What's new
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.

So please tell me about the FE lenses

E

Emilio Esplanar

New Member
Hello everyone,

I´m tempted to buy a nice 201f or 203fe, with the fast F/FE lenses being the main reason for me. I also like the fact that these lenses have a more rounded aperture. Currently, I´m using a Rollei with the 50/4, 80/2,8, 120/5,6, 150/4 and 250/5,6. I found that I like the 50mm and the 120mm focal lengths best, so I thought the 50/2,8 and the 110/2 would be a good decision to buy. My 120mm S-Planar delivers stunning sharpness, but I always find it very difficult to focus, so I hope the 110/2 will make things easier. What can I expect from this lens? Is sharpness equal to the 120mm?
I also found that I like to use the 50/4 wide open for close ups very much, but the lens distorts visibly when used this way and resolution is not so good, although it is quite good when used at infinity around f11. What can I expect from the 50/2,8 in this regard? I´ve read that it has a floating element and the minimal focusing distance is very short, so will it suit my style of shooting?
Finally, how does the 150/2,8 compare to the 150/4 and the 180/4 with regard to sharpness? I also like my 250mm very much but find it hard to focus, so how about the 250/5,6 vs the 250/4?

I´m very curious to hear about your experience!
 
F(E) lenses tend to be one stop faster than comparable lenses fitted with a leaf shutter.

Being faster also introduces other phenomenae:
To begin with less depth of field, less contrast and less resolution if used without stop down.
The latter is quite clear with the 110/2 lens.
These are not shortcomings from Carl Zeiss designs they are simply laws of nature.

I suppose the Rollei Distagon is an older CZ design without floating elements.
The Distagon 50/2.8 is the first floating elements lens from Zeiss designed for Hasselblad.
IQ is outstanding and a considerable improvement over earlier designs.
There are two version of this lens:

Early models have a minimum object distance of 0.32 m.
These lenses are good value for money with over 1400 grs net weight.
The later 50/2.8 focuses from 0.42 m and weighs "only" 1000 grs.
Weight reduction was achieved by fitting a shorter helicoid.
 
I use 50mm /2.8 old version and 110mm 2.0 for years now. Even with digital.

The 50mm is better than what I expected. the close foccussing is very funny.
The 110 /2.0 is 2 lense in one. At 5.6 it's an excelent lens better than 80mm. And even better than 100mm in the center
At 2.0 it's a very good lens for portrait.

Recents portraits made with 110 mm at 5.6 /CFV-39
 
blowupster said:
The 110 /2.0 is 2 lense in one. At 5.6 it's an excelent lens better than 80mm. And even better than 100mm in the center
At 2.0 it's a very good lens for portrait.

Recents portraits made with 110 mm at 5.6 /CFV-39
Click to expand...

The 110 wide open is quite selective as far as dof is concerned.
A face partly turned off camera will show one eye focused the other is out of focus.
Focus on the eyes and the nose is out of focus.

The 100 mm stopped down to F5.6 beats any lens for MF I have seen sofar.

Beautiful cars in the link!
 
That lens is a legend!!!!! I dont have it but cant stop reading about it from many people around the world.....

polypal said:
The 110 wide open is quite selectve as far as dof is concerned.
A face partly turned off camera will show one eye focused the other is out of focus.
Focus on the eyes end the nose is out of focus.

The 100 mm stopped down to F5.6 beats any lens for MF I have seen sofar.

Beautiful cars in the link!
Click to expand...
 
Just found me another 110 mm F lens.
It will be upgraded to FE spec next week.

Pictures soon.
 
Just got a 100mm CFI last week.
To early to compare files. However amasing lighter lens and yes like a lens with hood included.
It should have been possible to make a shorter 100mm lens iin size.
 
Congratulations!

The last improved version of the 100 mm Planar is quite a rare lens.
It belongs to the best lenses ever made for V series cameras.
 
Thank you all for your resonse so far. Special thanks to Blowupster for the nice pictures. I´m very eager to see comparisons between the 100 and the 110mm!
 
Comparisons?

These lenses were designed with completely different purposes in mind.
Their only common factor is their focal lenght and the fact that they are both Planars.

A little research is not a bad idea before posting, is not it?
 
Polypal, I´m well aware that the 100/3,5 was designed with the aim of high resolution and low distortion with aerial photography in mind, whereas the 110/2 was intended to be a lens used for low-light conditions but sacrifying image quality when used wide open. I´ve also compared the MTF data on the Zeiss website. However, after all that I´ve read about these lenses I only have theoretical knowledge about them and I wanted to hear some practical experience, that´s why I posted this question. I know that the 110m Planar cannot be any better than the 100mm, but maybe real pictures would show that it is not that much "worse".
 
The 110 mm lens can do things, like shooting under low light level conditions, that are impossible with the 100 mm Planar.
This lens can not be used for the purpose where the 100 mm is excellent: High resolution with near zero distortion.

The 100 mm Planar can be used for photogrammetry.
That was one of the demands from NASA when they asked Carl Zeiss to develop this lens.
Zeiss made a special MK version of the 100 mm Planar for this purpose.

Of course you can use both lenses stopped down for other applications.
You may even compare results but what is the use?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top