Hi Son,

Which teleconverter are you using in your tests? Is this the Canon 1.4x TC?

Thanks,
James

James Grimm wrote:
Which teleconverter are you using in your tests? Is this the Canon 1.4x TC?


Son, correct me if I'm wrong but I think it would be the Contax 645 Mutar.

James Grimm wrote:
Hi Son,

Which teleconverter are you using in your tests? Is this the Canon 1.4x TC?

Thanks,
James


James,
You asked the best question in this series of testing with regarding to the tele-converter. It is the Contax/Yashica manual mount. This baby is extremely sharp. I know this will confuse a lot of you but it works. The reason I go about doing this is due to the adapter thickness problem. The Canon tele-converter will not work since there is data requirement and my interest is in the Contax tele-converter. I then use my adapter to fit the rest and solve the infinity problem.
Best Regards,
Son

tom in mpls wrote:
James Grimm wrote:
Which teleconverter are you using in your tests? Is this the Canon 1.4x TC?


Son, correct me if I'm wrong but I think it would be the Contax 645 Mutar.



Tom, this is not the Contax 645 but instead the C/Y 135 mm manual focus version. I used it for resolution and bokeh which no one talk about but I also use it to solve infinity problem with the current hasselblad adapter to the canon mount. Thus, one for two.

Son

Stupid me, I managed to get myself completely mixed up. Not the first time I've pretended to be an expert in an area where I have more ignorance than expertise. Never mind.

Time to change my username.

Tom,
Actually we can use the Hasselblad tele-photo lens with your Contax 645 tele-converter. Since you do not have any Hasselblad tele-photo lens I have not suggest the idea. If you ended up with a Hasselblad telephoto lens you can use the Contax 645 teleconverter via your adapter which you already own.

Best Regards,
Son

Son I just emailed you about a discussion we were having on a starter system from March 8th. Thanks, Rich.

John Black wrote:
Do you have any other images with Hass 50 on Canon body you could show?

Not really, I made a couple of shots with a Mirex adapter but they are not worth to post here.

Thank goodness Andi, 'cause I can't afford another lens at the moment!!! Got home tonight just as the sun was setting; these are couple quickies wide open with the Hass 110/2 on the P25. I only wish the 1Ds3 was this sharp... The 110/2 is quite amazing on medium format; I still prefer the C/Y 100/2 on the 1Ds3 because it has a wider FOV. The 110/2 feels alot like a 135L (in terms of FOV) on the 1Ds3. All of these were wide open; everything else is in the EXIF.

Damn those are sharp John. Nice lighting as well (and landscaping). Basically, nice

Son,

You mention in your list the 180/4 Sonnar. Are you referring to the CF, CFi or CFE? The CFi an CFE data sheets appear identical yet the FE version should have a floating element correct?


Son/JB,

Son mentions the Mamiya 300/2.8 APO. Any thoughts on the 200/2.8 APO?

Since so little data on Mamiya glass seems to be around, Anyone want to comment on the better/worse characteristics of Zeiss (for Hassy) vs. Mamiya glass?

If nothing else, this thread and it's brother make for great starts to research incentives into a world of photography discussion beyond the endless Canon vs. Nikon BS.

The 50/4 was never a strong lens in the Hassy line up. The Sonnar 180/4 has a very strong reputation, as do the 110/2 FE, the 100/3.5 Planar, and come to think of it; quite a few of the other Hassy lenses.

Silly question, but what is the difference between the first 3 versions of the Planar T* 2.0/110 and the 4th/5th version ? Not that I would be starting hunting this as I just started to like my 85 1.4 C/Y Planar and don't have the cash to have too many lenses in the same FL, but it's interesting for the treasure hunters.

Kosmo - interesting on the 50/4 FLE - the MTF looks hellishly appealing.

kosmoskatten wrote:
The 50/4 was never a strong lens in the Hassy line up. T

Kosmos, for once I cant agree with you here. From all the lenses I had it was among the sharpest, up on par with the 120 and 135 bellows macros.

Conner and Andi; I think we can still agree, my comment was not for the FLE 50/4, I thought you was talking of the former 50/4 which is not stellar by any standards. The newer one with the floating elements is supposedly a stunning lens, which I have no experience with. And, yes, the MTF looks promising indeed.

My bad.

Edited by kosmoskatten on Mar 17, 2008 at 07:01 PM GMT

When it comes to quality MF glass, i.e. in the same league as the better small format lenses it is something that puts things in perspective...

When I had the Mamiya 7II with the 50/4.5 (equiv 25mm) the quality was mindblowing and it was possibly the best MF wide lens I have ever had, even better than my Hassy SWC. When I switched between MF and 135mm and back the feeling was like going between collecting stamps (135mm) and flags (MF). The A3 prints from the Mamiya 7II looked like you could crawl into it and wander around the details.

Though my experience in the MF field is somewhat limited I found my favourite lenses to be the Schneider APO 90/4 (macro) for Rollei and the Hassy SWC. As a whole the Mamiya 7II lens line was as good as they get - RF design for MF.

Hi, Son,

Thank you for the terrific list! I found it both fascinating and very helpful.

I have two questions about a couple of lenses I did not see on your list. Can you tell me where your experience would place them?

* In your wide angle list, the Rollei Super-Angulon 40/3.5 PQ
* In your telephoto list, the Contax Tele-Apotessar 350/4. and the Rollei Tele-Xenar 300/4 PQ.

Thanks again for taking the time.

Best regards,
Brad

--

Wide Angle:
1. Hasselblad Distagon T* 4.0/40 CFE IF
2. Contax 645 Distagon T* 3.5/55
3. Contax 645 Distagon T* 3.5/35
4. Hasselblad 2.8/50 F or FE (I like the F version; I will expand on this topic later with tests)
5. Hasselblad 3.5/60 CFi or CF or CB
6. Hasselblad Biogon T* 4.5/38
7. Rollei Distagon HFT 4.0/50 FLE
8. Hasselblad Distagon T* 4.0/50 FLE


Telephoto:
1. Hasselblad Superachromat 2.8/300 Power Pack
2. Hasselblad Superachromat 5.6/350
3. Contax 645 Sonnar T* 4.0/210 with tele-converter
4. Mamiya Apo 2.8/300
5. Hasselblad FE 4.0/350
6. Hasselblad Sonar T* 4.0/180

Brad,
Update on your request:

Wide Angle:
1. Hasselblad Distagon T* 4.0/40 CFE IF (close and infinity lens; wide open and stop down lens)
2. Contax 645 Distagon T* 3.5/55 (close up and infinity lens; wide open and stop down lens)
3. Contax 645 Distagon T* 3.5/35 (close up and infinity lens; wide open and stop down lens)
4. Rollei Super-Angulon HFT 3.5/40 PQ (close up and infinity lens; sharp stop down and compact)
5. Rollei Super-Angulon HFT 2.8/50 PQS (close up and infinity lens; sharp wide open is its uniqueness)
4. Hasselblad Biogon T* 4.5/38 (no distortion; inifnity and mid distance lens; sharp wide open and stop down)
5. Hasselblad 2.8/50 F or FE (I like the F version; I will expand on this topic later with tests; sharp wide open and stop down; bokeh lens)
6. Hasselblad 3.5/60 CFi or CF or CB (mid distance and infinity lens)
7. Rollei Distagon HFT 4.0/50 FLE (close up and infinity lens)
8. Hasselblad Distagon T* 4.0/50 FLE (close up and infinity lens)


Telephoto:
1. Hasselblad Superachromat 2.8/300 Power Pack (close up and infinity lens)
2. Hasselblad Superachromat 5.6/350 (Infinity lens)
3. Rollei Apo Tele-Xenar HFT 4.0/300 (infinity focus lens)
3. Contax 645 Sonnar T* 4.0/210 with tele-converter (extreme close up lens)
4. Mamiya Apo 2.8/300 (Infinity lens)
5. Hasselblad FE 4.0/350 (Close up lens)
6. Hasselblad Sonar T* 4.0/180 (Infinity lens)

Did you intend to include the Contax 4/350 Tele-Apotessar?

Thank you for taking the time to share your experience, Son. You are a wealth of information. Much appreciated!

Best regards,
Brad