H3D-II/39 now $22K

[khun_k]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Carl Zeiss and Leica are not Hasselblad, Fuji or just one "good" lens-manufacturer. They have over 100 years of experience, Zeiss Oberkochen makes the most precise, complex optical designs on this planet and has the most advanced production site with thousands of highly skilled, long-experienced and well-paid employees. Leica is "only" able to manufacture photo-lenses, but we all know their quality...

These two companies propably made 80% of all optical innovations, reference designs and major breakthroughs in the optical industry - without them, we would have no coating, no computer-based design, no aspheric elements...

And these products are in fact "Made in Germany", Leica buys some glass also from Japan/US/France while Zeiss nearly exclusively relies on Schott (part of their company), also most machines used for manufacturing/assembling/coating lenses and mechanics are in fact "Made in Germany".

 

The only reason why Hasseblad now uses Fuji is because they want to improve their profit for their Hongkong-based owners... Do you know how many highly-skilled and experienced people they fired in Göteborg? They're much smaller than Leica! Maybe they did the right economical choices in the past years with focusing stronger on digital integration than the others, but Hasselblad isn't Hasselblad anymore, everything they do in mechanics and optics can also be done by Mamiya or Pentax, they're no longer unique, which makes me very sad.

 

I've tested two or three lenses from "Hasselblad" and they weren't bad (they're neither fast nor cheap!) but they're not state-of-the-art-designs like the Zeiss TPP (one of the last new lenses for Hasselblad, over 8 years ago!). Look how complex Zeiss-designs are for the film-industry! This has very little to do with Fuji or Zeiss-branded consumer-lenses from Cosina. Imagine what they could have done for the new H-System with completely new designs! Instead they chose the cheapest, easiest way and basically staying on the same level they've reached with Zeiss 30 years ago!

 

Back on-topic:

The S2 will get the newest lens-designs from Leica, with the best technology in construction & manufacturing made, by a highly skilled and experienced workforce.

Wait till you see (some did...) the first 37,5MP pictures with these lenses and you won't talk about "digital apo" ever again, I promise...

 

P.S.

It's an extremely important topic for me as my own job relies on accepting cost and benefits of highest-quality-craftsmenship instead of "designed in" and "made anywhere", quality-management or brand-thinking, so I'm sorry to intervene again and bore most readers who just want to try out the systems and choose the one that fits them best... ;-)

In most part I agree with all you said, except every once awhile the Japanese maker does come out some excellent optic that's not inferior than the best from Germany, but, the lens as we see them is not just optical design, it is a result of combination of glass and the mechanism, and craftsmanship, which in these area that German lens really standout, far above the Japanese ones. The typical German made lens gave you the confidence and feel of quality when you hold it on hand, and the tight tolerance when mounting the lens to the camera body, something even the best Japanese can't come close - which is really a mystery for me. But in term of final image quality, they have became very close, but of course the experience of getting the picture is a different thing. I am lucky enough to own the TPP and I can fully understand why sometime we call a lens exotic. My TPP as being the FE lens, I am using them with my P45+ on Contax 645 thru adapter and canon DSLRs, really shows the quality.

I am not concerned much about the APO, a really nice lens design, if it is so well calculated, a non-APO lens can be just as good, but of course to apply special glass does help to design a lens somewhat easier, or as the case of TPP, a true APO design that the APO is not just optical design based, but also glass based, so the companion 1.7X can perfectly pair with the main tele lens.

My biggest disappointment with H lenses are the build quality, optically they are very good. Except the HCD 28mm, all but the 80 and 100mm lenses are too big and heavy, does not give you the feel like the Rollei or Zeiss lenses, but final image is nothing to complain about - however, today thanks for the advanced RAW converter, the lens quality is now taking not as much responsibility as before and I am a little far away from film today so I cannot compare the lenses directly.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[mjh]

The only reason why Hasseblad now uses Fuji is because they want to improve their profit for their Hongkong-based owners...

I lost count of how many times you have repeated that claim now, but do you have any evidence to back it up? When the development of the H system started, Carl Zeiss was the first lens manufacturer Hasselblad did approach. Only Zeiss wasn’t interested (the reason may have been the Contax 645), so they had to find someone else instead. Technologically, the H system and C system lenses are worlds apart, so how would one compare the H system lenses manufactured by Fujinon to hypothetical, equally modern lens designs from Carl Zeiss?

[sdai]

Zeiss recently has demonstrated exceptional enthusiasm in retrofitting all kinds of mounts on earth, perhaps it's only a matter of time when they'll come up with some ZH lenses - though not auto focusing, but forum members will have something to talk?

[georg]

@mjh

You're right, we both can only speculate about the real reasons changing the lens manufacturer from Zeiss to Fuji.

 

I have talked to an owner of a company which used Zeiss-lenses, he told me about the very difficult relationship between Zeiss and Hasselblad and Hasselblads reaction to others trying to adapt Zeiss-designs also used in the Hasselblad line-up.

Maybe Zeiss really didn't want to continue the work with Hasselblad? But for what reason?

Zeiss remained the same company, producing lenses for many systems. But the owner of Hasselblad changed, within a few years more and more production was given to Fuji (starting with X-Pan and the 60-120), while more and more people in Göteborg lost their job (not because they didn't sell enough cameras, they outsourced their work!). Fuji is known for cheaper lenses than Zeiss Oberkochen, the whole H-System is built cheaper (you have to admit that every button, every plastic element, every joint is of much lower quality than its predecessors 202/203/205!). Maybe Zeiss really wanted to quit the relationship because Hasselblad didn't want to pay them properly - something not too special in these times!?

 

So its absolutely clear for me why the chose Fuji over Zeiss! Do you think that the Kyocera/Contax (not Oberkochen lenses) was the reason to quit the much longer relationship with Hasselblad while continuing the work with Rollei and Sinar?

 

Why is Hasselblad the only one in the professional world with "digital correction" for more and more lenses (the 28mm is just the beginning, the new zoom als has this "feature")?

 

Of course they will never admit that officially, their marketing will create cool new words for digital correction of avoidable optical faults and talk about the long history of high-quality-Fuji-lenses...

 

Is this all just a coincidence?

 

Ok, enough speculation, let's wait and see! I would be extremely surprised to see just the slightest quality advantage using the 50MP-Hassi + Fuji vs. Leica S2 especially in difficult situations (not stopped down to f5,6 using just the center) - after what I have seen, the S2 is not just working against the "small" 33x44mm-Hasselblads...

[wattsy]

Zeiss remained the same company, producing lenses for many systems. But the owner of Hasselblad changed, within a few years more and more production was given to Fuji (starting with X-Pan and the 60-120), while more and more people in Göteborg lost their job (not because they didn't sell enough cameras, they outsourced their work!). Fuji is known for cheaper lenses than Zeiss Oberkochen, the whole H-System is built cheaper (you have to admit that every button, every plastic element, every joint is of much lower quality than its predecessors 202/203/205!).

 

So what? In any case, I'm not sure your history is correct. The x-pan and the introduction of the H system predate the changes in ownership of Hasselblad - i.e. when it effectively became owned by it's Hong Kong distributor and the later merger with (or takeover of) Imacon.

 

Your analysis that Fuji built lenses are cheaper than Zeiss may well be correct (I'd be surprised if it wasn't) but I'd imagine that the strategic decision to move away from Zeiss may well have had as much to do with the move to auto focus and the whole shift technologically from the manual V system to the more 'advanced' H system. Away from amateur orientated internet forums, serious professional users of the Hasselblad system are just getting on with using the gear. These users don't really cares whether the lenses are built in Japan or Germany - all that matters is that the lenses do a job. Any serious photographer (whether professional or amateur) eventually realises that the gear is simply not that interesting. The things that matter in photography are those which relate to what is in front of the camera - lighting, models, location, art direction, hair/make-up, etc. Yes, I'm sure a number of people will get excited about the possibilities that the S2 offers but, ultimately, it is just another camera - it isn't going to make a blind bit of difference to that age old division between talent and non-talent.

[sdai]

Well, as a gear head, I found the debate is quite funny ... no matter how expensive the oberkochen Zeiss is, no matter how cheap the Fujinon Hassblad is, the fact is - when they are tested side by side on a bench, the cheap Fujinon-made HC lenses beat their blue-blood German predecessors!

 

What means paying properly? if both can't agree on the price, then one is going to look for another. Pretty normal ... at the end of the day, the new ones still beat the old ones in terms of image quality.

 

Can Zeiss oberkochen build auto focus lenses meeting the H system's standards?

 

Don't just brag yes, prove it.

[georg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It's difficult comparing technological standards of manufacturers instead of particular lens designs with different "background" (speed, size, age...).

Fuji-Lenses better than Zeiss? Why don't prove this statement, with newer Zeiss-lenses like TPP, 350SA, 40IF? I've only compared older Zeiss standard-designs with comparable Fuji - and they didn't look better at all! Are there any comparison pictures available in the net?

 

Don't get me wrong, a 30k€ H3D-Systems tops every 35mm-System (Canon, Nikon, Leica) easily, but is the S2 really just comparable to "small" MF or will the IQ be on par with future 645/36x48-systems? Can the lens-quality compensate the smaller sensor?

 

That was exactly my point, Leicas competence in optical design&manufacturing is something that cannot be copied by "just another" optical supplier. These f2,5 S-lenses are just the beginning, even faster lenses (without cf) will follow.

 

P.S Hasselblad was bought & sold by more than just one investor - they weren't independent already when they started selling Fuji-equipment with Hasselblad-tag. And Zeiss does manufacture AF-lenses, there are dozens suppliers for precision-mechatronics & drives alone in south-Germany..

[sdai]

Fuji-Lenses better than Zeiss? Why don't prove this statement, with newer Zeiss-lenses like TPP, 350SA, 40IF? I've only compared older Zeiss standard-designs with comparable Fuji - and they didn't look better at all! Are there any comparison pictures available in the net?

 

Georg, "mjh" (Michael J. Hussmann) has tested/compared the V system CF lenses to the newer HC lenses and the results is published in the 2/2008 issue of Victor by Hasselblad. There're all kinds of test charts from the lab.

 

The HC lenses beat the Zeiss lenses (incl. the legendary 3.5/100 and SA 250) overall.

 

It's better, cheaper and faster, what do you have to complain?

 

Again, you need to back up your statement with hard proofs.

[georg]

Is it available in the net somewhere?

 

The 100mm and the 250SA are all over 30 years old designs, if I remember correctly!?

 

Proof? I wish you could see the technological standard in Oberkochen. Have you read how they manufactured the TPP? Building it, measuring it and designing a specific aspheric element which compensates the optical failures of this specfic lens!? Or how innovative and complex their designs for the master primes (cine lenses with t1.3) are? Or Leica with the new Summilux&Noctilux-designs?

 

Why I'm so obsessed with this thing? Maybe because I hate what the last investors have done to the legendary Hasselblad ;-( But mainly because engineering like Zeiss or Leica has become rare, very rare. Their knowledge, their "philosophy" in quality and willing to pay for difficult and innovative solutions (which can be used by others years later) relies on the customer who has to be willing to pay for that. Of course it's complicated in the Hasselblad-system, because in reality you just compare very old Zeiss-designs with newer Fuji and propably get the same quality from both, but I think that the S2-system will show what this "philosophy" is capable of.

 

But it will take another few months until we see the first pictures, so we'll have to wait.

[sdai]

oh,Zeiss is so great, so fancy ... What have they done in the last 10 or 20 years? Nothing.

 

If Fuji builds a 350mm equivalent for the H I believe it will put the TPP to shame too.

 

Do they know how to build an Af lens meeting the H system's standard? No.

 

Can they build a camera on which their lenses can be mounted? No.

 

Don't mix Zeiss with Leica, because they're in different leagues. And Leica has 3 systems while Zeiss can only steal other companies' mounts.

[khun_k]

oh,Zeiss is so great, so fancy ... What have they done in the last 10 or 20 years? Nothing.

 

If Fuji builds a 350mm equivalent for the H I believe it will put the TPP to shame too.

 

Do they know how to build an Af lens meeting the H system's standard? No.

 

Can they build a camera on which their lenses can be mounted? No.

 

Don't mix Zeiss with Leica, because they're in different leagues. And Leica has 3 systems while Zeiss can only steal other companies' mounts.

I use both P45+ on Contax 645 (including using adapter to make use of CF/FE lenses from Hasselblad and the TPP), and H3D39, in most cases, images from H system is not less, sometimes even sharper and I would say, from the experience of using both system, I think they are at least comparable. But I do not shoot pilot chart to make comparison of lens resolution and I really don't care, as long as the image is good. The H system has good lens but the 300mm lens is not as good as TPP that I can confirm from a recent portrait work.

Coming to that, I must comment again that there is a relationship between machine (camera+lens) and man that is beyond pure image quality, and overall the German made lenses feel more solid, more smooth to use (but often slower in focus, but perhaps more controlled manual focus), is another experience. The H lenses are not cheaper than the CF/FE lenses and they should not perform less for what they charge. Since the H system is a digital system (as at least the way it) so it is rather difficult to compare side by side. I think the subjective user experience is the proof. The fact that H system is perhaps among the best selling digital back today (if not the best), which many top professional use them, they cannot be bad, and often times the pro took it because of high quality.

The S2 is a totally different system, according to the mini brochure from Leica, it is even a weather proof system with a life insurance policy, for something of such resolution I would say that must be a first and combine with the compactness of the camera and flexible of using focal plane shutter and leaf shutter and in general faster lenses, I think it is a very desirable choice and I foresee the success of S2.

[sdai]

The argument in previous posts wasn't really all about comparison between 2 systems, it was because of some totally unfounded armchair criticism with no fact to back up with.

 

In fact, you can directly compare the Zeiss made V system lenses to the HC lenses on a H3D with the CF adapter ... if you bother to.

[mjh]

So its absolutely clear for me why the chose Fuji over Zeiss!

Again, they did not choose – they had to deal with Zeiss declining the offer to continue the cooperation with the H system. Why Zeiss wasn’t interested, even Hasselblad doesn’t know for sure.

 

And Fujinon isn’t cheap. Not if you want this level of quality.

 

Why is Hasselblad the only one in the professional world with "digital correction" for more and more lenses (the 28mm is just the beginning, the new zoom als has this "feature")?

“The only one“ – except Phase One, Canon, and probably others? Applying digital corrections comes at little cost and makes a great lens even better; it would be stupid not to do this.

 

I would be extremely surprised to see just the slightest quality advantage using the 50MP-Hassi + Fuji vs. Leica S2 especially in difficult situations (not stopped down to f5,6 using just the center)

You can take it for guaranteed that H3DII-50 will show superior resolution – not that this would concern Leica, as the S2 is targeted at a different set of customers. In fact you can see this improved resolution even now, with the H3DII-39MS. In multi-shot mode, a 39 MP sensor does already deliver a higher effective resolution than a 50 MP single-shot sensor.

[georg]

@sdai

Show me a direct comparison between Fuji and Zeiss-Lenses with comparable parameters (age, speed and focal length) - where are YOUR facts? I admitted that I don't have any, I have only circumstancial evidence and personal experience. Do you have any idea who Carl Zeiss is? That this company is domanting many optical sectors, building film-optics, telescopes, military-lenses and optical systems for the chip-industry?

I see their last complex designs for Hasselblad, their cine-lenses and wonder what they could do in the photo-industry? We propably will never find out.

 

@mjh

Phase One just has a converter with some digital-correction-functions, Hasselblad instead relies on ther converter when designing/ordering specific lenses.

 

The multi-shot-back is something completely different, the only way to vastly improve IQ without higher demands in optics. The question is: what resolution/contrast in critical situations can a S-lens deliver and what is the Fuji capable of when using extremely demanding sensors (like 6-µm-Kodak)? Pictures I've seen from the 39MPixel-backs at 100% weren't normally as sharp as pictures from my M8 + Leica Asph-lenses.

 

Where do you have your information from that Hasselblad did want to continue the work with Zeiss? I've seen this game the past decade many times (choosing cheaper suppliers...) and what I see here looks highly suspicous to me. We don't even know the price for Fuji-lenses, we only know what they're sold for by Hasselblad. Again, we're comparing high-end-systems, when I talk "bad" quality or "cheap" Fuji I mean that in direct comparison to other high-end solutions.

[sdai]

@sdai

Show me a direct comparison between Fuji and Zeiss-Lenses with comparable parameters (age, speed and focal length) - where are YOUR facts? I admitted that I don't have any, I have only circumstancial evidence and personal experience. Do you have any idea who Carl Zeiss is?

 

I have no idea if you are deaf or blind ... I've told you there's a direct comparison in the Victor magazine, why don't you just go buy one copy and read it by yourself?

 

Who is Carl Zeiss? a dead man buried 6 feet under.

[sdai]

@mjh

Phase One just has a converter with some digital-correction-functions, Hasselblad instead relies on ther converter when designing/ordering specific lenses.

 

This is just another blatant lie. Hasselblad and Phase One are doing the same with the correction in their RAW converter.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

C1 4.5 Pro has lens corrections in the software. You can correct for almost( depends on lens) all Mamiya lenses CA, Purple Fringing, Distortion, Lens falloff and Vignetting, Corner Sharpness the 28mm does dot have this feature yet though but I made a secret sauce to apply to do it. It will correct the 28mm barrel distortion and varies other options

 

The Mamiya 28mm, 35mm and I believe the 45mm have automatic defaults setup from Phase to make corrections , you do have to apply them. Also they also support Hassy and Zeiss lenses of different flavors for corrections both for the Contax system glass and the Hassy H system glass. Again there is a list of lenses in C1 that shows what is supported.

 

You can also create LCC profiles with any tech lens and make certain corrections.

 

Very powerful software and one other reason I went Phase on my purchase. Always liked C1 no matter what camera in hand it does a great job on processing.

[mjh]

Phase One just has a converter with some digital-correction-functions, Hasselblad instead relies on ther converter when designing/ordering specific lenses.

The fact is that Hasselblad, Phase One, and Canon all offer digital corrections for distortion, vignetting, and chromatic aberration in their respective raw converters. And yes, the HCD 4/28 (a Hasselblad design, by the way) was developed with distortion correction in mind. Given that the alternative would have been a considerably bigger and heavier lens, I think there’s nothing wrong with that. After all, Hasselblad was the first medium-format manufacturer to offer a 28 mm lens, so kudos to them. As to Phase One, they don’t design or manufacture lenses, and whether Canon’s lens designs are influenced by the availability of correction algorithms in the raw converter, they don’t talk about it; make of that what you will.

 

When Leica says they don’t need software corrections, I see that as rhetoric. It is just a way of saying “our lenses will be of exceptional quality”. I have no doubt that indeed they will be, but not offering state-of-the-art software corrections still wouldn’t make any sense. This would be like someone claiming he doesn’t need a safety belt as he is such a good driver. He very well may be, but to buckle up regardless is still the sensible thing to do.

 

The multi-shot-back is something completely different, the only way to vastly improve IQ without higher demands in optics.

Fact is a multi-shot sensor does place higher demands on lens sharpness. A sensor with RGB filters arranged in a Bayer pattern cannot actually resolve one line per pixel; 2 lines per 3 pixels would be a typical value. But in multi-shot mode, the sensor can resolve finer detail, resulting in a much higher resolution, an advantage that would be lost if the lens didn’t deliver a correspondingly higher resolution as measured in line pairs per millimeter. In multi-shot mode, only the Nyquist limit remains.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[dfarkas]

Leica's claim that digital corerction is not necessary on the S lenses is not just hot air. I got a chance to see the MTF charts of the first four S lenses. I can't see how the performance of the 35 Summarit-S could get any better with software. Seriously. I've never seen that kind of MTF chart for any wide angle lens before. I initially thought I was looking at the chart for the 180 APO!!!! The other S lenses are no different. The 120 APO Macro is better than the 100 APO Macro-R and the 180 APO bests the 180 APO Elmarit-R. The 70 has better performance than the 50 Lux-M ASPH. Guys and gals, there is no question in my mind that all these lenses will be benchmark class.

 

When comparing to the HC and HCD lenses, the S lenses are smaller, lighter, weather/dust sealed, have higher resolving power, less distortion, less vignetting, more even performance across the entire frame and offer faster max apertures. No one is saying that the HC Fuji/Hassy lenses are bad. There are some truly outstanding images being made by Hassy H system cameras. I think the point is that Leica is taking a no compromise approach to lens design on the S system. When they say that they don't need lens correction software, it is becuase they don't.

 

David

[Guest guy_mancuso]

David I understand what you are saying but making a 24mm without some barrel in it is one tough cookie to muster up with a retrofocus design. There has to be something , maybe less than others but I would think something has to be there. These are not like the tech camera lenses.