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.

CFV50 update

Tinker

Tinker

Member
After receiving the 40 mm back from service by Hassyparts (Wilco Jansen), I had the chance to compare how my lenses work with the CFV50.
So, what’s in the bag:
503CW with CFV50
40mm CF FLE
50mm CFi
80mm CFe
150mm CF
I made shots of part of my house, showing some bricks, an old garden bench and some plants. I did this with all 4 lenses at f4, f8, f16 and f22. The results came – in some areas – a bit as a surprise to me; perhaps the more experienced forum members may recognize some of my findings.
Here goes:
40mm:
Soft in the edges and corners at all f’s; center visibly sharper; overall performance ‘inconsistent’ in that the difference in sharpness is so obvious that even without ‘looking for it’, it shows. I am considering using the lens only in square crop mode as I don't like the softness in the corners.
50mm:
Much better; overall impression is more consistent; pictures are ‘crisp’ although there is still some difference in sharpness between center and corners; would not recommend this lens at f16 or above
80mm:
Overall less than the 50! Pics are consistent but lack the sharpness and crispy feel of the 50. Again, would not use this lens at f16 or above as quality rapidly reduces
150mm:
I suppose there’s nothing I can write which hasn’t been done many times before; this lens delivers a pleasant, although somewhat soft picture at all f’s. Again, above f16 quality falls.
I (very briefly) had the chance to use a 100mm; this lens is capable of delivering unbelievable sharp pictures; it’s definitely on my wish list.
Hope this may of use to other forum members possibly considering buying similar lenses. Personally I would be very much interested in hearing experiences with these (and other) lenses from you guys.
 
Some interesting results there Erik, my sharpest V system lens by far is my 180mm, even with the digital back it shines.
 
V lenses

I'm shooting with the CFV 39 so pixel peeping is a little different. My 40 CF FLE is actually quite good. A little soft as expected at f4 but improves nicely and very sharp at f8. Chromatic aberrations are noticable at the edges but easy to fix in focus.

My 50 CF FLE is stunning at all apertures. Like most lenses it improves stopping gown a little but is excellent in my view. Very crisp and excellent detail even in the corners.

My 60 CF is a little softer than the 50 but still excellent at all apertures.

The 80 is probbly my least good lens but is very good by f 5.6.

My 120 macro Planar f4 is superb all the way.

MY 180 f4 CF is the best of all of my lenses.

My 250 C T* is not bad but not a stellar pefrormer at 5.6 but does improve by 11 and does very well but not up to the 180.

Keep in mind the size of print if you were enlarging to the size of image on your screen and then consider you're looking at details from 6 inches away.

With 44 years of commercial photo experience and having shot hundreds of lenses and don't think I've ever seen what I would call a perfect lens. Yes some are better than others but none of these are what I would call shabby. I don't know what size you generally print but most of my work is commercial work that is rarely reproduced over 11x17 and my personal work is rarely printed beyond the native file size of 18x20 - 20x24 inches. Yes if you upsample your files to 60 inches and view them at one foot you will see soft edges and variation but I personally don't see this as a problem. I've used Leica, Zeiss, Schneider, Fuji, Rodenstock, Goerz and other top lens makers glass through my career and know from experience that none of the above make the best in every focal length or model of lens. Leica will make one lens better than Nikon and Nikon will make one better than Leica in another Fl. Some Schneider glass is better than Rodenstock and some Rodenstock better than Schneider. This is the case for every maker. I try to be realistic about my expectations within the bounds of what i'm doing and understad no system or lens is perfect.
 
I've only the cfv-39
My CFE 80mm was worse lens I sold it. I never undertood why the CWD kit included this lens for digital
My FE 150mm /2.8 was not the best (close to 80mm performenses) I sold it
I sold my CF 150mm lens to get 180mm lens befor I got digital. Good lens for portrait on film perhaps close to previous lenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My CF 60mm is perhaps a little soft but it's my first lens I got 25 years ago
My FE 50mm/2.8 is very interesting and yes a great lens even if really heavy. The close focus is amasing too, I will sell it only if I succed to get a CFE 40mm IF
My Cfi 100mm is really an excellent lens sharp in the center and in the corner, now my standard lens for portrait
My FE 110mm/2.0 is an excellent lens at 5.6 in the center and yes a great lens for portrait with noctilux effect at 2.0 anyway I use the 100mm more often this year. And poor DOF in MF digital allows noctilux effect with any lense.
My CFE 180mm is a great lens but I do not use so much (too long for my use)
My FE 60-120mm is an amasing lens as the quality is not bad at all for a zoom. A big lens but not heavy, great for portrait / nude. Ideal for 56x56mm sensor perhaps a little long for all all use with actual digital 36x48mm sensor.

Most used lens are FE50mm 2.8 and Cfi 100mm. I should prefer to have CFE 40mm IF for wider (60mm was perfect for 56x56mm film) , any way the bad point of the 50mm is the 1.4kg !
 
V Lenses & CFV-50

Hello, for me:
CF30mm • good (crisp in the center but soft in the corner, but I really like it)
CF40mm FLE • bad (I sold it, and now I own the 30mm)
CF60mm • good, just a little soft
CF100mm • very good overall
CF120mm • very good only for close subject
CF180mm • very good
 
variation in 40 FLE

There seems to be a wide spread of opinions regarding the 40 FLE. I'm wondering if sample to sample varies quite a bit. As I mentioned my 40 FLE is very good except for chromatic aberrations which are easily corrected in Phocus. Are those of you that dislike your 40's using Phocus or another converter?

I didn't mention I also have a 38 SWC/M and in comparison the 38 has little to no chromatic aberrations and is only slightly sharper.
 
We are talking about the same lens isn't it?
Mine is the 'old' model, not the IF version.

I use Phocus mainly to import / export; most of the actual processing is done in CS/4. This is indeed an interesting area where (potentially) a lot of quality can be made or lost. I don't know much about how sensitive the 3F files are, but when I bought my Nikon D700, initially I wasn't convinced about the quality; until I started using Nikon's own NX2; this made a hell of a difference for certain types of images!

This is probably not the right place to discuss this (and I need to check what's already been written about this on our forum) but I would be interested to understand how other Hassyists process their images.

To be continued !?
 
Tinker said:
We are talking about the same lens isn't it?
Mine is the 'old' model, not the IF version.

I use Phocus mainly to import / export; most of the actual processing is done in CS/4. This is indeed an interesting area where (potentially) a lot of quality can be made or lost. I don't know much about how sensitive the 3F files are, but when I bought my Nikon D700, initially I wasn't convinced about the quality; until I started using Nikon's own NX2; this made a hell of a difference for certain types of images!

This is probably not the right place to discuss this (and I need to check what's already been written about this on our forum) but I would be interested to understand how other Hassyists process their images.

To be continued !?
Click to expand...

Hassyist process their images through Phocus 2.6 with a lot of success. The lens correction gives possibility to control and correct any lens abberation if necessary. I use all lenses between CFi30 through CFE350 with the CFV39 back. Even the CFV39 back works fine with my 903SWC, although not recommended because of the retrofocus. The final touch is done with Photoshop. Hope this helps.
 
Phocus

I do as much as possible in Phocus. I almost always use the lens correction tool. Photoshop is for retouching and final touches.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top