The weather here has not been conducive to taking the new camera (Cambo Actus) outdoors much since it arrived on Wednesday. Today was the first day I got a free hour solid of no rain an some sunlight to play with the Hassy CF 40 FLE, so I got to find out how it does shooting with the (diffused) sun in the frame and then more typical usage. Not too shabby. Now I just need a more compelling subject.
adamdewilde wrote:
I tried it at different Leica stores in different countries (as in 3 different lenses), and the focus hit rate was low, very low (as in nothing was really properly in focus for me)...
That's discouraging... I ordered a Leica 100S a couple weeks ago and its auto-focus are completely off, not a single in-focus image. I sent the lens back for exchange and a replacement is scheduled to arrive later this week. Hopefully it's better - ALOT better.
As others have said, I'd happily forego the "macro" in the 120S for a lighter version with faster auto focus. Its rendering is quite nice. The only reason I bought the 100S was for its smaller size and the presumption of better auto-focus. The Hasselblad 110/2 Planar is always an option or the Hasselblad 100/2.2 HC. This is the 110/2 on S-006 -
Brad, how do you like that 40 FLE? Isn't that the lens used in the Hartblei 40 TS?
freaklikeme wrote:
The weather here has not been conducive to taking the new camera (Cambo Actus) outdoors much since it arrived on Wednesday. Today was the first day I got a free hour solid of no rain an some sunlight to play with the Hassy CF 40 FLE, so I got to find out how it does shooting with the (diffused) sun in the frame and then more typical usage. Not too shabby. Now I just need a more compelling subject.
wayne seltzer wrote:
Brad, how do you like that 40 FLE? Isn't that the lens used in the Hartblei 40 TS?
Was it? I thought it was the solid optical-block Distagon design they used (which is also a great lens, just not as good close up).
Here's my attempt at being objective.
The good:
Strongly reminds me of the Distagon 21 without any of the 21's distortion issues.
Center to mid-frame resolution is excellent on both the a7 and a7r.
The edges of the "usable" frame can be very good if you get everything exactly the way the FLE needs it.
Very usable wide open, great at f/8 so far as sharpness goes
Color and contrast are good wide open and at f/5.6, contrast gets progressively better.
By f/8, most of the vignetting is gone.
Very low overall distortion makes it a pleasure for architectural shots when it's critical, and pretty much everything else even when it's not critical.
The FLE can be a blessing. Before the Actus, my primary use for the lens was on a Kipon T/S adapter, and once I got everything shimmed out properly between that adapter and my LAEA3, I was very pleased with the close focus results.
The bad:
The FLE can also be a bit of a curse. It's fussy enough in use anyway, since you have to change it to the correct shooting distance range and then focus (can't count the number of times I've forgotten to do that) but on an adapter or tech camera, you really have to have everything just right to get the best out the maximum frame. People who think using the Lux 50 A adapted is a crap shoot have it easy.
Vignetting- I almost hesitate to put this under the "bad" column since, as I know you're aware, if you hate vignetting, there probably aren't many legacy Zeiss lenses that appeal to you anyway. But it is prominent wide open, even by Zeiss standards.
Color correction- high contrast areas can be miserable (again, not something that isn't evident in other Zeiss designs of the age).
Bokeh- wide open, it's pretty standard Distagon stuff, which isn't what I find particularly pleasing, but not every wide angle can have the bokeh of the ZM Biogon 25.
It's bulky, behind only the Distagon 50/2.8 and Planar 110/2 in size and weight for Hassy lenses under 150.
Specific to the Actus, the image circle is small. Which is why this lens will eventually retire to close-focus duty. My plan is to go with a 35/55/100ish Rodenstock kit for the Actus, which should give me the coverage I want with better color correction.
John Black wrote:
That's discouraging... I ordered a Leica 100S a couple weeks ago and its auto-focus are completely off, not a single in-focus image. I sent the lens back for exchange and a replacement is scheduled to arrive later this week. Hopefully it's better - ALOT better.
As others have said, I'd happily forego the "macro" in the 120S for a lighter version with faster auto focus. Its rendering is quite nice. The only reason I bought the 100S was for its smaller size and the presumption of better auto-focus. The Hasselblad 110/2 Planar is always an option or the Hasselblad 100/2.2 HC. This is the 110/2 on S-006 -...Show more →
I was really turned off by the prices of the adapters. I don't expect China companies to follow through with their own since the S-system is at the moment a small user group.
Also I have already sold off all my Hassy lenses and most of my Contax 645 lenses. So I don't really have much left to adapt. I'm finding that the 70S can do a majority of my work..
At one point was considering two bodies, a 45/100 combo, I've since changed my mind. Not because of the focusing issue I mentioned. It's just to costly to go that route, for the incremental increase in quality. I mean, it makes me happy, but I think their are a lot cheaper alternatives out there, that'll get the job done. That and I'm still pretty set on using my M-system where the S-system isn't needed.
Excellent architecture shot in B&W!
Great lens review, Thanks!
The Hartblei is based on the > 5k CFE IF version.
Not sure how that one compares to yours?
Thanks! freaklikeme wrote:
Was it? I thought it was the solid optical-block Distagon design they used (which is also a great lens, just not as good close up).
Here's my attempt at being objective.
The good:
Strongly reminds me of the Distagon 21 without any of the 21's distortion issues.
Center to mid-frame resolution is excellent on both the a7 and a7r.
The edges of the "usable" frame can be very good if you get everything exactly the way the FLE needs it.
Very usable wide open, great at f/8 so far as sharpness goes
Color and contrast are good wide open and at f/5.6, contrast gets progressively better.
By f/8, most of the vignetting is gone.
Very low overall distortion makes it a pleasure for architectural shots when it's critical, and pretty much everything else even when it's not critical.
The FLE can be a blessing. Before the Actus, my primary use for the lens was on a Kipon T/S adapter, and once I got everything shimmed out properly between that adapter and my LAEA3, I was very pleased with the close focus results.
The bad:
The FLE can also be a bit of a curse. It's fussy enough in use anyway, since you have to change it to the correct shooting distance range and then focus (can't count the number of times I've forgotten to do that) but on an adapter or tech camera, you really have to have everything just right to get the best out the maximum frame. People who think using the Lux 50 A adapted is a crap shoot have it easy.
Vignetting- I almost hesitate to put this under the "bad" column since, as I know you're aware, if you hate vignetting, there probably aren't many legacy Zeiss lenses that appeal to you anyway. But it is prominent wide open, even by Zeiss standards.
Color correction- high contrast areas can be miserable (again, not something that isn't evident in other Zeiss designs of the age).
Bokeh- wide open, it's pretty standard Distagon stuff, which isn't what I find particularly pleasing, but not every wide angle can have the bokeh of the ZM Biogon 25.
It's bulky, behind only the Distagon 50/2.8 and Planar 110/2 in size and weight for Hassy lenses under 150.
Specific to the Actus, the image circle is small. Which is why this lens will eventually retire to close-focus duty. My plan is to go with a 35/55/100ish Rodenstock kit for the Actus, which should give me the coverage I want with better color correction.
adamdewilde wrote:
I was really turned off by the prices of the adapters. I don't expect China companies to follow through with their own since the S-system is at the moment a small user group.
No doubt, the S adapters are expensive - but very well executed. Some dealers have the V adapter for $550 right now. Not a bargain, but it's better than the normal $850 charged by some. I have mixed feelings about adapters on the S as well, but the Mamiya 200mm F2.8 APO is well worth the added hassle. That's my favorite lens on the S.
The big upside of the 70S (IMO) is the size and weight. It's the most portable of the S lenses and isn't "that" big - relatively speaking of course. I like some of the other S lenses in isolation. But it's when building a kit and seeing how big and heavy the bag will be that I begin to think "keep it simple - VERY simple"
Hopefully the incoming 100S does well. If not, it can go back and I'll be done with it. It may turn into a M-246
wayne seltzer wrote:
Excellent architecture shot in B&W!
Great lens review, Thanks!
The Hartblei is based on the > 5k CFE IF version.
Not sure how that one compares to yours?
Thanks!
You are quite welcome and thank you.
Hardly the first time I was wrong (regarding the Hartblei). The CFE should be an improvement over my CF. Resolution should be a bit higher across the frame and better in the corners.
John Black wrote:
No doubt, the S adapters are expensive - but very well executed. Some dealers have the V adapter for $550 right now. Not a bargain, but it's better than the normal $850 charged by some. I have mixed feelings about adapters on the S as well, but the Mamiya 200mm F2.8 APO is well worth the added hassle. That's my favorite lens on the S.
The big upside of the 70S (IMO) is the size and weight. It's the most portable of the S lenses and isn't "that" big - relatively speaking of course. I like some of the other S lenses in isolation. But it's when building a kit and seeing how big and heavy the bag will be that I begin to think "keep it simple - VERY simple"
Hopefully the incoming 100S does well. If not, it can go back and I'll be done with it. It may turn into a M-246 ...Show more →
Yeah those M cameras.. Always really tempting after carrying around something like a 1Dx or S-006.
I'm going to stick with the 70S for a while. Wait out the user reports and samples from the 100S before I jump in.
How good/bad is the user support for the 645Z?
I sent emails twice with questions to the Canada distributor. The response - total silence.
I also heard that repairs require sending the cameras to the manufacturer. This may be a rumor. How prone is the camera sensor to dust and how difficult is to clean the sensor so deep in the body? Will appreciate user’s views.
So I have a Sony A7, and I use the Actus, I setup and focus where I want, then I slide the A7 around on a back plate and take a bunch of images and stitch them together (the lens and bellows don't move). OR is it that I just take one image and the lens circle just gets cropped?
As I've seen a few setups where the camera moves around, so just curious if this is similar, as I looked it up and the info wasn't clear.
adamdewilde wrote:
Just a question about the Actus...
So I have a Sony A7, and I use the Actus, I setup and focus where I want, then I slide the A7 around on a back plate and take a bunch of images and stitch them together (the lens and bellows don't move). OR is it that I just take one image and the lens circle just gets cropped?
As I've seen a few setups where the camera moves around, so just curious if this is similar, as I looked it up and the info wasn't clear.
The Actus has tilt and swing on the front standard (tilt is +10/-9 degrees, the swing will do a full 360 degree rotation) and shift on the back (40mm total side to side, 15mm down, 12mm up). On the normal rear standard, the mount rotates, so you can get up to 63x64mm covered in a six-shot pano or 51x76mm in a nine-shot pano (lots of overlap) with landscape orientation. That's assuming the lens' image circle has coverage for it. The 40 barely covers the full 59x59mm square it was deigned for, so when I'm checking my framing, I have to frame around the mechanically vignetted corners. My 100 and 150 will cover a full 63x64 with pretty poor edges. I've got a Rodenstock 55/4.5 coming that should cover both frames with plenty of room for tilt and/or swing.
To use LF lenses wider than 47mm (the Schneider APO-Digitar 47 XL, to be specific) with Sony, you have to have the dedicated wide angle rear standard, which doesn't rotate, and the attached wide angle bellows. Given that anything wider than 47mm is going to have an exit pupil very close to the sensor, the Kolari mod would also make sense to avoid any smearing. No avoiding the color cast, which can apparently get severe the wider you go. It's probably worth it, though. Yesterday I was speaking with a shooter who uses his a7rM on a Toyo 4x5 camera with a sliding back he designed himself and he's had great success with the Rode APO-Grandagon 35, which has an image circle meant to cover 6x9 with roughly the same angle of view as a 15mm lens on a 135 format.
freaklikeme wrote:
The Actus has tilt and swing on the front standard (tilt is +10/-9 degrees, the swing will do a full 360 degree rotation) and shift on the back (40mm total side to side, 15mm down, 12mm up). On the normal rear standard, the mount rotates, so you can get up to 63x64mm covered in a six-shot pano or 51x76mm in a nine-shot pano (lots of overlap) with landscape orientation. That's assuming the lens' image circle has coverage for it. The 40 barely covers the full 59x59mm square it was deigned for, so when I'm checking my framing, I have to frame around the mechanically vignetted corners. My 100 and 150 will cover a full 63x64 with pretty poor edges. I've got a Rodenstock 55/4.5 coming that should cover both frames with plenty of room for tilt and/or swing.
To use LF lenses wider than 47mm (the Schneider APO-Digitar 47 XL, to be specific) with Sony, you have to have the dedicated wide angle rear standard, which doesn't rotate, and the attached wide angle bellows. Given that anything wider than 47mm is going to have an exit pupil very close to the sensor, the Kolari mod would also make sense to avoid any smearing. No avoiding the color cast, which can apparently get severe the wider you go. It's probably worth it, though. Yesterday I was speaking with a shooter who uses his a7rM on a Toyo 4x5 camera with a sliding back he designed himself and he's had great success with the Rode APO-Grandagon 35, which has an image circle meant to cover 6x9 with roughly the same angle of view as a 15mm lens on a 135 format....Show more →
Very interesting, thanks for the reply!
I was tempted to get myself something similar, but I rarely shoot static shots. Most of the time it's people, and people move I'd like to see more shots when you have the chance to post them.
adamdewilde wrote:
Very interesting, thanks for the reply!
I was tempted to get myself something similar, but I rarely shoot static shots. Most of the time it's people, and people move I'd like to see more shots when you have the chance to post them.
Thanks again!
You're quite welcome. Thank you, Adam.
It's challenging even for mostly static subjects. The wind blows, the light changes, clouds move, birds fly through the frame. The guys who use the Actus DB with their large sensor backs have it easier where that's concerned, but they have to deal with central shutters and the connection between them and the back, and it's slower working if you still can't capture everything with a single frame.
I'd like to see more shots when you have the chance to post them.
