Zeiss vs. Mamiya 100mm f/2.8 lenses

Discussion in 'Medium Format' started by brent_bennett, Mar 1, 2006.

  1. Does anyone have experience or knowledge of lens tests to compare
    the sharpness, image circle, and especially sharpness in the corners
    of 120/220 6x9 film with these two lenses? Zeiss Planar vs. Mamiya
    Press/Universal; both 100mm f/2.8. The Mamiya is a clone of the
    Zeiss Planar.
  2. I'm not sure which version of the 100mm Zeiss you're talking about, but the 100mm is known for its corner sharpness and flat field. I used to use it all the time for aerial photography mounted on a Hasselblad.

    In fact I have a funny story about that. I was looking at two images taken in an aerial sequence through a 3-D viewer. It really hurt my eyes to view this particular set of images. About an hour later I was able to spot the difference. A seagull had flown between the camera (plane) and the ground. It was very small in the image... but also very sharp.

    Will it cover 6x9 though? As I recall, there is not a lot of image circle with Hasselblad versions of this lens.
  3. I should have been more specific. The Zeiss lens I refer to is the one designed for the Linhof 6x9 and similar cameras. The Hasselblad version has a smaller image circle.
  4. Brent, I don't have experience of this comparison, but I'll weigh in with a couple of comments and I hope this isn't too ill-informed. First thing is I bet you'll have difficulty finding someone who has compared them side by side, so you might have to do your own testing if you can locate a sample of each.

    The Technika Planars (in shutter) are uncommon and expensive, even second-hand, so there won't be a huge number of photographers who have hands-on experience. Medium format Planars were also supplied as a premium lens with the Graflex XL line, but it is said that this lens does not perform at the Hasselblad Planar level and that it is fundamentally a different lens.

    I suppose you might use performance of other ~1960/70s lenses by the same manufacturers as proxy data. For example, I would expect the Rolleiflex Planars of that era to beat the five-element Mamiya TLR equivalents using most measurements of performance, but you can't read too much into this type of comparison. Chris Perez's lens tests may nonetheless have some useful comparison data.

Share This Page