apertures. Many large aperture lenses have significant longitudinal chromatic aberration, giving greenish fringes at large apertures and that is almost entirely eliminated in the Distagon 50/1.4.

So I guess that much of the cost, effort and mass is going to make the lens almost perfect at f/1.4. Living with a smaller aperture means a smaller lens.

I guess that Anders feels that small pixel sizes don't work well on technical cameras, forcing retrofocus designs and he is probably right. I have old Hasselblad lenses so for me this is not an issue.

Best regards
Erik

[esox]

What lenses do you have ? When you speak about he 28 it is the P1 or the SK ?