Hassy 80mm CFE: disappointment
I bought a bran new Hassy outfit in november to replace my old and tired Rolleiflex Tessar. Now, I am very happy and disapointed at the same time, the current generation planar is outstanding in sharpness, flare control and contrast, really amazing but the distorsion is just bad.
I usually never go to check the MTF graphs and all but seeing this curved straight lines on my slides got me to wonder and it seems that the 80mm Planar has 2% distorsion where my old tessar seems to have close to none of it. How can Zeiss produce a lens which is, in this particular aspect, inferior to a 60 years old single coated Tessar? Maybe I am picky, but I am really sensitive to distorsion and more than 0.75-1% is a lot for me.
I usually use a lot of straight lines in my compositions, environmental portraits and all and it seems that I will have either to get a really expensive 100mm planar (which acording to the datasheet has no distorsion) or to get another rolleiflex for this particular purpose and relegate my new hassy to studio and non geometricaly critical use.
I rule out all the 2.8 Rolleiflex versions because they would probably have the same problem (looking at the current version 2.8 FX datasheet, the lens has the same distorsion as the hassy version).
Do anyone know if the 3.5 Planar/Xenotar is bettter corrected or if I will have to go for another Tessar (maybe a recent Rolleiflex T)
How about posting an example of why this is such a bad lens?
How big do you print?
It is not that it is totally bad, but only bad in this respect.
As usuall it is more obvious in the side of the pictures, on the rail and uper tablet on this one. This might not be the best example for now, but not many are scanned yet.
I print up to 20x20
Again maybee I am picky but my eye react a lot to this, I always notice distorsion when I see pictures, will other notice it on my own pics? Don'T know but I certainly do.
Sorry Kris, I just don't see it and think you are worrying about nothing.
No way would Hasselblad and Zeiss release a crappy lens.
Actually, when I look on flickr for exemple, I see the same thing: slight barrel distorsion. I repeat, it is not a crappy lens at all it simply has more distorsion then I would like it to. I reiterate my original question:
Is the 3.5 planar found on Rolleiflexes generally showing less distorsion than the 2.8 CFE even if the latter shows just a little of it?
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I see very little distortion here, as well. When the axis of the lens is not closely perpendicular to the "lines" in the composition, there will be *some* so-called wide-angle "falling away" of the extremities of the image. This is the nature of the beast - and,truthfully if my attention had not been drawn to critical examination of parallel edges here, I would never have noticed anything like that.
From what I read here, I would question the "fairness" of your evaluation. Try a few more exposures with both lenses, keeping both in the same position - perpendicular to vertical lines and deviating from perpendicularity equally, and compare the results.
I can't guarantee a damned thing. If I've learned anything over the many moons, it is that anything is possible. I would, however, be very surprised to find excessive distortion or other errors in Hasselblad lenses.
Ed Sukach, FFP.
I too don't see where you detected that distortion.
Perspective, yes. But distortion? Not in that picture.
But before you decide to do anything, put your camera perpendicular (use a mirror to align the thing) to a flat surface bearing absolutely straight lines, and take pictures. Examine and measure those.
Do the same with your Tessar, if you still have it.
(Tessars, by the way, are not better lenses than these Planars. Their distortion is opposite, but about the same degree.)
It looks like the camera is slightly tilted to the left. If you look at the vertical at the right edge, it's not equal at the top & bottom of the frame. When you look at the left edge it may give the appearance of distortion because the vertical nearest the L edge seems to tilt inward.
If you're going to test a lens for distortion I would suggest with less confusing elements.
I'm not seeing it either. I used to use that lens for doing critical copy work of art. If you're deeply concerned about absolute freedom from distortion, try the 120 Makro-Planar. I used it for doing copy work of scientific test results that went into an FDA submission. It has really harsh bokeh, but for absolute critical sharpness and correction, it's the next best thing to the Superwide.
The zeiss planar 80mm 2.8 does have a slight amount of barrell distortion. It can be easily seen if you superimpose a grid to the picture (At least in Photoshop you can do that).
The distortion is very low and almost imperceptible unles you photograph architecture or do reproduction work (that's how I found out)
As you mentioned, a lens with almost no distortion is the planar 100 (I whish I had it).
You can check the technical datasheet in the Carl Zeiss web page: http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B8B6...E_102211_e.pdf