Well said that man, as most of photography practiced and respected today rests on a modicum of performance first then the other essentials to be added in. You know, small matters such as artistic expression, enlightened understanding of subject matter, harmonious and expressive compositions, imparting meaning to viewers of the work, and professional finishing - simple stuff really, all will readily agree!
Furthermore the Hasselblad 180/4 Sonnar survives and in fact does very well in the MTF life provided that the lenses are treated equally MTF-wise, which they seldom are.
I use my CF without any hesitation if 180mm is right for the job at hand. The 6x6 less resolution and contrast may be correct in general. But there are a few exceptions, 40/4 IF Distagon, 180/4 Sonnar, and 250mm Sonnar Superachromat are the ones I use. They are up there with the ZE´s, just somewhat cooler in colour.
Lee Saxon wrote:
Exciting new 180/3.4 APO-Telyt-R arrives tomorrow and I just realized I forgot to order a Leitax!! Guess it's just gonna sit around looking pretty for a while :/
I have Leitax adapters and they are great. Use them on my Leica R 35-70/4 and 100/2.8 APO Macro as well as on the OM 21/3.5 and OM 28/2 (all with EOS). However, for the Apo-Telyt 180/3.4 I use Novoflex adapters for both EOS and NEX. They work extremely well and allow me to use the Leica R 2xAPO extender with the 180/3.4, which would not be possible if it were "Leitaxed". This also allows for far more flexibility with this wonderful lens, not just to double the focal length but also to use it on either the NEX or the Canon.
Z250SA wrote:
Furthermore the Hasselblad 180/4 Sonnar survives and in fact does very well in the MTF life provided that the lenses are treated equally MTF-wise, which they seldom are.
I use my CF without any hesitation if 180mm is right for the job at hand. The 6x6 less resolution and contrast may be correct in general. But there are a few exceptions, 40/4 IF Distagon, 180/4 Sonnar, and 250mm Sonnar Superachromat are the ones I use. They are up there with the ZE´s, just somewhat cooler in colour.
No medium format lenses from the Hasselblad reproduces the same LP/mm and contrast from a 24 x 36mm sensor surface as a dedicated good prime for 24x36mm.
There are one of Mamiyas macro lenses and also Leicas S-lenses who are are closest to a dedicated good 24x36 prime lens.
I have been discussing this subject since years back with my good friend and founder of the "old original Photodo" who has the world largest real MTF measurements of MF and 24x36mm lenses and this MTF tests are made by Hasselblad MTF lab in Gothenburg .
Z250SA wrote:
Furthermore the Hasselblad 180/4 Sonnar survives and in fact does very well in the MTF life provided that the lenses are treated equally MTF-wise, which they seldom are.
I use my CF without any hesitation if 180mm is right for the job at hand. The 6x6 less resolution and contrast may be correct in general. But there are a few exceptions, 40/4 IF Distagon, 180/4 Sonnar, and 250mm Sonnar Superachromat are the ones I use. They are up there with the ZE´s, just somewhat cooler in colour.
that is from the MF 4,5x6 or 6x6 area not a 24x36mm area
macrobild wrote:
that is from the MF 4,5x6 or 6x6 area not a 24x36mm area
Over the 24x36mm image circle, the Sonnar 180/4 still has a highly respectable MTF by 35mm-format standards. With 40lp/mm MTF curves at 0.5-0.6 at f4, uniform and with little saggital/tangential divergence, the lens is quite respectable. A few "super lenses" will do better (e.g. a Leica APO-Telyt 180/2.8, with 40lp/mm MTF curves in the 0.6-0.8 range), but most 35mm competitors will be at best equally good performers (with older-generation lenses like the Contax 180/2.8 being significantly worse).
Well, yes - it's indeed respectable, and better than many modern zooms.
But before praising it to much, I'd suggest actually comparing it out in reality with:
Sigma 180/3.5 APO macro (dirt cheap)
Sigma 180/2.8 OS APO macro (expensive, but still often cheaper than the HB lens)
Tamron 180/3.5 macro (also dirt cheap)
Nikon 70-200/2.8VR2 @ 180mm
Canon 70-200/2.8IS2 @ 180mm
It (the HB lens) is worse than all of the above on all accounts except vignetting (though the AF-enabled, stabilized and much better APO corrected new Sigma macro is very close at F4.0) and uniformity - roundness - of the OOF highlights. Even a zoom like the Canon 70-200/2.8IS2 can do the reverse, i.e wipe the floor with the Hasselblad @F4.0 in any handheld situation except brilliant daylight.
So no, it does not in any way "wipe the floor" with modern lenses. Anyone saying that hasn't really compared. And probably never used one in the wild, where focusing, stabilization and auto aperture in 99% (?) of all cases makes more difference for the absolute quality of your work than absolute sharpness.
I'm an alternative nutcase myself, and some of my most used lenses are adapted ones. The only ones (from the MF camp) that comes close to modern lenses in real life use for me are the Mamiya APO120/4 (the HB alternative both old and new version are reportedly as good - I've only used the older one), the Mamiya 200/2.8, and the HB/Zeiss SuperAPO series (which I've only seen and held once...). The Mamiya 150/2.8A is very, very good, but not as good as the 70-200 or the any of the Sigma 150 macros.
I recently shot the new HB150/3.2HC (3500USD) on the H4D-40. Even on its' native format it's not significantly better than a good sample of even a lowly Sigma 105/2.8 macro on the D800, except on the lowest aperture value F2.8 (F4.0 for the MF lens). Yes, we did make direct comparisons on the same scene.
Well, if you have one, why not send Lee your lens so he can compare it, or post some comparisons of your own to back up your statements.
I've tried some medium format lenses on APS-C, and the results were superb, contrary to common beliefs. In fact, my MF Contax APO-Makro 120mm is the sharpest lens I've ever used, if sharpness is what counts.
I'd still wager the HB 180 will match the sharpness of any 35mm lens compared, and will also show a more pleasing rendering for portraits etc. I may have to eat these words, but only a real shoout-out will tell.
BTW, I don't know anything about the newer HB Fujinon lenses, they may be inferior to the older Zeiss, but that's not what were talking about here.
briantho wrote:
Well, if you have one, why not send Lee your lens so he can compare it, or post some comparisons of your own to back up your statements.
I've tried some medium format lenses on APS-C, and the results were superb, contrary to common beliefs. In fact, my MF Contax APO-Makro 120mm is the sharpest lens I've ever used, if sharpness is what counts.
I'd still wager the HB 180 will match the sharpness of any 35mm lens compared, and will also show a more pleasing rendering for portraits etc. I may have to eat these words, but only a real shoout-out will tell.
BTW, I don't know anything about the newer HB Fujinon lenses, they may be inferior to the older Zeiss, but that's not what were talking about here....Show more →
are you now talking about to use this lenses on a 24x36 mm surface?
can I please se some pictures from the APS camera and which dedicated APS lenses did you compare against?
NO , the lenses from Hasselblad/Fujinon is better regarding to Per Nordlund when I talked to him at Photokina in Cologne , Per is lens designer at Hasselblad Göteborg Sweden
macrobild wrote:
NO , the lenses from Hasselblad/Fujinon is better regarding to Per Nordlund when I talked to him at Photokina in Cologne , Per is lens designer at Hasselblad Göteborg Sweden
You were expecting a company representative at a trade show to tell you his new lens designs were worse?
From some of Hasselblad's own published marketing materials touting the advantages of their new Fujinon lenses, the new lenses may be a bit behind comparable old designs at infinity (where the old designs were best optimized). However, the newer designs are better optimized for high performance over a wider range of "normal" focal distances, so improved for portrait or commercial product photography applications --- though possibly relying more on software correction for geometric and chromatic aberrations.
I believe it. 