[HUG ] Re: Odious Comparison
- From: "flexbody" <flexbody@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 05:20:11 +0200
Dear Uncle Dick,
The general rule for both the Makro-Planar and the much underrated
S-Planar is to use them up to about 1m from the object.
Both these lenses were designed for close range applications.
Other lenses perform better at larger distances because they are
optimised for maximum resolution at infinity.
The 1meter thing does not imply you cannot use Macro lenses at
larger distances. They simply will not give results they can deliver if used
for the sort of distances they are designed for.
Quite a few photographers have used the Makro-Planar at infinity with
quite decent results.
Stopping down till F11 or even F16 helps under these circumstances.
I do not know what the conditions were when you did the job with the
F 150/2.8 or the Makro-Planar for that matter.
This is just an observation about lenses and how they can be used for
best results.
If you are after high resolution and mininal distortion the Makro or the
S-Planar for close range and the 100/3.5 Planar for larger distances from
about 1m are hard to beat.
The 150/2.8 Sonnar is a very good lens in its own right.
I use the FE version. That lens is optically the same as the F lens.
Only difference of course are the databus contacts and electronics.
I would be very reluctant to draw any hard conclusions from what you
photographed.
A more static subject with conditions that can be better controlled
and repeated would be advisable for that.
Richard.
----- Original Message -----
From: Stein
To: hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2008 3:50 AM
Subject: [HUG ] Odious Comparison
Dear friends,
I have been staring hard at the light box and even harder at
the prints. I have a question about Hasselblad lenses that is bugging me and I
need various opinions.
I purchased a 150mm Sonnar F - the 2,8 version for the
200-2000 series cameras. It sits on my 201F and seems to function perfectly.
Therein lies my query. Up to now I have done bellydance shots in the studio
using a 120mm Makro Planar as it allowed me to get a decent sized image and
preserve as much of the paper-roll backdrop area as possible behind the dancer.
In many cases with ME dance things swirl out to a great distance and I try to
get all the veils and swords within the confines of the backdrop.
This is indeed even more possible with the new Sonnar though
the slightly longer focal length means I have to step further back in the
camera room. All good - the 1/90 second exposure demanded by the 201F is still
fine for movement as most shots are taken with flash.
The problem is I have been looking at the new prints and am
starting to wonder if they are significantly sharper than the ones taken with
the 120 - and whether this means that I have a beauty of a new lens - HOORAY -
or if the dear old Makro Planar is having problems - SNIF....
Any ratings on the relative sharpness of these two Zeiss
lenses? I have never questioned it before and indeed the Makro Planar delivers
superb results with flat art copy od close-ups. Is it time for a service or is
it all correct or is it just me?
Uncle Dick
Other related posts:
