Have you shot with Hassys for more than 5 years?

[André E.C.]

Hei man, honestly, get a Zeiss Super Ikonta folder and shoot away, and yes, many of those are equiped with Tessars, Jena or Oberkochen.

http://www.pacificrimcamera.com/pp/zeiss/zeiss.htm


Cheers


André

 

[Andrey]

Hei man, honestly, get a Zeiss Super Ikonta folder and shoot away, and yes, many of those are equiped with Tessars, Jena or Oberkochen.

http://www.pacificrimcamera.com/pp/zeiss/zeiss.htm

But are they multicoated?

if they're not multicoated, I'm losing the cotrast and resolution as compared to the planar.

 

[André E.C.]

But are they multicoated?

if they're not multicoated, I'm losing the cotrast and resolution as compared to the planar.

Depends of your choice, all Zeiss optics produced after WWII are coated, up to you to grab a camera from that period, and just a thought, optically, Jena and Oberkochen are the same, so, apply your money wisely.


Cheers


André

 

[epatsellis]

But are they multicoated?

if they're not multicoated, I'm losing the cotrast and resolution as compared to the planar.

contrast, yes, resolution, no.

 

[Andrey]

contrast, yes, resolution, no.

I was under impression that the tessar design was less sharp inherently (less corrected) than the planar, so even theoretically the MTF is worse.

Depends of your choice, all Zeiss optics produced after WWII are coated, up to you to grab a camera from that period, and just a thought, optically, Jena and Oberkochen are the same, so, apply your money wisely.

But how do I find out if that tessar is multicoated or singly coated?

From what I know, zeiss didn't deem it worthy to let the users know at that time... so it's somewhat of a gamble.

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

Those are some very hard questions.

I'll need the normal and a wide - that's all I'm going to need in terms of lenses.

The interchangeable backs would be nice, of course. But it might be cheaper to just get two extra bodies and use those for different kinds of film.

I like square negative. All of the stuff I shoot in MF will eventually wind up in an album and there the square format is my favorite. But I've never tried 6*7 either.

Basically, all I know is that I want a better lens in terms of contrast than I currently have on my TLRs. I like to shoot into the light often, so ideally I'd like to find something multicoated with minimum number of glass to air surfaces.

Are there any T* coated tessars for medium format?

T* is the Zeiss Trademarked multicoating. AFAIK, there are multicoated MF Zeiss Planars, Sonnars Distagons and TeleTessars, but no Medium Format T* coated Tessars

The permanently mounted Fuji CAMERA MF Fujinon lenses are multicoated (with Fuji EBC multicoating), but they are not Tessar formulations

There are also individual LF and MF Tessar formulation (and more complex formulations than the Tessar) Fuji lenses in Copal shutters that are EBC coated.

The Mamiya 7ii mount lenses in shutters are multicoated (with Mamiya multicoating), but they are not Tessar formulations - they are all more modern and more complex formulations than the Tessar.

 

[Andrey]

Update: The mamiya TLR system is out. Most of their lenses are singly coated.

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

Update: The mamiya TLR system is out. Most of their lenses are singly coated.

Yes, but the The Mamiya 7ii 6cm X 7cm Rangefinder Camera lenses are all multicoated lenses of modern design.

 

[hobbes]

Maintenance is like anything that has mechanics in it - every 2-3 years go to a specialist who will check it out (prevention costs less than reaction) - for reliability I'd consider: Hassie, Rolleiflex TLR and Bronica (talking 'bout squares). Now, taking about $$$ - the Bronica system can be the best in terms of $$$ vs quality. I had all of it - and I'm left with Rollei TLR only! I threw away hassie since I didn't have enough big bucks to get Distagon or Sonnar, anyway most of the time 80/2.8 was enough for me, and the TLR has one big advantage over any hassie - no flapping mirror. Try to get a sharp shot on 1/8sec with hassie ..haha. Anyway, that was my choice. I'd consider also a Rollei SL66 - if you come across a mint one, you'll get the same optics quality (HFT lenses) for less $$. You decide!

 

[André E.C.]

T* is the Zeiss Trademarked multicoating. AFAIK, there are multicoated MF Zeiss Planars, Sonnars Distagons and TeleTessars, but no Medium Format T* coated Tessars

hummmmm, I´m looking at my Zeiss Ercona folder at the moment, and i see a Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 1:3,5 f=10,5cm T mounted on it.

They are out there!


Cheers



André

 

[Greg_E]

If you do a search on the Mamiya 7II you'll eventually come across a few posts by Sandy King where she will explain the resolution and possibly contrast on several of the lenses that she has used or tested. She speaks very highly of that system for its superb optics.

Otherwise I have no comment as I'm fairly happy with my 645 stuff and if I wanted larger I would probably go to either an RB or RZ system, or maybe shoot up to 4x5 depending on the needs. But I would probably stay with 120. I might go to a 7II but the lenses fall just outside of my grasp. I even have a body sitting here that needs some attention, but without a lens I can't perform the service.

 

[2F/2F]

"Update: The mamiya TLR system is out. Most of their lenses are singly coated."

Are you joking?

 

[Andrey]

hummmmm, I´m looking at my Zeiss Ercona folder at the moment, and i see a Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 1:3,5 f=10,5cm T mounted on it.

They are out there!

But the T is the simple magnesium fluoride single coat.

Are there any that have the T*, meaninig multicoating?

 

[Andrey]

"Update: The mamiya TLR system is out. Most of their lenses are singly coated."

Are you joking?

Not quite, but I lost my source.

There's a link off the photo net site to a website. Somebody wrote a guide describing the TLR system of mamiya and he's saying that the coatings are sub-par, with most of the lenses being singly coated.

Do you have any information to suggest otherwise?

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

hummmmm, I´m looking at my Zeiss Ercona folder at the moment, and i see a Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 1:3,5 f=10,5cm T* mounted on it.

They are out there!


Cheers



André

André if you investigate, I think you will find that your Ercona Jena Tessar is single coated - at best.

I will take another look at my Ercona

But no short focal length T* Tessars for modern Hasselblads

 

[2F/2F]

They are FINE. Considering the best pix ever were taken with lenses with NO coating, they are even better than fine. None of my Nikon 35mm glass is coated. My favorite 35mm lens, my Summar, is non coated AND scratched to hell and it is FINE.

Jeezus H. Christ; you are talking about shooting two rolls of film per year. Quit obsessing and shoot. There is some Internet advice that will actually help all of us. I grow weary of "I read it on the Internet..." I would worry more about capturing and printing good pix and having sound concepts than obsessing about some technical minutiae.

People love to obsess about the theoretical when they should be obsessing about the practical, and then they go write about it on the Internet and people read it and take it as if it is law. I'll bet you that no one in the world, when presented with one of an artist's fine, genius square prints, obviously the work of a new-age photographic master, is even going to be thinking about what camera was used and how many coatings the lens had, nor would the print be any more or less successful with a German versus a Japanese lens.

My point is that if anyone makes any comment about technique, or what camera you used, or how many coatings your lens has right off the bat, then your photo probably stinks. If your work doesn't quite meet those criteria above (fine, genius, work of a master), like most of ours does not, then the lens will REALLY not matter. Show up in any fine art gallery or fine art school talking about crap like that, and they will give you a bored stare and possibly some rolled eyes. Mention that you read it on the Internet, and you will be laughed out of the place.

 

[André E.C.]

André if you investigate, I think you will find that your Ercona Jena Tessar is single coated - at best.

I will take another look at my Ercona

But no short focal length T* Tessars for modern Hasselblads

yes indeed you're correct Tom, just forgot the meaning of the * (multicoated) after the T, single coated indeed it is.

Sorry for the confusion.


PS- I really don't understand Andrey's fixation with the multicoating, a single coated optic with a shade, it´s a killer combo, whatever!

My East German Tessar is razor sharp and with good contrast.


Cheers



André

 

[david b]

Wow...lots of response on this one.

My advice is to buy the newest system you can afford. Buy CF lenses as the parts are still available.

I've had mine for at least 5 years and never a problem.

A CLA for the film backs is under $100 from Hasselblad USA. I send mine in about every 18 months whether they need it or not.

Great systems that will last a lifetime.

 

[Curt]

I've had a Mamiya 645, bought new, for over thirty years, what's a cleaning? I don't get it wet, dirty or bang it around but it's been from Point Lobos salt spray to the Eiffel Tower and points in between and with a gang of lenses and hasn't cost a dime for cleaning or repair. Don't buy an RB67 I'm still building a kit and don't want the competition for accessories.

You should consider a 4x5 field camera setup. That would give you sheets and roll film capability.

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

yes indeed you're correct Tom, just forgot the meaning of the * (multicoated) after the T, single coated indeed it is.

Sorry for the confusion.


PS- I really don't understand Andrey's fixation with the multicoating, a single coated optic with a shade, it´s a killer combo, whatever!

My East German Tessar is razor sharp and with good contrast.


Cheers



André

Yes Sorry for the confusion.


PS- I really don't understand Andrey's fixation with the multicoating, a single coated optic with a shade, it´s a killer combo, whatever!

My East German Tessar is razor sharp and with good contrast.


Cheers



André, my East German Tessar is razor sharp as well!

My Ercona 6x9 has a single coated 105mm/3.5 Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar, in Tempor shutter.
There is a logo (a circle bisected by a 1) engraved in the lens ring to the immediate right of the” T” in “Tessar”
No T*, but inspection with a microscope shows that there was a Red engraved “T” that had been filled in with black paint. The “Carl Zeiss Jena” was also filled in and covered over by black paint.

A Red T signified Zeiss Jena Single Coating. A Red “T*” would signify Zeiss multicoating.

I checked the number of color reflections produced by a point light source at the lens surface and the single color result I obtained is consistent with a single anti reflective coating layer.
By comparison, the same light source (a blue/white LED) produced 6 different colored reflections with my brand new multicoated (Red T*) Carl Zeiss 50mm f1.5 C Sonnar ZM lens

 

[Shelly Grimson]

2F/2F's comments sing to me. It's fine to obsess over trivialities of camera fetishism but it can be a trap with a lot of regret. If photography is an art to you then less equipment and more photography is the answer.(for most of us)Obviously if your area is scientific or sports or commercial work then you need the equipment to handle the job. But for most artists its not the gun but the gunner!

 

[Andrey]

PS- I really don't understand Andrey's fixation with the multicoating, a single coated optic with a shade, it´s a killer combo, whatever!

Well, I am finding out I love to shoot INTO the light a lot. Especially with film...

Basically, stuff like this but with the background overexposed not by half a stop past white, but by 2-3 stops. What happens with a lot of lenses is that the image falls apart. The face is really low contrast and just flares.

So if I find a 3 element multicoated lens I'll be able to cut down my flare twice as compared to the usual planar design variant.

I'd prefer this thread to stay away from the "camera doesn't matter" rhetoric, it's true to an extent but I'm trying to find the best tool for me. Irregardless of talent, I'd prefer a lens with as much contrast as I can afford.

 

[2F/2F]

Your original question is one questioning reliability, and you pretty much have a consensus as far as that goes. All this other discussion of possible alternate systems is peripheral anyhow; just for the sport of it. Just buy a Hassy. It's obviously what you want, and you won't listen to reason, so just buy the damned thing and shoot your two rolls a year through it if that's what will make you feel good. You have the right to consume as wisely or as foolishly as you would like. You won't be unhappy with a Hassy , but you shouldn't be any more happy or your pix any better than with a Mamiya TLR, Kiev, Pentax 645 or M645 for a fraction of the cost. With what you will be doing, any happiness that the Hassy gives you over these systems will be strictly the type of happiness of which Thorstein Veblen wrote in "The Theory of the Leisure Class"...and that is a very real form of happiness, for good or for bad. So just buy the damned thing and be happy. Lord knows I don't need a tenth of the cameras I have (although they are all used regularly, and only my Sinar system matches the cost of a Hassy system...the rest are $500 camera systems *tops*).

 

[Curt]

I'd check out all, and I mean all of the specifications before buying any camera or lens. Then take the one you pick and test it out among others that are exactly like the one you choose. Try to get models with close serial numbers and have an expert check the coatings, it's important to have the entire surfaces of the lenses scanned for flaws. The body must be given the same scrutiny. Get a written guarantee that the camera and lenses will last at least the five year period that you will shoot the dozen rolls of film. Otherwise it's a waste of money, you can't be too sure of these things.:munch:

BTW what's the "H" stand for in J "H" C? I never did know. I often thought that it was J F*****G C.

 

[2F/2F]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_H._Christ

As we have discussed previously on APUG, if it's on the Wiki thingy, itsgotstabe true.