H3DII 31 - 400ISO Sample

[yaya]

Carsten see my previous post with a sample from the 110mm/f2

I agree about the "mojo" of this lens but I don't think that it is not sharp because it IS. However like most other Zeiss MF lenses it's got less contrast compared to the HC lenses, which, in part, gives it a different look.

I also think that the HC100/2.2 is a very good lens but for portraits I personally prefer the look from the 110/2, wide open or stopped down.

Yair

[David Grover / Phase One]

Originally Posted by carstenw

Oh dear. Et tu, Brute? I only ever meant it as a flippant remark, and really don't understand why people are getting so upset instead of just skipping over it....

Ok ok ok ok. Lets just leave it there.

However, it is important to note that this lens is used in not only portrait photography and you could argue that 100mm is a better length on the 645 format compared to 110 on 6x6.

Aperture dependent focus correction wasn't really so necessary with film (although the H1 did have a basic correction for it) but as resolution in sensors creep up, every little bit of accuracy you can squeeze out of a system as a whole helps.

Also you can easily soften an image, but you can't make a soft one sharp.

David

[georgl]

We're talking about the high-end-market, systems that try to do the work of large format-cameras (commericals...). Photographers spend 10000-40000$ for digital backs every few years. Even if you're willing to pay more, this is the absolute best the industry has to offer.

About 30 years ago Zeiss developed most of the lens designs of the Hasselblad/Rollei-System and while being technologically outdated, most of them are on par with the best lenses available today!
Leica pushed lens-quality in the 35mm-segment to an entirely new level with their Asph/Apo-lenses using entirely new technologies and design approaches, Zeiss develops a set of cine lenses which are twice as fast as other lens-sets and offering superior performance even at open aperture and an incredible "natural" look (No country for old men, Revolutionary Rod, Children of Men...) - giving artists new possibilities!

But what's with the high-end-photography-market? A hand full new, innovative designs in the last 15 years (mostly exotics like the TPP).

Are there MF-lenses which don't significantly drop in performance above f4?

The most legendary company in the MF-market develops an entirely new system, entirely new lenses, even switching suppliers.
They have "digital apo" (everytime you say that, one optical engineer dies... ;-), 3 new bodies within 4 years, everything cool and digital.

But the optical designs and their performances are similar to the tecnnological standard achieved 25 years ago!

I'm sorry, but I think it's understandable that not everybody is über-excited about this strategy and while having the most powerful systems (IQ-wise) it leaves doors open for other strategies...

Optics are an investment, unlike the digital components we shouldn't hesitate to pay a little bit more to get the best quality available.

[carstenw]

Originally Posted by David Grover / Hasselblad

However, it is important to note that this lens is used in not only portrait photography and you could argue that 100mm is a better length on the 645 format compared to 110 on 6x6.

Okay, I really really don't want to take this any further, but you made two new points, so I will respond to just them.

I bought my 110/2 for use on a 645 camera. I liked it so much that I also bought a 2000FC/M, but the primary use, once I get a back, will be on 645. On my Contax, the 110/2 is 10mm longer than the 100/2.2 on the H. Not a big difference, but as you say, every little bit helps.

Also you can easily soften an image, but you can't make a soft one sharp.

You know what? I haven't thought this through well, so if I am completely off, feel free to tell me so, but I have an inkling that it is much easier to take a shot which is *slightly* soft, and sharpen it up a bit (Canon's entire camera range would be the proof here ), than it is to take a shot which is sharp, and somehow achieve the look of the 110/2. Certainly once you factor in the probably not insignificant time to produce such a fake-110/2 image, the cost of the 110/2 will appear to be a relative bargain.

This is the opposite of the standard saw you use, but I think that the *look* of a lens is very much underestimated in importance *by manufacturers*. Photographers know where it is at, but manufacturers seem to universally think that softness is bad, no matter what kind. It just ain't so.

[Paratom]

I dont understand the discussion.

Why do we allways need/expect more and more and more?

The 110/2.0 is a great lens.
If we say the 100/2.2 is quite some years newer and not much improvement to see (or maybe for some taste a slightly less appealing) is one thing.

But I see it that way:
2 great lenses:
The Zeiss, great lens, fully usable even wide open smooth bokeh, and I am happy that even though its not the latest design it still holds up. I wouldnt even know what should be improved if I had a free wish (price maybe)

The Hassy 100 - probably also great lens, lower price than the Zeiss 110 (at least the Rollei version), included AF etc etc

So we have 2 great lenses.
One for the H-system, and one for Hasselblad V/Rollei system
So everbody can be happy. If you use H system-buy the 100/2.2, if you use Rollei/Hasselblad/Contax, buy the 110.

While manual focus works fine most of the times I wouldnt mind to have AF in the 110 though.

[David Grover / Phase One]

Originally Posted by t_streng

I dont understand the discussion.

Why do we allways need/expect more and more and more?

The 110/2.0 is a great lens.
If we say the 100/2.2 is quite some years newer and not much improvement to see (or maybe for some taste a slightly less appealing) is one thing.

But I see it that way:
2 great lenses:
The Zeiss, great lens, fully usable even wide open smooth bokeh, and I am happy that even though its not the latest design it still holds up. I wouldnt even know what should be improved if I had a free wish (price maybe)

The Hassy 100 - probably also great lens, lower price than the Zeiss 110 (at least the Rollei version), included AF etc etc

So we have 2 great lenses.
One for the H-system, and one for Hasselblad V/Rollei system
So everbody can be happy. If you use H system-buy the 100/2.2, if you use Rollei/Hasselblad/Contax, buy the 110.

While manual focus works fine most of the times I wouldnt mind to have AF in the 110 though.

Spot on.

And if anyone is interested there is a very indepth article regarding Zeiss and HC lenses in the online version of Victor Magazine... (pg 11 - Evolution of Lenses)

www.victorbyhasselblad.com/

[woodyspedden]

Hey guys, this is beginning to sound like a thread on LUF. I understand there can be differing points of view but when they are defended ad nauseum with little new data but many opinions, we learn little more but the heat goes up.

Carsten has tried to end this thread several times. Since this all comes down to opinion (better to soften a sharp image vs sharpening a soft one etc) why not leave it lie before some one gets upset and things go south. Not the GetDPI way.

Just my humble opinion and now you have me to flame to take your minds off this thread

Woody

[Guy Mancuso]

Thanks Woody. Let's not go to far not worth losing friendships.

[ptomsu]

Folks,

I do agree very much with Guy and Woody.

I really like this forum, mainly because you can say here things openly, get a discussion going - I mean a really good discussion - get good and helpful criticism and learn from each other. And I feel there is lot of respect for each other as well.

I unfortunately happen to know the LUF since many years and I can assure all of you who do not know it, that you CANNOT have open and helpful discussions there. And this is one of the reasons why I am spending much more time in forums like GetDPI and not in the LUF anymore!

Please let this be true also for the future - THANKS!

[carstenw]

I agree. The LUF forum (international side only; I have no idea why, but on the German side insults are common) was great around the time the M8 was released, for about 6 months, and then slowly but surely deteriorated. Getdpi is still great, for the most part. I am still sorry that Thierry left though. He was a great resource for the Sinar side of things.

[aprillove20]

Anyway, Not every lens has to be sharp, and people love these lenses.