You can see the charts and read the full report on the Mamiya web site.Ģ. However the 210mm was a different matter, the Contax 210mm significantly underperformed the Mamiya lens. The 80mm saw the Mamiya take a small advantage, but as the Contax lens is an f2.0 available light lens that's to be expected. The American magazine "Popular Photography" ran a comparison between Mamiya and Contax using 45mm, 80mm and 210mm lenses. The surface of the newspaper had ripples that were about 5mm deep, and maybe misalignement introduced a further 20mm discrepancy from corner to corner, but that's still a total error that's well within depth of field limits.īecause the 140mm and 210mm were so inferior to the 120mm I did some further research. If we halve it to be cautious that still gives 50mm. At these magnifications (a 30 inch subject) the depth of field at f4.0 is the same for all focal lengths, about 100mm. All I can say is that I focused carefully, checking auto focus with a loupe directly on the focusing screen. I appreciate it's hardly scientific, and in particular the focusing and alignement have to be questioned. A heavy tripod, mirror lock up and a cable release were used for each shot. The film used was Provia 100 in a 220 vacuum back, scanned at 4000 dpi on a Nikon 8000ED. I taped a broadsheet newspaper to a wall (the newspaper is about 30 inches across the long side) and set up a Contax 645 on a tripod, moving the camera progressively further back so that the newspaper consistently filled the frame with a 120mm, 140mm, 210mm, Hasselblad 180mm mounted via an adapter, and 350mm lens. You can see 100% crops in the "Test Photos" gallery. I've just run a fairly basic test, and the 140mm and 210mm in particular weren't very impressive. I've tended to blame myself, too windy for the tripod, shutter speed a bit too low for handholding, not quite accurate enough with the focus override etc. However, none of these three lenses has really impressed me with their sharpness.
The 140mm and 210mm are very even performers across the frame, and they all have that signature Zeiss quality of very smooth transistions from in focus to out-of-focus. The wides are terrific, and the 120mm Macro is an outstanding optic, but the 140mm and 210mm, and to a lesser extent the 350mmm, have always left me a bit flat. I've used a Contax 645 for about two years, together with a full compliment of lenses, and I've never been completely satisfied with the results from the 140mm, 210mm, and 350mm lenses.
0 kommentar(er)
