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.
First results of the CFV39 Part three.
- Thread starter polypal
- Start date
a few more; that concrete zone is the entry to the "The Newtown Creek Nature Walk", very close to the largest oil spill in history, still underground
Attachments
bradleygibson
Member
Hi, folks,
Thanks for the support.
I was using a good tripod, head, mirror lock up (8 seconds) etc...
I was worried I have a back flange issue (the back is not where the finder thinks it should be). Shouldn't be, because the back is new, and the camera just came back from Hasselblad, modified for digital, and this is one of the things they are supposed to check for.
Anyway, I took out my LensAlign to see if what I see as my plane of focus in the finder agrees with what the back is seeing. With my FE 50, and 110, they agree, and focus accuracy is well within human error. Based on this, I attribute the lack of bite in the photos taken yesterday with these two lenses to wind.
Bad news is I do have issues with two lenses, my CFE 40 IF and my FE 80.
The 40 is back focusing quite a bit (15mm or so at 50cm distance), and both are delivering poor image quality wide open. Painful as it might be, it may be worth sending the whole kit to H'blad to have everything calibrated properly.
So good news is that the back and camera seem to be OK, but a couple of the lenses I've picked up are not peak performers. Let's hope it's not too costly to get them back to tip top shape.
-Brad
Thanks for the support.
I was using a good tripod, head, mirror lock up (8 seconds) etc...
I was worried I have a back flange issue (the back is not where the finder thinks it should be). Shouldn't be, because the back is new, and the camera just came back from Hasselblad, modified for digital, and this is one of the things they are supposed to check for.
Anyway, I took out my LensAlign to see if what I see as my plane of focus in the finder agrees with what the back is seeing. With my FE 50, and 110, they agree, and focus accuracy is well within human error. Based on this, I attribute the lack of bite in the photos taken yesterday with these two lenses to wind.
Bad news is I do have issues with two lenses, my CFE 40 IF and my FE 80.
The 40 is back focusing quite a bit (15mm or so at 50cm distance), and both are delivering poor image quality wide open. Painful as it might be, it may be worth sending the whole kit to H'blad to have everything calibrated properly.So good news is that the back and camera seem to be OK, but a couple of the lenses I've picked up are not peak performers. Let's hope it's not too costly to get them back to tip top shape.
-Brad
cs_foto
Member
Bad news is I do have issues with two lenses, my CFE 40 IF and my FE 80.
excuse my ignorance but how can one lens be back-focusing while another be spot-on? with the same body, for what i understand it is impossible...
this is no auto focus system, so if your body is 'calibrated' you see in the focusing screen what the back will see, no matter what lens you use the result should be the same...
am i right?
polypal
Active Member
The body is calibrated in order to make what you see on the screen also appears at the film plane or DB sensor.
Calibration involves setting the mirror at exactly 45°, measuring and if necessary correcting the distance from the lens mount to the rear of the body.
Finally the screen is adjusted.
These jobs can only be done by a trained repairman who has acces to factory tools.
What puzzles me is the fact that two lenses have serious problems.
That seems to be an unlikely coincidence.
Paul
bradleygibson
Member
Tell me what you see...
I've captured screen shots of the images in Phocus. I'd be quite interested in hearing your thoughts on what you see in these images:
http://gibsonphotographic.com/share/web/Focus Test/
Equipment used:
- Hasselblad 203FE (modified for digital) + CFV-39
- Bogen/Manfrotto 3444 Carbon Fiber tripod
- RRS BH-55 Ballhead with Arca-Swiss compatible long lever clamp
- RawWorkflow LensAlign with ruler set to 30 degrees
- Lenses as per filename
Methodology:
- Shot indoors (no wind)
- All shots employed focal plane shutter (varied from 1/30 to 1s)
- Mirror lock up with 8s delay
- Focus was with waist level finder, with magnifier, at close distance
- Focus target was upper right hole, just below the "A" in Lens Align; this was carefully focused with the split recticle; additional lighting on target as needed for critical focus. Focusing on this should ensure optimal sharpness is at "0" on the ruler -- see FE 50 tests for approximately how it should look. The smallest numbers are precisely 3mm in height so each small number, projected at the 30 degree setting means a focus error of 2.6mm in distance perpendicular to the camera plane. If the plane of focus is +/- 1.5 numbers on the ruler, I consider that to be a fine result.
What are your thoughts on:
* The -4 backfocusing observed with the CFE 40 IF? I repeated the shoot twice to be sure and saw the same result...
* The (what looks like) axial chromatic aberration of the 40mm and the 80mm shot wide open? I have owned a different copy of this 40mm lens before; did not see this... Looks like a soft diffusion filter was applied...
Thanks guys, for your help!
Best regards,
-Brad
I've captured screen shots of the images in Phocus. I'd be quite interested in hearing your thoughts on what you see in these images:
http://gibsonphotographic.com/share/web/Focus Test/
Equipment used:
- Hasselblad 203FE (modified for digital) + CFV-39
- Bogen/Manfrotto 3444 Carbon Fiber tripod
- RRS BH-55 Ballhead with Arca-Swiss compatible long lever clamp
- RawWorkflow LensAlign with ruler set to 30 degrees
- Lenses as per filename
Methodology:
- Shot indoors (no wind
)- All shots employed focal plane shutter (varied from 1/30 to 1s)
- Mirror lock up with 8s delay
- Focus was with waist level finder, with magnifier, at close distance
- Focus target was upper right hole, just below the "A" in Lens Align; this was carefully focused with the split recticle; additional lighting on target as needed for critical focus. Focusing on this should ensure optimal sharpness is at "0" on the ruler -- see FE 50 tests for approximately how it should look. The smallest numbers are precisely 3mm in height so each small number, projected at the 30 degree setting means a focus error of 2.6mm in distance perpendicular to the camera plane. If the plane of focus is +/- 1.5 numbers on the ruler, I consider that to be a fine result.
What are your thoughts on:
* The -4 backfocusing observed with the CFE 40 IF? I repeated the shoot twice to be sure and saw the same result...
* The (what looks like) axial chromatic aberration of the 40mm and the 80mm shot wide open? I have owned a different copy of this 40mm lens before; did not see this... Looks like a soft diffusion filter was applied...
Thanks guys, for your help!
Best regards,
-Brad
polypal
Active Member
I am not familiar with this alignment chart so my comment is limited to the large differences I see for both the 40 mm IF and the 80 mm FE lens between full aperture and stopped down 2 stops.
As far as I know these results are not the way these lenses were designed.
Of course any lens may have been subject to change in performance due mechanical overload caused by a fall etc.
This calls for an expert opinion that is not coming from me.
The 40 IF will probably have to go for a test and correction of errors to Oberkochen.
The same thing happened to the CF(E) 40 in the early years of its existence.
Later corrections and repairs could be performed by Hasselblad in Sweden.
Finally a method was developed to repair and align these lenses at Hasselblad service centers around the world.
A low volume lens like the IF is not likely to be serviced with these kind of problems by any other than Carl Zeiss in Germany.
Paul
As far as I know these results are not the way these lenses were designed.
Of course any lens may have been subject to change in performance due mechanical overload caused by a fall etc.
This calls for an expert opinion that is not coming from me.
The 40 IF will probably have to go for a test and correction of errors to Oberkochen.
The same thing happened to the CF(E) 40 in the early years of its existence.
Later corrections and repairs could be performed by Hasselblad in Sweden.
Finally a method was developed to repair and align these lenses at Hasselblad service centers around the world.
A low volume lens like the IF is not likely to be serviced with these kind of problems by any other than Carl Zeiss in Germany.
Paul
bradleygibson
Member
Thanks, Paul for your thoughts. Agreed.
My first CFE 40/IF gave flawless results--it looked nothing like this.
You mention sending it to Zeiss Germany--I assume that is a more direct (and cost-efficient route) than through Hasselblad USA? I'll also check with my Hasselblad USA repair technician on Tuesday.
Thanks again,
-Brad
My first CFE 40/IF gave flawless results--it looked nothing like this.
You mention sending it to Zeiss Germany--I assume that is a more direct (and cost-efficient route) than through Hasselblad USA? I'll also check with my Hasselblad USA repair technician on Tuesday.
Thanks again,
-Brad
polypal
Active Member
Hello Brad,
Simply ask HBUSA what they think of the 40 IF problem.
Interesting to know whether they have facilities to correct this.
While you are at it give them the eighty as well.
If it were my lens I would send it directly to Carl Zeiss.
You are not the first owner. That makes it difficult to claim extended warranty.
Should the problem not come from any kind of accident you stand a good chance CZ solves the problem without charging you.
I should not say this but even in Oberkochen mistakes happen.
Apperently not all lenses are tested before they leave the factory.
There was this batch of 350 lenses that had all there front elements fitted upside down.....
No I will not say which 350!
Paul
Simply ask HBUSA what they think of the 40 IF problem.
Interesting to know whether they have facilities to correct this.
While you are at it give them the eighty as well.
If it were my lens I would send it directly to Carl Zeiss.
You are not the first owner. That makes it difficult to claim extended warranty.
Should the problem not come from any kind of accident you stand a good chance CZ solves the problem without charging you.
I should not say this but even in Oberkochen mistakes happen.
Apperently not all lenses are tested before they leave the factory.
There was this batch of 350 lenses that had all there front elements fitted upside down.....
No I will not say which 350!
Paul
wbulte
Active Member
If I had to do it I would definitely repeat the test with another body. Just to eliminate that factor.
Wilko
jotloob
Well-Known Member
Here is my very first shot with the 503CW + DISTAGON 4/40 IF + CFV-39 .
The first image is without any adjustment .
View attachment 1777
The second image is with a little WB adjustment as well as lens correction for the 4/40IF + USM 100/1 -
View attachment 1778
I am very delighted of the image quality .
Next will be tests with 905SWC and also SWA .
Jürgen
The first image is without any adjustment .
View attachment 1777
The second image is with a little WB adjustment as well as lens correction for the 4/40IF + USM 100/1 -
View attachment 1778
I am very delighted of the image quality .
Next will be tests with 905SWC and also SWA .
Jürgen
jotloob
Well-Known Member
polypal
Active Member
Hello Jürgen,
It certainly looks like you have a good 40 mm IF lens.
Where did you get that one?
I know the files are limited but still I could get some idea of the IQ this combination is able to give.
Have fun doing some more tests and give us more images to show what you have been up to.
Paul
It certainly looks like you have a good 40 mm IF lens.
Where did you get that one?
I know the files are limited but still I could get some idea of the IQ this combination is able to give.
Have fun doing some more tests and give us more images to show what you have been up to.
Paul
Many congratulations Jurgen.
I thought I will post a few images taken early morning with the CF180, and 40IF. I am looking into buying the CF25o sa tomorrow.
The next image is of my long yacht taken with the 40IF.
Joking of course
The images are a lot sharper than how they appear.
Saad
I thought I will post a few images taken early morning with the CF180, and 40IF. I am looking into buying the CF25o sa tomorrow.
The next image is of my long yacht taken with the 40IF.
Joking of course
The images are a lot sharper than how they appear.
- Hasselblad - Hasselblad CFV-39
- ƒ/5.6
- 30 sec
- ISO 50
Saad
Attachments
polypal
Active Member
Hello Saad,
An excellent idea:
" Hi Jurgen, I can arrange that if you like "
I would not mind sailing that ship to Germany.
Jürgen better inform us about the size of the port of Sonthofen to make sure that ship can be moored without problems.
He has enough time to see to the paintwork and a few other jobs.
May I suggest we call this steamer Forum Enterprise or FE.
That brings us back to Hasselblads famous extra fast lenses.
Paul
An excellent idea:
" Hi Jurgen, I can arrange that if you like
"I would not mind sailing that ship to Germany.
Jürgen better inform us about the size of the port of Sonthofen to make sure that ship can be moored without problems.
He has enough time to see to the paintwork and a few other jobs.
May I suggest we call this steamer Forum Enterprise or FE.
That brings us back to Hasselblads famous extra fast lenses.
Paul