Does anyone have some 100% crops of images taken digitally with this lens they could share? Especially in the corners? I find my Contax 45mm a bit soft, particularly in the corners, but I can use Hasselblad lenses with an adapter.
I am aware that the Zeiss 40mm for the Sinar M is considered the best out there, but is the Hasselblad V version mentioned above as good?
Distagon T* 4/40 ZH
Alternatively, what is generally considered the best, sharpest MF wide out there in the Hasselblad or Contax lineup? How is the Contax 35mm?
thanks,
Ben
Hi Ben,
The Contax 35 lens is a Zeiss Distagon design, but it is not exactly the same in its implementation compared to the Zeiss 40s. The Contax 35 consists of 11 elements in 8 groups, while the 40s consist of 12 elements in 9 groups. And, the barrels of each lens have slightly different characteristics in terms of mitigating flare and veiling glare. The distortion of the 40s seem no worse than the 35 in practice, since at infinity it is less apparent and at close range it is highly corrected by the floating lens elements.
I had all three lenses (Sinaron 40mm, Hasselblad 40IF CFE, and Contax 35), and compared them simultaneously with the same back (Sinar e75LV). I also thought the Contax 35 was a decent lens until I acquired the Zeiss 40s. I found both 40's to be much sharper, from the center all the way into the corners, when compared to the 35, which basically agrees with the MTF charts. Once I acquired the Sinaron 40mm lens, there was just no going back to the Contax 35, so I ended up selling the Contax. Unfortunately, I since dumped those test shots when freeing up hard disk space, so I am unable to post.
In addition, I use the 40IF CFE with a Hasselblad Flexbody, which gives me some shift and tilt capability. I noticed that the 40IF lens stays sharp even for shifts of around 10 or 12mm. This means that the 40IF CFE is a better lens choice if you plan to use larger sensor sizes. Some people have reported softer corners with the Contax 35mm lens when using the P65+, due to its larger sensor format, thereby using more of the outer edges of the lens image circle.
As for the Sinaron 40 versus the Hasselblad 40IF, I am unable to tell the difference between these lenses in actual print. They are both stunningly sharp lenses and I have not found anything better (including the Rodenstock HR). I continue to use both (the 40IF with the Flexbody, and the Sinaron with the M), since they have their particular advantages on each system. However, there is no way the 40IF can compete with the Sinaron 40 on the M camera, as the autofocus of the Sinaron is always spot on, whereas you have to manually nail the focus with the 40IF, which is surprisingly difficult to do consistently unless you are shooting tethered with live view.
I hope this helps.
David
