Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: narikin on November 30, 2017, 02:53:58 am
-
With 150mp sensors about to arrive, we badly need higher quality lens options for Phase One.
The blue ring lenses simply aren't up to it, imho. I've demonstrated elsewhere their weaker resolution compared to older non LS designs.
When full frame started hitting this barrier, Zeiss stepped in with it's Otus range, which reset the parameters for FF resolution. So... surely it's time for the same for MF now? M-Otus ('Motus'?!) would be great. Yes I'd accept manual focus and no LS if necessary. We have Electronic Shutter, and that will improve in speed with every new sensor generation, so it's simply the ultimate resolution that needs improving.
I appreciate Zeiss have retreated from MF as the market is smaller than CaNikon, but surely the 300lb Gorilla that is Phase One can tempt then back for a high end production run at least for something like a 60 or 80mm standard?
-
Considering the X1D lenses, I would personally expect more from Hasselblad in terms of delivering lenses able to tap into that resolution potential. Even the best H lenses will probably do a very fine job.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
With 150mp sensors about to arrive, we badly need higher quality lens options for Phase One.
The blue ring lenses simply aren't up to it, imho. I've demonstrated elsewhere their weaker resolution compared to older non LS designs.
Please be more specific. I find it utterly incredulous you've found anything lacking with the 35LS, 40-80LS, 45LS, 150LS or 240LS. These are some of the best lenses ever made for any platform by any maker. The 55LS and 110LS are darn good. The 80LS is good. The 28LS is the lens that really needs a successor; in absolute terms it's a fine lens, but relative to any of the other Blue Ring lenses, and when used for high res full-frame 645 sensors like the IQ3 100mp it falls behind.
-
You're a Zeiss fanboy.
-
The 55LS and 110LS are darn good. The 80LS is good. The 28LS is the lens that really needs a successor; in absolute terms it's a fine lens, but relative to any of the other Blue Ring lenses, and when used for high res full-frame 645 sensors like the IQ3 100mp it falls behind.
You provided your own answer Doug. The 80mm is 'Good'?
Is that what we should expect from the standard lens of a $45,000+camera: 'Good'?!!
It's simply unacceptable at this price point. The 55 is likewise.
Compare these to Roddies best tech cam lenses and they mostly fall away.
They need to do better, imho.
What about an 80 or 60 mm MF Otus level lens, as we step up to 150mp?
Surely that's not asking too much
-
You're a Zeiss fanboy.
Hard to be a Zeiss fanboy in digital MF!
The only lenses they made for this were for Sinar, and that system died virtually at birth.
The best two mf lenses I own are Rodenstock, the Yellow banded 90mm f5.6, and the small walkabout 60mm f4.
The best phase lenses I own are the older generation non LS ones.
-
I've always lamented the loss of Zeiss in medium format and I agree, we need them back, even more so with the increase in accessibility and popularity of medium format with the GFX and X1D.
When I asked them a while back about it they replied - we can't say.
-
Hi,
I have owned most Zeiss lenses for the Hasselblad and many were not that good. The ones that impressed me were the Sonnars 150/4 and 180/4 and the Planar 100/3.5. But, I have not owned the 40/CFI IF or any of the Superachromats.
Regarding the Phase One lenses, I have not seen enough raw files to build an opinion. Jim Kasson has run a lot of very good tests on the Fujinon lenses for the GFX and it seems that they belong to the best lenses ever made.
I don't think Zeiss can deliver better lenses than other vendors. It is more about price and tolerances. It seems that there is a tendency to more complex designs.
Once a decent image quality is reached, diffraction will be the limit. That is the reason for f/8 and be there. Most older lenses had near optimum performance at f/8, stopping down more improves depth of field but looses fine detail contrast. New lens designs may reach optimum performance at f/5.6 or even f/4. But, making use of that performance means shooting at f/5.6 or f/4.
The figure below is taken a bit out of context, but it shows quiet clearly that lens performance tends to converge at f/8. Diffraction is the limit and that limit is the same for all lens makers:
(http://blog.kasson.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/htrrn-mtf-vs-fstop.png)
Best regards
Erik
I've always lamented the loss of Zeiss in medium format and I agree, we need them back, even more so with the increase in accessibility and popularity of medium format with the GFX and X1D.
When I asked them a while back about it they replied - we can't say.
-
Honestly I don’t get the fuss... all lenses I currently own 35,45,55,80,110,120,150,240 will easy handle 150MP from corner to corner.
The 35,45,110,150,240 were perfect from the start. I needed 2 copies of the 80 BR to find a great one. (7 of the none BR to match one with the BR)
I admit the 55 was more difficult. I tried 5 none BR copies and kept none. I tried 3 BR copies. Two were ok, the one I kept is as good as the 35 and 45.
So, while I never would mind heiß in the game it’s not needed.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I'm all for higher resolution lenses and higher resolution backs, and heck even more choices for lenses, but I don't get the fuss either. X1D and GFX lenses are already fantastic, so I'm not sure what else Zeiss would bring to the table here. The only thing I find lacking with the XCD lenses is lack of focal length selection at the moment. Plus I'd rather have AF and LS on the X1D than an Otus-type lens anyway.
For the upcoming 150mp backs, I don't see too many ppl complaining about the P1 BR lenses on the IQx 100mp and can't imagine they wouldn't be up for the 150mp task. The Hasselblad 35mm needs an update but I don't anticipate the other lenses wouldn't be able to handle the resolution bump. I think both Hasselblad and Phase could benefit from some redesigned wider-than-35mm lenses as the P1 28mm seems to be weak, and the Hassy 24 and 28mm are HCD lenses designed for a smaller-than-40x54mm sensor.
I also don't see P1 and Hasselblad partnering up with Zeiss to make MF lenses anytime in the near future anyway as P1 is partnered with Schneider and Hassy Fuji (for the H lenses). Zeiss already has a partnership with Sony, so an obvious entry for Zeiss into the MF world would be on a Sony system, however Sony doesn't seem to be in any hurry to release a MF system (if at all).
-
i was never really a huge fan of zeiss, always preferred schneider or fuji for MF glass...
now? the last zeiss lenses i have owned were for sony are (except for the 55 maybe) are mediocre....sony's own GM line is way better IMO...
hasselblad "broke up" with fuji (or the other way around, for obvious reasons)...i am not sure if the X1D lenses are all THAT great but at least they should have been planed with 100+mpix in mind....
fuji's GF line is excellent just like their 670, 680, 690,....always was....
Jim Kasson's findings about H lenses on GFX are a little worrying for the H system IMO....but hasselblad will figure it out for the next gen sensors/backs....most of the (old, fuji made) lenses will probably see updates when those backs come out.....
but the key there is just like with everything is being able to keep prices down with higher production quantities....how is it that fuji can come out with a completely new line of lenses.....they are all class leaders and cheaper....because they are selling great glass for smaller bodies.....
IMO sigma is the new zeiss....the produce amazing glass for great prices and canon and nikon shooters appreciate it....maybe that is where phase should look for glass...but sigma probably has no interest in such a small niche market, especially since hasselblad and fuji are most likely to seriously dent phase's business with GFX and X1D....IQ3 50 system is twice as much as X1D? i am not even comparing it to the GFX...but all 3 have the same sensor and both GFX and X1D have better AF? not sure how that will play out in the long run.....
-
Hi,
A blue label dos not mean a great lens. A bit similar, Pentax did put a "Schneider" label on some of it's lenses.
I would suggest that most high end lenses are better than the photographers using them. Achieving best performance is difficult. It needs dead on focus at say f/4 with no vibrations. So, I think that must of the subjects we see are more photographer limited than lens limited.
Now, I am not saying that we should not use great lenses, or so. But stopping down a world class lens to f/11 makes it to perform as a decent lens at the same aperture.
I would suggest that many lenses we have today are truly great. But, to see their real benefits they need to be optimally used, that often means f/4 or f/5.6 and critical focus. That is what you are paying for, why throw it away?
Best regards
Erik
i was never really a huge fan of zeiss, always preferred schneider or fuji for MF glass...
now? the last zeiss lenses i have owned were for sony are (except for the 55 maybe) are mediocre....sony's own GM line is way better IMO...
hasselblad "broke up" with fuji (or the other way around, for obvious reasons)...i am not sure if the X1D lenses are all THAT great but at least they should have been planed with 100+mpix in mind....
fuji's GF line is excellent just like their 670, 680, 690,....always was....
Jim Kasson's findings about H lenses on GFX are a little worrying for the H system IMO....but hasselblad will figure it out for the next gen sensors/backs....most of the (old, fuji made) lenses will probably see updates when those backs come out.....
but the key there is just like with everything is being able to keep prices down with higher production quantities....how is it that fuji can come out with a completely new line of lenses.....they are all class leaders and cheaper....because they are selling great glass for smaller bodies.....
IMO sigma is the new zeiss....the produce amazing glass for great prices and canon and nikon shooters appreciate it....maybe that is where phase should look for glass...but sigma probably has no interest in such a small niche market, especially since hasselblad and fuji are most likely to seriously dent phase's business with GFX and X1D....IQ3 50 system is twice as much as X1D? i am not even comparing it to the GFX...but all 3 have the same sensor and both GFX and X1D have better AF? not sure how that will play out in the long run.....
-
Some of the H lenses, interestingly the more complex wide glass (28mm and 50mm II) are very good and will have no issues dealing with 150mp.
The 35mm is weak and the 100mm f2.2 leaves a lot to be desired technically compared to an Otus or recent Nikon glass. The Nikon 70-200 f2.8 E FL is far superior at f2.8 for example.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Hi Bernard,
I guess that the most of the action is in 44x33 mm right now...
Best regards
Erik
Some of the H lenses, interestingly the more complex wide glass (28mm and 50mm II) are very good and will have no issues dealing with 150mp.
The 35mm is weak and the 100mm f2.2 leaves a lot to be desired technically compared to an Otus or recent Nikon glass. The Nikon 70-200 f2.8 E FL is far superior at f2.8 for example.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Christopher,
For my own education, how do you test your new lenses? I am afraid I have not been as discriminating as I should be; my Blue Ring 80mm and 35mm LS lenses are excellent, but I learned this over time, as I used them. I am thinking now I should have a rigorous testing protocol for a new lens purchased, based on how many lenses you have returned.
Perhaps my 120mm Macro lens is not as sharp as it could be. I am thinking about obtaining a 110mm Blue Ring lens anyway. Any thoughts?
Thanks,
John
-
The original premise is pretty stupid if you ask me
-
Christopher,
For my own education, how do you test your new lenses? I am afraid I have not been as discriminating as I should be; my Blue Ring 80mm and 35mm LS lenses are excellent, but I learned this over time, as I used them. I am thinking now I should have a rigorous testing protocol for a new lens purchased, based on how many lenses you have returned.
Perhaps my 120mm Macro lens is not as sharp as it could be. I am thinking about obtaining a 110mm Blue Ring lens anyway. Any thoughts?
Thanks,
John
For such high end lenses, I just have to wonder what you'd be shooting that makes one find them inadequate
-
I guess that the most of the action is in 44x33 mm right now...
Indeed. But the true MF sized sensors remain IMHO the only ones that have real value compared to the best 35mm FF sensor cameras.
That is already true today (sensors very close in resolution, colors and DR, much wider range of similar quality lenses, much better AF,...) and will be even more true after Sony releases their a9r and Nikon their D5x/D950.
So I really hope that Hasselblad continues to invest in the true MF segment with newer lens designs, and AF suitable for the EVFs they are likely to equip these cameras with.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Please be more specific. I find it utterly incredulous you've found anything lacking with the 35LS, 40-80LS, 45LS, 150LS or 240LS. These are some of the best lenses ever made for any platform by any maker. The 55LS and 110LS are darn good. The 80LS is good. The 28LS is the lens that really needs a successor; in absolute terms it's a fine lens, but relative to any of the other Blue Ring lenses, and when used for high res full-frame 645 sensors like the IQ3 100mp it falls behind.
Hi,
If I read you correctly the Schneider-Kreuznach 110 f/2.8 id not as good the ones that you peek. Am I correct?
I believe part of the issue is that people are finally comparing the MF offerings to the rest of the market, and also today backs are stressing the lenses at the same level than the DSLR counterparts ( in fact, the Nikon D810 has a lower resolution by surface area than the 100mp backs).
Best regards,
-
If I read you correctly the Schneider-Kreuznach 110 f/2.8 id not as good the ones that you peek. Am I correct?
Everything is relative. The 110LS is a really good lens. But the 35, 40-80, 45, 150, and 240 are all superlative lenses. If you'd like any raw files samples to make your own evaluation we have gigs of them.
To make it more personal, a 110LS and 55LS are the two lenses in my bag when I shoot a wedding with a Phase One kit; the 150LS and 45LS are too hefty to carry the entire day and would likely require me to carry an 80 for when the 45 was too wide and the 150 was too long.
-
Hi,
I have owned most Zeiss lenses for the Hasselblad and many were not that good. The ones that impressed me were the Sonnars 150/4 and 180/4 and the Planar 100/3.5. But, I have not owned the 40/CFI IF or any of the Superachromats.
Regarding the Phase One lenses, I have not seen enough raw files to build an opinion. Jim Kasson has run a lot of very good tests on the Fujinon lenses for the GFX and it seems that they belong to the best lenses ever made.
I don't think Zeiss can deliver better lenses than other vendors. It is more about price and tolerances. It seems that there is a tendency to more complex designs.
Once a decent image quality is reached, diffraction will be the limit. That is the reason for f/8 and be there. Most older lenses had near optimum performance at f/8, stopping down more improves depth of field but looses fine detail contrast. New lens designs may reach optimum performance at f/5.6 or even f/4. But, making use of that performance means shooting at f/5.6 or f/4.
The figure below is taken a bit out of context, but it shows quiet clearly that lens performance tends to converge at f/8. Diffraction is the limit and that limit is the same for all lens makers:
(http://blog.kasson.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/htrrn-mtf-vs-fstop.png)
Best regards
Erik
Hardly relevant comparing older lenses with new ones. The Otus line is clear indication of what we could expect from modern Zeiss lenses on Medium Format.
Besides, you are missing the point. There is far more to a lens than sharpness and MTF data.
Almost all of the Contax glass and a lot of the Hasselblad glass, 120 f4, 150 f4, 110 f2 are some of the nicest rendering lenses in history, which in their time were high performance lenses which also exemplify Zeiss Character. There is not one Fuji/Blad or Phase One/Schneider lens to get excited over.
-
IMHO, the look champions are mostly 35mm lenses these days...
The complexity of designing for technical excellence and a great look is such that only large volume manufacturers can affort to do it consistently (niche manufacturers can get lucky with some designs of course), meaning Nikon, Zeiss and Canon.
Canon has decided to go for their usual neutral, good but boring approach these past years which leaves Zeiss and Nikon.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Canon has decided to go for their usual neutral, good but boring approach these past years which leaves Zeiss and Nikon.
Cheers,
Bernard
If I were employee of the Nikon Marketing Department, I would pay you for your constant Canon bashing. ;)
Normally, the problem is not the glass that has the "usual neutral, good but boring approach".....
-
If I were employee of the Nikon Marketing Department, I would pay you for your constant Canon bashing. ;)
Normally, the problem is not the glass that has the "usual neutral, good but boring approach".....
Well, this is Canon bashing if you like lenses with character. It is Canon praise if you like a neutral look.
Canon used to release lenses with character such as the 85mm f1.2 or 50mm f1.2.
I find neutral boring.
Btw, this is precisely what this discussion is about.
Canon apparently feels they are mainstream and must stay in the middle of the road of everything they do. I know it serves well many professionnals around the world. I would probably take the same product planning decisions if i were Canon.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
..... it serves well many professionnals around the world. I would probably take the same decisions if i were them.
Cheers,
Bernard
O.K.
I understand now.
Regards,
Ben
-
O.K.
I understand now.
What exactly do you understand Ben?
Or more importantly, what exactly is it you disagree with?
Do you think that recent Canon lenses offer a special look? If you don't then you agree with me.
If you do, could you please share some examples? I would be more than willing to acknowledege that I am wrong.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Bernard
I know, you love your gear. Go on, love it! :)
But please stop bashing other gears. It's not necessary.
"Or could you please share some examples how boring the canon lenses are?"... ;)
I don't use Canon cameras and lenses but I know a lot of very good
photographers using them, some create a special look, some make ordinary photography.
But nobody's secret is the gear they use.........
I don't use Hasselblad H cameras and lenses but I know a lot of very good
photographers using them, some create a ......
... but this is all out of topic
I really wish ZEISS back in MF or Sigma first time in MF....
...or Rodenstock in MF DSLR! And I like the look of the Zeiss 40 mm IF, it's one of my favourite lenses... 8)
-
Bernard
I know, you love your gear. Go on, love it! :)
I select gear meeting my needs and preferences, I don't love it. I never hesitate a second to get rid of a piece of equipment if I think something better I can afford is available. Don't be surprised if you see me write about how great I think Sony is in a few months. ;)
But please stop bashing other gears. It's not necessary.
That is just your perception. Stressing the fact that Nikon and Canon have made different design choices in terms of the rendering of their lenses isn't bashing Canon. Many photographers must like the neutral rendering Canon went for otherwise they wouldn't be shooting with Canon cameras and lenses.
I would probably be pissed as a Nikon body owner if I preferred such a neutral look because that is definitely not what Nikon went for with their recent lens releases.
Do I find Canon boring? Yes I do. I used to lust for the Canon 1Ds and to regret not be able to afford one at the time. I am disappointed that Canon stopped pushing the bar forward. As a potential owner of their equipment. I am selfishly sad for myself not to have another alternative. And I think that Canon owners should continue to pressure their provider of equipment of choice to move their ass instead of defending their lukewarmess (not talking about you and I know many Canon customer did just that).
I have personnally never hesitated to stress how blind Nikon has been not to move faster in the mirrorless segment.
"Or could you please share some examples how boring the canon lenses are?"... ;)
I don't use Canon cameras and lenses but I know a lot of very good
photographers using them, some create a special look, some make ordinary photography.
But nobody's secret is the gear they use.........
Never said it was. And I do also know many excellent photographers shooting Canon, although many of them are now using Sony bodies with their canon lenses.
But I just don't think that all lenses are the same, that we live in a great equalitarian world where nothing differs. If anything, I am a Ken Wilber fan boy, in case you are familiar with his writings. And it is a fact that Nikon and Canon lenses are not performing the same way. And I believe it is perfectly legitimate to have preferences. Is it a deal breaker? Probably not, but I think that it does nonetheless matter enough to take the time to share my views about it (and believe me, I have a long list of things to do).
I don't use Hasselblad H cameras and lenses but I know a lot of very good
photographers using them, some create a ......
... but this is all out of topic
I really wish ZEISS back in MF or Sigma first time in MF....
...or Rodenstock in MF DSLR! And I like the look of the Zeiss 40 mm IF, it's one of my favourite lenses... 8)
Agreed. I used to own a copy of the 40mm IF and loved it too. I should have kept it btw.
I also shoot with an Arca equiped with the Rodenstock 23, 40 and 90mm and would indeed love to see them propose SLR lenses too, although I find this very unlikely.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Even if it were criticism it is hardly bashing.
Even if it were bashing, who cares? people like what they like. You like what you like so don't be put off by it.
Everything is open for discussion and it's not 1950's China where you aren't allowed to speak your mind.
I agree - Canon is boring. Boring as hell - that is my opinion, as an ex long time Canon user who moved on, and you are free to have your own. Some people want boring (they just call it something else). To me - BORING. :P
-
Almost all of the Contax glass and a lot of the Hasselblad glass, 120 f4, 150 f4, 110 f2 are some of the nicest rendering lenses in history, which in their time were high performance lenses which also exemplify Zeiss Character. There is not one Fuji/Blad or Phase One/Schneider lens to get excited over.
i couldn't disagree more....in more then 30 years of shooting i have never found or owned a zeiss lens i preferred over fuji or schneider....but i guess that is the point, personal preference.....
btw: i have never owned or shot with a lens from the otus line...i have obviously seen and heard a lot about it and am impressed with the sharpness and detail but other then that there is nothing there i really lust for and especially not for the price.....
my last zeiss lens was the fixed 35mm on the sony rx1rII and as much as i liked the small package, i much preferred the A7RII voigtlander 40 1.4 combo....and much of that had to do with the lens....
-
Do I find Canon boring? Yes I do. I used to lust for the Canon 1Ds and to regret not be able to afford one at the time. I am disappointed that Canon stopped pushing the bar forward. As a potential owner of their equipment. I am selfishly sad for myself not to have another alternative. And I think that Canon owners should continue to pressure their provider of equipment of choice to move their ass instead of defending their lukewarmess (not talking about you and I know many Canon customer did just that).
Cheers,
Bernard
Unfortunately Canon was never able to improve the still image rendering over the original 1Ds. The whole camera just worked and the images were exceptional. Not boring.
Edmund
-
i much preferred the A7RII voigtlander 40 1.4 combo....and much of that had to do with the lens....
Interesting because, as you probably know, both Zeiss lenses such as the Otus and many others, are manufactured in Japan by Cosina, the company owning the Voigtlander brand. I believe that the same glass is used in both lines. ;)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Hi,
Rendering is a bit up to taste. Ideally, there would be one rendition, the one that correctly reproduces subject on the image plane. But optical designers often leave some aberrations not fully corrected, so they may undercorrect spherical aberration and overcorrect secondary spherical aberration. Choosing the set of compromises may contribute to the "look" of the rendition of the lens. I don't know much about optic designs, but this was discussed by Brandon Dube (AKA AiryDiscus) on one of his blogs.
I own or have owned many of the Hasselblad lenses. Including the Sonnar 150/4 and the Planar 120/4. I am not in anyway impressed by the Planar 120/4, while I found the Sonnar 150/4 to be a very good lens, but the Sonnar 150 needed to go, it was to long for my needs. So, I got a Sonnar 180/4 instead. The Sonnar 180/4 is a very good lens. I had two Planar 120/4 lenses a CF and a CFi.
I also own or have owned the Distagon 40/4CF, Distagon 50/4CF, Distagon 60/3.5 and Planar 80/4. On the plus side, those lenses are fully usable at maximum aperture, but stopped down they don't come near my Canon zooms I use with the Sony A7rII in the few comparisons I made.
Best regards
Erik
i couldn't disagree more....in more then 30 years of shooting i have never found or owned a zeiss lens i preferred over fuji or schneider....but i guess that is the point, personal preference.....
btw: i have never owned or shot with a lens from the otus line...i have obviously seen and heard a lot about it and am impressed with the sharpness and detail but other then that there is nothing there i really lust for and especially not for the price.....
my last zeiss lens was the fixed 35mm on the sony rx1rII and as much as i liked the small package, i much preferred the A7RII voigtlander 40 1.4 combo....and much of that had to do with the lens....
-
Zeiss should start with a PC 35mm for full frame... a bigger market, and no modern 35mm is available in any mount... i still can't understand why...
and keep the same formula for GFX and Phase One... but, is it allowed to produce a lens for Phase one and GFX ?
Maybe, SIGMA will try it...
-
With 150mp sensors about to arrive, we badly need higher quality lens options for Phase One.
The blue ring lenses simply aren't up to it, imho. I've demonstrated elsewhere their weaker resolution compared to older non LS designs.
When full frame started hitting this barrier, Zeiss stepped in with it's Otus range, which reset the parameters for FF resolution. So... surely it's time for the same for MF now? M-Otus ('Motus'?!) would be great. Yes I'd accept manual focus and no LS if necessary. We have Electronic Shutter, and that will improve in speed with every new sensor generation, so it's simply the ultimate resolution that needs improving.
I appreciate Zeiss have retreated from MF as the market is smaller than CaNikon, but surely the 300lb Gorilla that is Phase One can tempt then back for a high end production run at least for something like a 60 or 80mm standard?
Hi. Who do you know 150 mp coming to market? I am not uptodate ,is there any news about it that I dont know? Thanks
-
Hi Ali,
Sony has published a rodmap for sensors and several 150 MP 54x40 mm sensors are on that roadmap for 2018.
They will also release 100 MP versions of the 44x33 mm sensors.
In all cases, Sony published device numbers. So I think they are quite close to sampling those chips.
Best regards
Erik
Hi. Who do you know 150 mp coming to market? I am not uptodate ,is there any news about it that I dont know? Thanks
-
Hi Ali,
Sony has published a rodmap for sensors and several 150 MP 54x40 mm sensors are on that roadmap for 2018.
They will also release 100 MP versions of the 44x33 mm sensors.
In all cases, Sony published device numbers. So I think they are quite close to sampling those chips.
Best regards
Erik
So different from the old days when Phase would have a monopoly on Dalsa sensors for a period of time and photographers didn't know what was coming until Phase announced it.
-
Talking of lenses for 100+ mp backs. I have just bought a new HC50mm II and 100mm f2 and considering a second hand HC150n lens........will the HC150n lens work okay with my 100c back or do I have to get a new 150 to cover the back??
Neil
-
Talking of lenses for 100+ mp backs. I have just bought a new HC50mm II and 100mm f2 and considering a second hand HC150n lens........will the HC150n lens work okay with my 100c back or do I have to get a new 150 to cover the back??
Neil
Will work well it's a brilliant lens.
-
Will work well it's a brilliant lens.
Thanks very much
Neil
-
Thanks very much
Neil
Have a look at the H6D-100c launch photos - the photos by Karl Taylor of the paint splashes are done with the 150mm. They are impeccable.
You can see them in the Hasselblad Lens Brochure:
https://cdn.hasselblad.com/04e9d0f7-abdf-434d-8b5b-364c69af21ec_x-h-system-lenses_v2_28feb2017_a.pdf
-
Hi Bo,
Thanks for the link. Just to say, I have a criterion for an excellent lens:
- MTF > 0.9 for 10 lp/mm
- MTF > 0.8 for 20 lp/mm
- MTF > 0.6 for 40 lp/mm
That means both sagittal and tangential curves accord the field. Without doubt many of the HC lenses are excellent. But also note how good the X-lenses are! They of course need to be great to play well with the forthcoming 100 MP-backs.
I would say that all that stuff with sharpness is mostly interesting if you print large. Web side samples don't say anything about sharpness.
Best regards
Erik
Have a look at the H6D-100c launch photos - the photos by Karl Taylor of the paint splashes are done with the 150mm. They are impeccable.
You can see them in the Hasselblad Lens Brochure:
https://cdn.hasselblad.com/04e9d0f7-abdf-434d-8b5b-364c69af21ec_x-h-system-lenses_v2_28feb2017_a.pdf
-
A blue label dos not mean a great lens. A bit similar, Pentax did put a "Schneider" label on some of it's lenses.
a joke from that time ( www.pentaxforums.com/forums/870985-post52.html )
Here's how Samsung gets Schneider Kreuznach to make lenses for 'em:
SAMSUNG: "We're making a play, like every other man and his giant-electronics-corporation dog, for the digital camera market. Unfortunately, we have zero credibility in the camera industry, and, well, that's where you come in..."
SCHNEIDER KREUZNACH: "NEIN! Ve are a respected European opticz company, with many years of fine tradition und expertise in the field..."
Samsung drops, with a surprisingly loud thud, a briefcase on the conference table. It pops open, revealing row upon row of shiny Euro notes, neatly bundled in 10000-Euro lots
SK: "...and as such vill not be villing to zell our name for use on some cheap, mass-produced cameras! Our lens are a ground by magic elves, und coated vith ze finest, purest dragon's urine..."
Samsung reaches into its pocket, and pulls out a handful of diamonds, water clear, each the size of a human testicle, and tumbles them onto the briefcase
SK: "Our lenses are hand-assembled by virgins! The lens barrels are polished on zeir thighs!"
Samsung whistles, and a team of sunglass-wearing security guards with earpieces screwed into their ears, wielding submachine guns, enter the room. They briefly check the corners, the faces of those at the conference table, then nod and mutter into their lapels. Seconds later, a powered trolley laden with gold bullion enters the room, and is placed at the head of the table.
SK: "EACH LENS IS HAND-TESTED BY ZE POPE!"
Samsung pulls a share certificate from his pocket. Laying it next to the briefcase, it reads: "COCA-COLA: 250,000 Shares".
SK: "I look forward to working vith you, Samsung. Here's the TIFF file of our logo. Stick it vhere you vant. Guten tag!"
-
Have a look at the H6D-100c launch photos - the photos by Karl Taylor of the paint splashes are done with the 150mm. They are impeccable.
You can see them in the Hasselblad Lens Brochure:
https://cdn.hasselblad.com/04e9d0f7-abdf-434d-8b5b-364c69af21ec_x-h-system-lenses_v2_28feb2017_a.pdf
FWIW the paint splash photos by Mr. Taylor are also taken with the H6D-50c (as it says in the brochure) and not the 100c.