[Leica] Zeiss Optics was Re: The myths of crop factor

[Richard Man]

The famous http://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium-format-systems-digital-backs/

Bob Adler hangs out there too. The tagline is *"Abandon Hope All Ye Who
Enter Here." (Dante) :-)*

On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 5:54 AM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote:

> Which guys are these? Why not just show us the URL?!?
> I was just reading how the 40mm Hassy CFE FLE is still a very wanted lens
> for digital a bunch of guys who really sounded like they knew what they
> were
> talking about.
>
> By the way a digital back I'd get would be on the conservative side not a
> huge one. And it would still be for the most part overkill.
>
>
> On 1/6/15 4:26 AM, "Richard Man" <richard at richardmanphoto.com> wrote:
>
> > Changing the subject line so we don't invite the wrath of Ted :-)
> >
> > Mark,
> > Those digital MFDB shooters are SUPER picky. They talk about how that
> $6000
> > Rodenstock "Rody" is not quite as good as that $7000 Schneider or vice
> > verse. Of course they are talking about 80 megapixel back!!! As I haven't
> > shot MFDB extensively, I am a bit surprised that apparently there are a
> lot
> > of 23mm-38mm users on that format, which is 1.1x to 1.3x of 645, and they
> > stitch and focus stack etc.Their consensus seems to be that the Hassy
> Zeiss
> > optics are great for film, and even for data back of may be up to 30-40
> > megapixels, but beyond that, you need "digital" designed lens.
> >
> > It is properly a massive case of sour grape in my part, as even if I have
> > the money, I can't see spending $20K just for a back, but in any case,
> all
> > these talk about lugging a laptop with extra chargers and doing live view
> > to focus or use focus stacking etc. does not seem like a big win
> comparing
> > to lugging a 4x5 with 3 lens, a meter, a loupe, a dark cloth and 12
> > holders. That's a 15 pounds pack, probably less if I choose different
> lens
> > or just take 6 holders.
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 11:33 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Richard I think terms like "fingerprint" and "Character" in lenses is
> >> reserved for the revealed faults of lenses of simple coatings or no
> >> coatings
> >> from decades gone by like the 1960s and before.
> >> I can see that modern made of digital optics with smaller image circles
> and
> >> costing many thousands of dollars might out spec made for Hassy Zeiss
> made
> >> in the 1990's. But that doesn't reduce them to relics. The specs on
> these
> >> Zeiss optics are still super high way higher than what we normally see
> in
> >> all but modern cutting edge Leica M optics.
> >> I sure hope its ok for us to be talking about this!
> >>
> >>
> >> On 1/6/15 1:20 AM, "Richard Man" <richard at richardmanphoto.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> That's the one I mentioned. It lists at $15K but people have gotten it
> as
> >>> low as $12K-$13K through grey market.
> >>>
> >>> It's the same Sony CMOS sensor used in all the latest MF cameras and
> >> backs,
> >>> Leica excepted. So it goes to the inexpensive Pentax 645Z for $8000 up
> to
> >>> the $$$ Phase One at $30000+ (is that enough zeroes?) So the Hassy
> price
> >> is
> >>> not too bad in that sense.
> >>>
> >>> Supposedly the latest Schneider and Rodenstock lens are way better than
> >> old
> >>> non-digital lens, but I suspect the old classic Hasselblad Zeiss lens
> can
> >>> make it up with their "characters."
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Someone I think Hasselblad/Fuji is marketing a not super high priced
> new
> >>>> CMOS back which works with classic Hassy 500c bodies or an ELM such
> as I
> >>>> have. Its enough to make me try to get a job in the post office.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> A CMOS back makes your Hassy not just a studio and tripod camera but a
> >>>> digital version of the Hassy film camera like a 35mm DSLR Is to an
> SLR.
> >> In
> >>>> other words you can use it on the street or indoors or at dusk hand
> >> held.
> >>>> A medium format camera whose iso tops off at 200 would be a lot more
> >>>> constricting and limiting than you'd think. There's also a limit on
> >> longer
> >>>> exposures I think. Personally I'm ok with tripod use but it would be
> >> nice
> >>>> to
> >>>> do with my Hassys what I used to do with them and and what I do now
> with
> >>>> 35mm format DSLR's. Almost.
> >>>> I used a lot of 220 iso 800 film in my Hassy's. Color neg.
> >>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Mark William Rabiner
> Photographer
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>



-- 
// richard <http://www.richardmanphoto.com>
// http://facebook.com/richardmanphoto
// https://www.facebook.com/Transformations.CosplayPortraits