Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: What system for landscape?  (Read 6884 times)
Dan Wells
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 347


WWW
« Reply #20 on: October 04, 2008, 01:46:19 PM »
ReplyReply

After Brad's comment that the glass for the Sinar is heavy, I just looked up the relevant lens weights... It's more that the Mamiya glass is specifically LIGHT, than that anyone's is heavy. The macro lenses and longer lenses are very close to the same weight for every system (except that Hasselblad's AF macro lens is quite a bit heavier (400+grams/1 lb) than either Mamiya's or Sinar/Leaf's MF macros). Mamiya has a lighter 80 mm (by ~150 g/5 oz), and the Mamiya wides are notably lighter (the Mamiya 35 is 250 g/9 oz lighter than the Schneider for Sinar/Leaf 40, and a full 450 g/1 lb lighter than the Hasselblad 35). Mamiya also has the only zooms that are actually lighter than the combined weight of the two lenses they would replace! The one really overweight Hy6 lens is the 60-140 zoom (about 5 lbs, which is close to the weight of a 300/2.8 for 35mm), which is so heavy that it makes no sense - I believe this was true of the few V-System zooms ever made as well - maybe a 6x6 zoom is just about impossible to make at a reasonable weight?
     If Thierry's following this thread, I wasn't able to find the Hy6 lens specs on Sinar's site (either SinarBron US or  Sinar international) - got them off of Leaf's site, but it would be a good thing for Sinar to have accessible, and probably easy for your webmaster to do. Another accessory I can't find on either Sinar's or Leaf's site is whether a grid focusing screen is available for the Hy6? Both Mamiya and Hasselblad list grid screens on their websites, but I can't find a list of screens on either Sinar's or Leaf's site... Is Sinar lens and accessory availability in general a problem? Most big-city camera stores carry both Mamiya and Hasselblad, and any number of places can overnight a battery or other part (one advantage to Phase/Mamiya is that the Phase back battery is actually a Canon video camera battery, easily available even in Vermont, and the handgrip batteries are AA cells - it's clunky that there are two different batteries, but both are standard and cheap). Sinar has far fewer dealers, and I don't know if the Sinar battery (camera and back take the same battery, if I understand correctly - with the HY6 65 only, one battery can run both) is something standard (borrowed from a camcorder) or an unusual one like the Hasselblad battery grip.

                     -Dan
Logged
Don Libby
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 729


Iron Creek Photography


WWW
« Reply #21 on: October 04, 2008, 01:47:53 PM »
ReplyReply

I've just started testing the Cambo RS1000 and P45+ thanks to Dave & Chris at Capture Integration.  Up till yesterday I had never used a TC and had some serious doubts on where I would be able to transition into the workflow; my main concern was being able to obtain critical (to me) focus.  I've found that my major worry is remembering to remove the lens cap.

I've used a combination of Mamiya and Phase AFD's for my landscape and see that that will switch shortly to the Cambo.

Here's a couple sample images from this morning both shot using the Cambo RS 1000, P45+ back and the 47mm lens.

[attachment=8695:Saguaro_Panorama.jpg]

[attachment=8696:Saguaro.jpg]

I haven't done much PP in any of the images other than merge.

Best of luck

don
« Last Edit: October 04, 2008, 01:51:11 PM by Iron Creek » Logged

bradleygibson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 829


WWW
« Reply #22 on: October 04, 2008, 02:20:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi, Dan,

Here in the US, you'll likely find it somewhat more difficult to find a local Sinar dealer than you will a Leaf, Hassy or Mamiya dealer.  There's a long story behind that, but I'll stick to the topic.

The good news for you is that the Leaf lenses and the Sinar lenses are the same lenses--so if you can find a local Leaf AFi dealer or a Sinar Hy6 dealer (or a Rolleiflex Hy6 dealer--even rarer) you'll be pretty much good to go for lens accessories.

Please note that there is one notably different accessory for the Hy6/AFi, the 45 degree prism.  Sinar's are specially modified by Sinar to allow the digital back to swing through an orientation change.  The Rolleiflex and Leaf 45 degree finders will need to be removed in order to complete  the swap.

One other option you have is flying down to Atlanta for a few days.  There are two great dealers down there who cover the entire gamut of MF--Capture Integration and Professional Photo Resources.  With your short-list in hand, handling, shooting and experiencing the cameras in person will be really helpful in determining what works for you.

I ended up purchasing my Sinar Hy6 from PPR Atlanta and despite my being in Seattle and their being in, well, Atlanta, I've had top-notch service, overnight shipment and superb same-day (usually on-the-spot or same-hour) support for anything I've needed.

--

The little fiddly sync cable on the Hasselblad V was definitely a hassle.  It would work its way loose from the lens, giving me intermittent responsiveness, before I remembered I had to keep pushing it back in (the CFE lens design improved on this with a little 'lock').  I had a cable go bad on me in about 3 months, as well.  Lots of folks use them with no problems, but it just felt clumsy to me.

Personally, I don't think in-body metering is such a big deal any more.  Most of us can usually get within a stop simply by eyeing the scene.  Taking a shot and evaluating the histogram takes all of 5 seconds, and provides more precise results than any reflective or incident metering system.

By the way, it's probably worth pointing out that the P45+ provides a lovely 4-channel histogram, and the eMotion75LV is only single-channel (luminance, I assume).  I don't remember if the Leaf Aptus 75S was 4-channel or 1-channel.  (Obviously the 4-channel is superior for those rare occasions when one is shooting non-gray subjects! )

--

The Sinar Hy6 camera and eMotion75LV take the same battery.  You can purchase aftermarket batteries for $30-40 and they work fine in both the camera and back.  Beware, there may be fit issues with some third-party batteries and the digital back.  You can pick up the Energizer ER-C520 camcorder battery which works just fine in both the camera and the back.

The Leaf AFi and Aptus 75S also use the same battery, but this battery is different from the Sinar Hy6/eM75LV battery.  It's best to use the branded back with the same-branded camera.

Take care,
Brad
« Last Edit: October 04, 2008, 02:35:53 PM by bradleygibson » Logged

Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #23 on: October 04, 2008, 03:15:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: bradleygibson
Sinar Hy6/Leaf AFi:
   
    + Great lens lineup, Schneider perhaps just a hair behind Hassy's Zeiss for resolving power, but overall far ahead in terms of overalll rendering quality.  Plus, both Zeiss and Schneider lenses are available, so you  can pick from the best of both worlds.

Hi Bradley, this is strange - most people rank the Schneider glass above the Zeiss glass, putting the Rollei lens based systems on top rather than the Hass V, as you suggest. My own experience leads me to the same conclusion.
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
Dan Wells
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 347


WWW
« Reply #24 on: October 04, 2008, 04:10:50 PM »
ReplyReply

The battery situation is certainly a factor, at least in adding some cost to the Hasselblad alternative. The Hasselblad battery grip is unique, tougher to pack due to its odd shape, and $200+. Both the Sinar and Phase/Mamiya options run on small, easily packed camcorder batteries that cost about $40. This wouldn't be a factor if battery life was good enough that I only needed two of them, but I've seen reviews of these systems that suggest that 5 or 6 batteries are a good idea for extended shoots (battery life of only a couple hundred images). 6 little camcorder batteries don't take up any space, or cost anything relative to the system, while 6 battery grips both take up significant space and cost $1500.
      What do the Hasselblad users here actually get on a charge? If it's 500 shots, I'm a lot less worried about it, while if it's 100 shots, the nonstandard battery could be a real issue...

                                                                                       -Dan
Logged
samuel_js
Guest
« Reply #25 on: October 04, 2008, 04:12:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Dan Wells
My reason for eliminating the V-system was the fiddly sync cables and the lack of good in body metering.

                                                 -Dan

Dan,
The 200 Hasselblad series like the 203 or 205 have built in metering. But the sync cable is going to be there (except with a CFV back).
Logged
bradleygibson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 829


WWW
« Reply #26 on: October 04, 2008, 11:32:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: foto-z
Hi Bradley, this is strange - most people rank the Schneider glass above the Zeiss glass, putting the Rollei lens based systems on top rather than the Hass V, as you suggest. My own experience leads me to the same conclusion.

Yep, I know...  This is what I expected getting into the Rollei lineup as well.  All I can say is what I've seen in my own personal experience (that the Zeiss glass seemed to outresolve, in general).  But as I mentioned, I wouldn't consider it a scientific test, because I haven't been able to test both sets of glass on the same digital back, nor have any comparisons been controlled tests--so please consider these observations accordingly.  The differences have not been huge.

Despite this, all my glass is Schneider (except the Zeiss Planar 110/2, which has no Schneider equivalent), so I'm still obviously quite a fan...

-Brad
« Last Edit: October 04, 2008, 11:40:13 PM by bradleygibson » Logged

HarperPhotos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1250



WWW
« Reply #27 on: October 04, 2008, 11:51:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Gidday Brad,

I think this report was written a few years ago but it is a interesting read.

Cheers

Simon
Logged

Simon Harper
Harper Photographics Ltd
http://www.harperphoto.com
http://www.facebook.com/harper.photographics

Auckland, New Zealand
bradleygibson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 829


WWW
« Reply #28 on: October 05, 2008, 03:07:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: EPd
As for Zeiss lenses vs Schneider lenses for the Rolleiflex 6000/Hy6/AFi systems: I believe Brad is using very large aperture lenses from Schneider. By their nature they should not be compared to smaller aperture lenses with the same focal point. Large aperture lenses will in general be softer with three dimensional surfaces, especially at short distances, because of their large front lens diameter. Due to this diameter they will see "around" small details/objects (at short distance), giving strong optical blur just outside the maximum focus area. Focused on a flat surface (like a focus target) they might seem just as sharp as Zeiss lenses though. The more "standard" Schneider lenses for this system are generally sharper than the Zeiss designs. Schneider lenses use more modern lens designs too, which might be one of the reasons for the better performance.

I think EPd may have hit the nail on the head, although very little of my work is at close distances.

In particular the 80/2 is markedly inferior (in terms of resolution) than the 80/2.8, even when stopped down to 2.8, regardless of focusing distance.  It's the nature of the beast (I've checked several units).  It is not hard for me to imagine the same is true of the 180/2.8.
Checking the MTF's should tell the tale, certainly for resolving capability.  And looking at the Schneider Tele-Xenar 180/2.8 vs. the Zeiss Sonnar 180/4 CFE for example, the Zeiss outperforms with significantly higher (+0.2) resolution (40lp/mm) and lower astigmatism.

Two weeks ago, I evaluated the AFD 50/2.8 on a hike and found its corner performance to be disappointing, even on a 48x36mm sensor, focused at infinity and stopped down to f/5.6-f/8.   I have not compared it with the Zeiss FE 50/2.8, so I cannot speak to relative performance.  But there does seem to be a very real penalty for speed (beyond price and weight).

MTF's show that going to a Distagon 50/4 FLE would show an improvement, at the cost of half the light sensitivity...

I have little doubt that much of the difference I see, as EPd points out, is due to compromises that must be made for such high-speed optics.  All of my Rollei lenses are at least 1/2 a stop but usually a full stop faster than my Hasselblad Zeiss counterparts.

So yes, I'd consider doing an apples-to-apples comparison with slower glass to more fairly compare the two lineups.

Very good point, EPd, thank you.

Hi, Simon,

Based on what I've seen above, it does not surprise me that the Mamiya's 80/2.8 outperforms the Contax 80/2.0, even stopped down.  Also the Contax Sonnar is, IMHO the weak lens in Contax' lineup, so that makes sense as well.  The 45 test is interesting, but I have not tried the 45 in either lineup.  I'd like to see MTF charts for the Mamiya wides--do you know where one can find Mamiya MTF charts?

-Brad
« Last Edit: October 05, 2008, 03:09:32 AM by bradleygibson » Logged

HarperPhotos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1250



WWW
« Reply #29 on: October 05, 2008, 03:43:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: bradleygibson
I think EPd may have hit the nail on the head, although very little of my work is at close distances.

In particular the 80/2 is markedly inferior (in terms of resolution) than the 80/2.8, even when stopped down to 2.8, regardless of focusing distance.  It's the nature of the beast (I've checked several units).  It is not hard for me to imagine the same is true of the 180/2.8.
Checking the MTF's should tell the tale, certainly for resolving capability.  And looking at the Schneider Tele-Xenar 180/2.8 vs. the Zeiss Sonnar 180/4 CFE for example, the Zeiss outperforms with significantly higher (+0.2) resolution (40lp/mm) and lower astigmatism.

Two weeks ago, I evaluated the AFD 50/2.8 on a hike and found its corner performance to be disappointing, even on a 48x36mm sensor, focused at infinity and stopped down to f/5.6-f/8.   I have not compared it with the Zeiss FE 50/2.8, so I cannot speak to relative performance.  But there does seem to be a very real penalty for speed (beyond price and weight).

MTF's show that going to a Distagon 50/4 FLE would show an improvement, at the cost of half the light sensitivity...

I have little doubt that much of the difference I see, as EPd points out, is due to compromises that must be made for such high-speed optics.  All of my Rollei lenses are at least 1/2 a stop but usually a full stop faster than my Hasselblad Zeiss counterparts.

So yes, I'd consider doing an apples-to-apples comparison with slower glass to more fairly compare the two lineups.

Very good point, EPd, thank you.

Hi, Simon,

Based on what I've seen above, it does not surprise me that the Mamiya's 80/2.8 outperforms the Contax 80/2.0, even stopped down.  Also the Contax Sonnar is, IMHO the weak lens in Contax' lineup, so that makes sense as well.  The 45 test is interesting, but I have not tried the 45 in either lineup.  I'd like to see MTF charts for the Mamiya wides--do you know where one can find Mamiya MTF charts?

-Brad


Hi Brad,

Sorry that's all the info I have.

Simon
Logged

Simon Harper
Harper Photographics Ltd
http://www.harperphoto.com
http://www.facebook.com/harper.photographics

Auckland, New Zealand
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad