Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [OM] OT-Bronica or 'Blad ?

Subject: RE: [OM] OT-Bronica or 'Blad ?
From: Matt BenDaniel <matt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 18:52:12 -0500
This is a message from Gary Reese that he asked me to forward to the list...

>Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 06:46:17 -0800
>From: Gary Reese <pcacala@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>RE: [OM] OT-Bronica or  'Blad  ?
>
>Using my Olympus OM Zuiko lens test setup, I've looked at a selection of 
>Bronica MC and PE
>lenses (including zooms) for the Bronica ETRSi against a pre T* 120mm f/5.6 
>Macro and a pair
>of 80mm f/2.8 Planars, one T* and one pre T*. I've also looked at the lenses 
>for the Bronica
>RF645. In general:
>* the Planars stopped down are far superior to most Bronica ETR series lenses, 
>with the 75mm
>f/2.8 PE being the only stellar performer so far. I think the macro for the 
>Bronica would
>test well, though.
>* the 120mm for the Hasselblad has fantastic resolution! and fine contrast, 
>too.
>* the Bronica RF645 lenses offer top notch performance vs. cost - I was most 
>pleasantly
>surpised and would say they are a significant step better than the ETRSi 
>series lenses,
>although resolution lags some against stopped down Hasselblad (Zeiss) lenses.  
>The latter
>are no great shakes wide open (may I burn in hell).  Especially nice in the 
>RF645 lenses is
>no distortion.  The Bronica 45mm is a top notch performer, for reasons stated 
>in the final
>paragraph.
>* the Bronica zooms are good enough to leave the primes behind, if one can get 
>by with
>distortion, greatly increased bulk and some reduction of focusing snap (due to 
>not so
>stellar wide open performance).
>* there is lots of variation in on film performance from older, well used 
>Hasselblad
>equipment. I've done the Planar tests on various bodies and backs and have had 
>quite a few
>unacceptable shoots of my test subject. I've needed adjustments to the height  
>of the
>focusing screen in a 500C/M and flattening of the flange side of film 
>magazines.  Buyer
>beware - your gear should be checked out by an experienced Hasselblad 
>repairman, which most
>major cities should have slaving away in close quarters.  This probably 
>accounts for why I
>often encounter poor wide open performance. 
>
>Why this question was posted to an OM System mailing list I'm not sure. There 
>are Photo.net
>message boards for this sort of question. But to try and tie them together, 
>I'll say this:
>medium format SLR wide angle lenses, like any 35mm SLR wide angle, have to be 
>retrofocus
>designs. That seems to severely limit their edge performance, even in a 50mm 
>Distagon (an
>incomplete test). I'm not at all sure that the Bronica ETRSi wide angles (at 
>wide open to
>f/8) plus 2.3X larger film size offer me better edge performance than a Zuiko 
>lens shot on
>35mm, so long as I've rated it an A grade at the aperture you use. Popular 
>Photography's
>lens test on the Bronica 50mm MC (I think) showed severe fall off in 
>performance from 2/3
>out to the corner.  I concur, eben for the latter PE.  But the flip side is 
>that medium
>format *rangefinder* cameras don't require retrofocus design wide angles.  
>They have a big
>advantage and show it in image performance.  I don't hesitate to use my Fuji 
>GW690II (90mm)
>instead of a 4x5 with a 135mm lens when I don't want to fuss.
>
>Please, no requests for the test data.  It's not typed up and too full of 
>confounding
>factors to be "prime time" material.  Thus the conclusion are IMHO . . . 
>
>Gary Reese


< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz