Medium Format Forum
Register a free account now!
If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.
440 FLE v 440 IF
- Thread starter hhansard
- Start date
najobskalf
Member
I would need to have sevberal stiff drinks before doing that!
My two biggest concerns with a wide angle lens are resolution and contrast.>
Martin:
Since you are into landscapes, I think you will like it. Resolution is an attribute of this lens and it will deliver every bit of the resolving power of your camera.
Regards:
Gilbert
BTW-If I may ask where did you obtain one to test. Please let me know off the forum.
Thanks
Martin:
Since you are into landscapes, I think you will like it. Resolution is an attribute of this lens and it will deliver every bit of the resolving power of your camera.
Regards:
Gilbert
BTW-If I may ask where did you obtain one to test. Please let me know off the forum.
Thanks
polypal
Active Member
@ Eduardo,
There seems to be some confusion about 40mm lenses from Carl Zeiss for Hasselblad cameras.
Here are they in chronological order:
C type lens large body early coating
C type lens with T* coating
These are large bulky lenses with limited picture quality at close range. No spares available.
Production 1966-1982
CF FLE lens with floating elements. This lens group is manually adjusted.
After that focusing takes place as usual.
Production 1982-1998
CFE FLE As CF with improved shutter spring and better internal anti
reflection coating. Improved Flash contact.
This lens also has contacts to communicate with 20X
series bodies. production 1998-2003
CF IF Current model with improved performance over CF/CFE model
at the cost of increase of distortion.
Floating elements adjusted while focusing as usual.
No longer extra lens group with pre adjustment.
This lens is best suited for digital applications.
Production 2003-
When using 4/16 shot mode digital the CF IF is the winner.
Paul
There seems to be some confusion about 40mm lenses from Carl Zeiss for Hasselblad cameras.
Here are they in chronological order:
C type lens large body early coating
C type lens with T* coating
These are large bulky lenses with limited picture quality at close range. No spares available.
Production 1966-1982
CF FLE lens with floating elements. This lens group is manually adjusted.
After that focusing takes place as usual.
Production 1982-1998
CFE FLE As CF with improved shutter spring and better internal anti
reflection coating. Improved Flash contact.
This lens also has contacts to communicate with 20X
series bodies. production 1998-2003
CF IF Current model with improved performance over CF/CFE model
at the cost of increase of distortion.
Floating elements adjusted while focusing as usual.
No longer extra lens group with pre adjustment.
This lens is best suited for digital applications.
Production 2003-
When using 4/16 shot mode digital the CF IF is the winner.
Paul
This is the review of the IF that appeared in Popular Photography a few years ago:
A great performance—and no distortion!
WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW: The
40mm f/4 Carl Zeiss Distagon T* IF CFE
lens, a new floating-element formula, is the
first major redesign of the 40mm Distagon
in decades. The 40mm (35mm equivalent:
26mm) is popular with Hasselblad shooters
using digital backs with smaller sensors.
The new 40mm f/4 Distagon T* IF
CFE has mechanical connections for
V-series Hasselblads (e.g., the 500CW)
and gold-plated contacts compatible with
200-series Hasselblads with electronically
controlled focal-plane shutters. It claims to
be up to digital standards.
HANDS ON: Average in size and weight
for a lens of its type, the lens is magnificently
finished in semigloss black with
very legible white-on-black numerals
except for the EV scale (EV 3–21) in
orange on black. There are adjacent
metric and footage distance scales, the
latter calibrated in inches below 3 feet,
down to the minimum focusing distance
of 19 inches. The wide, dual-focusing
collar and narrow shutter-speed (1–1/500
sec plus B) collar are rubberized, ribbed,
and very grippable. The f/4–22 aperture
ring is easy to grasp. You can lock both
aperture and shutter-speed rings together
by holding in a button as you turn them, to
make equivalent exposure settings. Other
features include an aperture-stopdown
switch, locking PC terminal, “F” shutter
setting, comprehensive depth-of-field
scale, and a screw-in lenshood. The new
lens balances extremely well, and all controls
operate very smoothly, with very well d&ed
action.
IN THE LAB: Resolution results indicate
outstanding performance at all apertures,
both center and edges, at f/4, f/5.6, and
f/8. Barrel distortion (0.1%) was virtually
undetectable. At the minimum measured
focusing distance of 18 inches (1:7.5), center
and edge sharpness were excellent at
all apertures. Optimum aperture was f/16.
IN THE FIELD: Test slides were uniformly
sharp and contrasty from center to corners
at all apertures, and flare was very well
controlled throughout. Light falloff was
gone by f/5.6. An excellent result.
CONCLUSION: Expensive, but for the
pros who need it, worth every penny. The
best ever tested for a medium-format lens
of this type
How they came up with no distortion is beyond me. What where they smoking?
A great performance—and no distortion!
WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW: The
40mm f/4 Carl Zeiss Distagon T* IF CFE
lens, a new floating-element formula, is the
first major redesign of the 40mm Distagon
in decades. The 40mm (35mm equivalent:
26mm) is popular with Hasselblad shooters
using digital backs with smaller sensors.
The new 40mm f/4 Distagon T* IF
CFE has mechanical connections for
V-series Hasselblads (e.g., the 500CW)
and gold-plated contacts compatible with
200-series Hasselblads with electronically
controlled focal-plane shutters. It claims to
be up to digital standards.
HANDS ON: Average in size and weight
for a lens of its type, the lens is magnificently
finished in semigloss black with
very legible white-on-black numerals
except for the EV scale (EV 3–21) in
orange on black. There are adjacent
metric and footage distance scales, the
latter calibrated in inches below 3 feet,
down to the minimum focusing distance
of 19 inches. The wide, dual-focusing
collar and narrow shutter-speed (1–1/500
sec plus B) collar are rubberized, ribbed,
and very grippable. The f/4–22 aperture
ring is easy to grasp. You can lock both
aperture and shutter-speed rings together
by holding in a button as you turn them, to
make equivalent exposure settings. Other
features include an aperture-stopdown
switch, locking PC terminal, “F” shutter
setting, comprehensive depth-of-field
scale, and a screw-in lenshood. The new
lens balances extremely well, and all controls
operate very smoothly, with very well d&ed
action.
IN THE LAB: Resolution results indicate
outstanding performance at all apertures,
both center and edges, at f/4, f/5.6, and
f/8. Barrel distortion (0.1%) was virtually
undetectable. At the minimum measured
focusing distance of 18 inches (1:7.5), center
and edge sharpness were excellent at
all apertures. Optimum aperture was f/16.
IN THE FIELD: Test slides were uniformly
sharp and contrasty from center to corners
at all apertures, and flare was very well
controlled throughout. Light falloff was
gone by f/5.6. An excellent result.
CONCLUSION: Expensive, but for the
pros who need it, worth every penny. The
best ever tested for a medium-format lens
of this type
How they came up with no distortion is beyond me. What where they smoking?
Wow! They indeed need to have their testing machinery looked at.
Distortion is 30x as bad as the 0.1% they have found.
You never know what of the rest in such reviews to believe, or what else is the result of having had one bottle of Château Lafitte too many. A pitty.
In this instance, i think the "is popular with Hasselblad shooters
using digital backs with smaller sensors" is. It echoes the marketing speak that introduced the lens to us when it was launched. And i don't think this lens has sold in numbers large enough to even consider calling it 'popular'.
Yet, maybe in the smaller group of "Hasselblad shooters using digital backs with smaller sensors", almost everyone has one? But still, difficult to believe.
Distortion is 30x as bad as the 0.1% they have found.
You never know what of the rest in such reviews to believe, or what else is the result of having had one bottle of Château Lafitte too many. A pitty.
In this instance, i think the "is popular with Hasselblad shooters
using digital backs with smaller sensors" is. It echoes the marketing speak that introduced the lens to us when it was launched. And i don't think this lens has sold in numbers large enough to even consider calling it 'popular'.
Yet, maybe in the smaller group of "Hasselblad shooters using digital backs with smaller sensors", almost everyone has one? But still, difficult to believe.
polypal
Active Member
It is hard to believe but some "testers" write about products they have not even seen or test without taking the item out of the box it came in.
The guy who wrote this review did not even bother to check factory data for this lens.
Could well be this is a review based on this kind of attitude.
This lens sells in relatively small numbers and will be a rather scarce item due to its price.
The lens is much appreciated by those who use one.
It is virually impossible to find it in a good used condition.
Paul
The guy who wrote this review did not even bother to check factory data for this lens.
Could well be this is a review based on this kind of attitude.
This lens sells in relatively small numbers and will be a rather scarce item due to its price.
The lens is much appreciated by those who use one.
It is virually impossible to find it in a good used condition.
Paul
Or they did indeed test the thing thoroughly. But were not very good at doing so?
A test always is a test of the person doing the testing and his methods and 'machinery' as much as it is of the thing to be tested.
And since factory data often are a bit embellished, the tester might have thought it best to not even look at them. Better only trust your own performance testing.
It certainly saves having to account for discrepancies between your own test data and the ones the factory might have published.
Anyway, we're guessing. That's all we can do.
A test always is a test of the person doing the testing and his methods and 'machinery' as much as it is of the thing to be tested.
And since factory data often are a bit embellished, the tester might have thought it best to not even look at them. Better only trust your own performance testing.
It certainly saves having to account for discrepancies between your own test data and the ones the factory might have published.
Anyway, we're guessing. That's all we can do.
Preliminary report on the H2/CF adapter/40mm CFE IF/P45 DB:
Last weekend I had the opportunity to take multiple images with this combination around my home. Aesthetically, the lens is gorgeous. A true piece of craftsmanship. It works flawlessly with the CF adapter. The images are tack sharp at all apertures out to the edge. Yes, there is distortion, but nothing that really bothers me. In my opinion, given my set-up, the lens is a big improvement over the CFE FLE. I really have not compared it as yet with the HC 35, but suspect that they are going to be fairly close.
Last weekend I had the opportunity to take multiple images with this combination around my home. Aesthetically, the lens is gorgeous. A true piece of craftsmanship. It works flawlessly with the CF adapter. The images are tack sharp at all apertures out to the edge. Yes, there is distortion, but nothing that really bothers me. In my opinion, given my set-up, the lens is a big improvement over the CFE FLE. I really have not compared it as yet with the HC 35, but suspect that they are going to be fairly close.
najobskalf
Member
Without a direct comparison, I am afraid that I remain sceptical about the disappointing prformance of the CFE FLE! But then, I am always ready to be convonced by real evidence.
Mark - As I have said before, inconvience is irrelevent in this case. I never use the HC 35 on auto focus when shooting landscapes. So it comes down to metering. It is no problem setting the lens using the H2 meter or a hand held meter. I rather enjoy it. Cost/benefit is a definite factor and you are correct. Each individual photographer is going to have to address this issue after reviewing the results and make a choice. Mine has been made. Marty