Hexar AF result equal to Canon 35/1.4 L prime?

[henrik_jacobsen]

After having read a lot about rangefinders and their advantages I decided to

get one, but unfortunately we (=my wife) has agreed only to use cameras with

dateimprinting function. I could therefore not buy the Leica, Zeiss, Bessa,

etc. So I bought a Hexar AF Silver with Date back (Thanks to Stuart Richardson

for advice/recommendation).

 

My wife was not happy when I left my Canon 30 (Elan 7NE) at home and only took

the Hexar AF to Italy for sommer holiday. "I want good pictures, and I will be

very angry if we don't get good pictures from our holiday. Can't you save your

experimenting until after the holiday" she said.

 

I was extremely surpriced when I saw the pictures. All 216 pictures were

amazing, brilliant, crisp sharp, wonderful colours, etc. The fill-flash (with

GN programmed to 20 for the standard HX-14 flash) was excellent. Even my wife

is impressed with these pictures.

 

But now I wonder. Is the result of this fantastic pictures due to its lens or

due to its leaf shutter with no vibration? Why do I want to know? Because, I

wonder if I would get the same huge improvement in picture quality if I bought

a Canon 35/1.4 L lens. I would then have two fantastic cameras with different

advantages but same lens quality. I need both types of camera, but have not

used the SLR since the positive Hexar experience, because I also want the high

quality. But it would be nice to be able to obtain same quality with the SLR.

 

And yes, I know I could just bring both cameras, but if I could be sure to

obtain same quality with the L-glass, I would prefer to have that so I could

choose which camera I should bring along based on camera facilities/assessories

and not have to worry about quality.

 

/Henrik

[derek_stanton2]

I want to say, "Get a new wife. Unless she's a client, you should probably be taking pictures for your own enjoyment." But, i'll let someone else say that.

 

Why can't you shoot whatever you want, and let her shoot with whatever she wants - free to deal/not deal with date imprinting?

[stuart_richardson]

Hi Henrik,

<P>I am glad that the Hexar worked for you! It is an amazing camera. Let me start out by

stating that I have not used the 35mm f/1.4L, so anything I say is just based on the

reviews and impressions I have read. I do use the Leica R 35mm f/1.4 Summilux which is a

similar lens. My guess would be that yes, you will be able to get the same quality with the

L glass, but you need to excercise proper technique. In other words, I think if you had

both cameras on tripods, both would be excellent, but without a tripod you will need to be

more careful with the 35mm f/1.4L. Because it is heavier and has mirror vibration, it might

be more difficult to shoot at lower shutter speeds. The actual quality of the glass should

be comparable however. The 35mm f/1.4L is considered one of canon's best wide angle

lenses, so it is no slouch. The advantage of the hexar is in that it is light, small, easy to

hold and it has no mirror shake. Also, the auto-focus is easy to deal with since it is just a

single central spot. The EOS cameras have this option as well, and it might be a good idea

to use it if you don't already as the center spot is considered to be the most accurate.

Also, it would make the way you work with the two cameras similar, leaving less room for

mistakes. <P>But all that said, is there any way that you can rent the 35mm f/1.4L? Since

it is a popular EOS lens, chances are that any place that rents cameras has one available.

That way you could see for yourself. I hope this helps, and I am relieved that the Hexar

exceeded your expectations! <P>Stuart

[oceanphysics]

I have a Hexar AF and the EOS 35 f/2. I can see zero difference in image quality. I've also seen no evidence that the f/1.4 is any better -- it's just faster. If you don't need the speed it's a huge waste of money. Of course people have a near-unlimited ability to convince themselves that spending money will improve their photography, or that money they've already spent wasn't wasted. Nevertheless it won't, and it probably was.

[henrik_jacobsen]

Hi Stuart,

 

Once again you came up with a clever advice. I will try and rent the 35/1.4 L glass for my canon. I was not aware of the central focusing benefit, and will explore that further. Good idea.

 

Thanks.

 

/Henrik

 

PS. Having a lot of pictures of people, it is very nice to be able to see when that particular picture was taken. And I am convinced that the first manufacturer of rangefinders which launch the dateimprinting function would have a competitive edge because some people like "us" actually prefer this feature. What I have to learn is to turn off the date-function when taking some kind of pictures e.g. landscape and flowers.

[socke]

I like to second Derek, date imprinting is one of the uglyest features a camera can have. Every now and then I see realy nice pictures taken at interesting places with a prominent dark orange date imprinted.

 

To the question, I have a Canon 35/2 and I shot some frames with a friends 35/1.4 and an EOS 3.

 

The 35/2 is ok and the 35/1.4 quite good stopped down two or three stops, compared to my Planar 35/2 and Distagon 35/2.8 I think the Canon L lens is not worth the money. Here the Canon 35/1.4 costs some 1200 Euro, I'd get the Canon 35/2 for 260. Oops, that's what I did :-)

[socke]

Henrik, have a look at a Contax G2 with databack, they imprint the data either on the first two frames of a roll or between the frames.

 

I don't have the databack, I use a notebook, the paper type :-)

 

My significant other was pretty puzzled when she realized that I keep a travel diary. Sometimes I record exposure data, but mostly what I shot and some keywords. Later I mark the rolls so I find which roll belongs to what diary entry. Back home I store the notebook with the films.

[matt_chamberlain]

what's she doing out of the kitchen?

[michaelging]

As much as I think the Hexar AF,lens to be without many peers , I do wish the cameras shutter speeds were a little faster. :)

[icuneko]

Keep the Hexar AF. Indeed, its lens is excellent! (I had one but sold it since a 35mm lens isn't my way of seeing.) Take the money you'd spend on the Canon 35 and give it to your wife to buy something she really likes. Then, you'll both be happy with the Hexar's photos and each

other. Voila!

[monkey]

<i>Even my wife is impressed with these pictures.</i><p>Phew! What a relief...

[thomas_t]

Henrik

 

First, I've found the Hexar AF to be very impressive and agree that the 35/2 lens on it is in a class of its own. I think it is easily the match of any of my Leica glass.

 

I've used the 35/1.4 L lens quite a bit. It is a very good lens, as virtually all of the L lenses are, but are you aware of how large in size it actually is? It is easily about the size of the Hexar in its entirely and quite heavy. So I'd second Stuart's suggestion that you try one out to see if you can handle the ergonomics of it.

 

The 'quality' of photos will come from your composition at this point, not from the marginal optical differences, if any, between these two lenses. As for your wife's insistence for date-stamping ... a pen and small pocket notepad would also serve the trick. And she can add additional anecdotes as well ;-) good luck

[mark_ryan2]

Be glad, she may make him move to the new Fuji S3 Pro UVIR model! Is she a huge fan of CSI? Does she have short term memory loss or is loves the movie "Momento"? Don't let her fnd out about the GPS noting functions on some of the digitals.

 

If it came down to shooting film and having the date imprinted on each picture or shooting digital and having it inherent in the picture, I'd shoot digital. Or make her label the slides when they came back.

 

The way some people talk about mirror slap here, you'd think that they had all spent time shooting a Pentax 67 or handholding Fuji GX680s.

 

I agree that it does add some vibration and that it can be worse at some speeds, but an 1/8 of a second with a wide angle lens, things are just moving in the frame usually. Some bone-to-bone contact with a good shooting stance, and good trigger control goes a long way. With a 1.6 crop Canon 20D with the battery pack you can go pretty low.

 

Mark

[claude_batmanghelidj]

I'd upgrade the wife to a new model, one that imprints the data elsewhere than on the photo.

I think the Hexar is highly overrated, the results I was getting from a 70 dollar nikkor 35mm

ais were no different.

[philippartridge]

A lateral solution for the data-dependent wife: The Fuji 645 rangefinders imprint eveything but what I had for breakfast that day, the info is placed outside (beneath) the 120/220 frame. My GA645 is like a large Hexar AF (we have two of those too) and imprints: date, time, exp comp, flash, s/s, ap, manual/AF, perhaps more...weighs 780 grams, has a killer 60/4 lens (AOV like your fave 35mm/35mm), leaf shutter, takes 30 images per 220, cheap and very, very good images. Cost way less and photos looks way better than some puffed up hunk of fast SLR glass...