Constable Posted February 2, 2011 Share #21 Posted February 2, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm in love with the 120. Never used the Zeiss 110 but have done a reasonable amount of comparison work with the Zeiss 100 on the D3X. Up to A3 printing, hard to tell the difference on full frame. Cropping brings out the S system very quickly. For real macro work the S2 + 120 really needs a tripod, D3X + 100 you can get away with handheld at a pinch. Love to try the 110 on a Hassy but suspect that in the field it has to many negatives. There is a companion thread with some general shots from the 120 ... I'll try to put some more somewhere useful Ed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 Hi Constable, Take a look here S2 with Hasselblad Zeiss 110/2. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
mwilliamsphotography Posted February 5, 2011 Share #22 Posted February 5, 2011 I think the use of the Zeiss 110/2F or FE is more for old-school character than competing with modern ASPH or APO optics for ultimate retina slicing IQ. I personally don't see it as Noctilux 1.0 like in rendering ... more like the 75 Lux. I used the 110/2 quite a bit on a 203FE with a digital back, then a Mamiya 645 with a Leaf Aptus 7S ... then with a Nikon D3X and Sony A900. However, it really needs the larger format 16 bit sensor without mushy AA filtration, and better dynamic range to show off all of its subtile qualities. It is a very difficult lens to critically focus manually and I eventually sold it for that reason, preferring the HC100/2.2 AF lens on the H4 camera ... which has incredibly accurate AF with even off-center subjects close up. Wish there were extension tubes for the S mount ... the 180 would be very interesting close up because of its incredibly beautiful Bokeh. -Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfarkas Posted February 5, 2011 Share #23 Posted February 5, 2011 Wish there were extension tubes for the S mount ... the 180 would be very interesting close up because of its incredibly beautiful Bokeh. -Marc Marc, Extension tubes are not possible for most S lenses, as they use floating lens elements. Flange-to-sensor distance is critical for optimal quality and extension tubes would alter this. The 180 doesn't use a FE, but the 70 and 120 do. David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted February 5, 2011 Share #24 Posted February 5, 2011 ... Extension tubes are not possible for most S lenses, as they use floating lens elements. Flange-to-sensor distance is critical for optimal quality and extension tubes would alter this. The 180 doesn't use a FE, but the 70 and 120 do. IMHO extension tubes are a must-have accessory, even if the results are not as spectacular as with the lenses by themselves, or even if they're recommended only for the 180. I use extension tubes regularly with the R APO 180/2.8 and 280/4 and a lack of extension tubes for the system is a show-stopper for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted February 5, 2011 Share #25 Posted February 5, 2011 The relativly long minimla focusing distance of the 180 makes my decisopn between the 180 and 120 difficult. In one way I think I wold like to have the longer reach but then I think being able to focus close is important as well for what I do.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Rains Posted February 9, 2011 Share #26 Posted February 9, 2011 I have both the 120 and 180 waiting for me when I get back home from Europe next week. It will be interesting to see which gets used more - my money is on the 120 but time will tell. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddanois Posted February 9, 2011 Share #27 Posted February 9, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hey Nick, the 120 is notoriously challenging when it comes to depth of field. I love mine but have to say that f2.5 requires a patient hand. Derek Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted February 11, 2011 Share #28 Posted February 11, 2011 Hey Nick, the 120 is notoriously challenging when it comes to depth of field. I love mine but have to say that f2.5 requires a patient hand. Derek Derek, I believe what you say. you can allways stop down though. I made up my mind end opted for the 120 - hope to receive it in few weeks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddanois Posted February 11, 2011 Share #29 Posted February 11, 2011 Derek,I believe what you say. you can allways stop down though. I made up my mind end opted for the 120 - hope to receive it in few weeks. Sure, I understand what you're saying. I meant that at 2.5, this lens renders some of the most beautiful images I've ever seen but the DOF is RAZOR THIN...so thin, in fact, that no autofocus system should pretend to satisfy. This is one jewel of a lens and I'm so glad that I own one. I will try and post some shots this weekend. Derek Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted February 11, 2011 Share #30 Posted February 11, 2011 Sure, I understand what you're saying. I meant that at 2.5, this lens renders some of the most beautiful images I've ever seen but the DOF is RAZOR THIN...so thin, in fact, that no autofocus system should pretend to satisfy. This is one jewel of a lens and I'm so glad that I own one. I will try and post some shots this weekend. Derek I think I understood yes, please lets see some shots Derek! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
c6gowin Posted February 12, 2011 Share #31 Posted February 12, 2011 I have both the 120 and 180 waiting for me when I get back home from Europe next week. It will be interesting to see which gets used more - my money is on the 120 but time will tell. Please let us know your thoughts on the 120 vs 180. I have demo'd both lenses and it is still a difficult decision to choose one over the other. They each have their benefits. It would be a much easier decision if one had an IQ weakness, but they are both excellent. The best solution is to get both, but that is not likely for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted February 12, 2011 Share #32 Posted February 12, 2011 Please let us know your thoughts on the 120 vs 180. I have demo'd both lenses and it is still a difficult decision to choose one over the other. They each have their benefits. It would be a much easier decision if one had an IQ weakness, but they are both excellent. The best solution is to get both, but that is not likely for me. Maybe it would also be a good combo to have the 120 acro and a little longer lens, like maybe a 250mm/4.0 if something like that will ever appear. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted February 13, 2011 Share #33 Posted February 13, 2011 Not sure I grasp the decision making process between the 120 and 180. 35, 70, 120, and 180 are pretty nicely spaced out in terms of coverage/need. Hopefully, a 24 isn't too far off. I needed the 180 as a priority for reach ... but will soon add a 120 for people/portrait work. If economically forced to choose, I would have opted for the 120 as being more useful. This based on amount of use of corresponding 35mm DSLR lenses ... I use a 135mm far less than a 90 or 100mm. From what I can tell so far, all the lenses seem equal to one another in terms of in-focus sharpness, so a 180 would be just as sharp as the 120 macro ... the macro just focuses closer. The amount of use I would have for a 280/300/350 would never be economically justifiable ... especially one from Leica for the S system. A Leica 1.5X APO Extender matched to their S180 would be a most welcome addition ... if @ f/5.25 it still maintained AF ... which is should. A Zeiss V 350/4FE is probably more my economic speed for the usage I get from a lens this long ... but only if there was a split diagonal with micro-prism collar screen for the S2. -Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
c6gowin Posted February 13, 2011 Share #34 Posted February 13, 2011 The only reason to have to choose one lens over the other is if you can't afford both. There is no way I can afford both so, I much choose. While I would really like to have the 120mm for its closer focusing distance and faster aperture, the 180mm makes more sense for me due to the extra reach (I think). Thinking long term, I want to get the 30-90mm zoom when available and that is not much gap to the 120mm. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted February 13, 2011 Share #35 Posted February 13, 2011 Yeah, makes sense if you are going for the zoom ... can't imagine what that will cost. Gripes, I just noticed my LUF join date ... 04-02-2003! Time flies ... LOL! -Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted February 14, 2011 Share #36 Posted February 14, 2011 Money is one thing, the other thing is the attemp to keep my setup small, simple and just slowly growing. I still see some overlap between 120 and 180 - for portraits for example where I could use both with just a little different distance, or for more compressed landscapes. If I wanted reach I find a focal length equvalent to 180-200mm in fullframe FOV (meaning something like 220-250mm range for the S2) more usefull than 180mm. But who knows, maybe I end up with both of them in the future on day. I agree that a 1.4 TC would be very nice and usefull, also for the 120 this would be great. I dont know if we should have much hope for it or if it is optically possible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted February 15, 2011 Share #37 Posted February 15, 2011 Rather see an 1:1 Elpro for the 120 Macro and a 1.4X APO Extender optimized for the 180 ... like the R system had. Personally, I don't see the 120 and 180 as being all that close for portraits any more than a 100mm and 135mm are in 35mm format. The compression ratios have different effects on different faces. Generally, for most of the portrait work I do, the 70 and 120 will get the most use ... especially location work indoors where distance to subject can be limited. -Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted February 15, 2011 Share #38 Posted February 15, 2011 Rather see an 1:1 Elpro for the 120 Macro and a 1.4X APO Extender optimized for the 180 ... like the R system had. Personally, I don't see the 120 and 180 as being all that close for portraits any more than a 100mm and 135mm are in 35mm format. The compression ratios have different effects on different faces. Generally, for most of the portrait work I do, the 70 and 120 will get the most use ... especially location work indoors where distance to subject can be limited. -Marc The 70mm with a slightly long focal length for a normal lens, and some room for cropping from the resolution, and the rendering of the lens does pretty well too. The 120 interests me for even shallower DOF and for the short minimum focusing distance. I am still sure I will sometimes miss some reach with 120mm ;( ...maybe I find a cheap used 180 one day Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidigital Posted February 15, 2011 Author Share #39 Posted February 15, 2011 Tom, It's a real difficult call ... the 180 or the 120. I've been using the 180 for a few months and really love the lens. I've used it quite a bit for reportage and compressed landscapes. In all instances it really delivers. That being said, I had an opportunity to use a friend's 120 over the past week while he used my 180. In my mind, they are really separate focal lengths that provide the ammunition for a wide variety of applications. The extra length of the 180 is great for reach, yet since the 120 is a faster lens with a very shallow field of focus, it lends itself to a whole different set of possibilities. I wasn't planning on liking the 120 as much as I did. The result of my week with the lens is that I ended up putting myself on the waiting list with my dealer. There are quite a few images with the 180 included in my Valley of Fire post on my blog: Blog | Kurt Kamka Here's one ... Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/128156-s2-with-hasselblad-zeiss-1102/?do=findComment&comment=1589078'>More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted February 18, 2011 Share #40 Posted February 18, 2011 While talking about keeping my setup small and simple it kind of happend that I won an auction for a 110mm/2.0 Hassy without expecting it. Well, now I wonder when I receive my 120 Summarit and the 110 how different they draw-then I need to see if I keep the 110 or not. I just liked thislens so much with my Rollei System. I now need to also get an adapter, want to find out if Novoflex also makes it and how that compare to the Korean version. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.