Reading mode: Light Dark

XCD 25 f2,5V

Go to last post
Bashir Lunat said:
I think all lens ma I am not critical about kers should state in their spec list: x eliments in x groups +1 invisible (digital APO? I am not critical about inclusion of software correction, as we all strive for better looking output.
Click to expand...
Hasselblad data sheets, which are available for every lens, contain a good amount of useful information and shows lens data before digital corrections are applied. It's noted in the data sheets: "When images are imported to Phocus, light fall-off is automatically removed." or "When images are imported to Phocus, distortion is automatically removed."
Bashir Lunat said:
I think software solution may or may not work when using modern software depemdent lenses on a film camera. True or false?
Click to expand...
The only way to apply digital software corrections to images captured on film would be to scan the film into a digital image file. This method is sometimes used by photographers using film.
 
Pd printer said:
Light fall off (vignetting) is compensated in camera (jpg) or in software (raw) and as the dynamic range is equal over the sensor the compensation is progressively reducing the DR toward the corners. As wide-angle lenses have more light fall off it becomes more significant the wider the angle. At least Hasselblad is publishing the light fall off.
Click to expand...
In the case of Hasselblad, no software correction occurs with jpeg files produced in camera. Lens corrections are only applied to raw files thru Phocus or other raw conversion software and contained in the subsequent images when exported.

For anyone looking for a place to begin exploring the topic, a concise and informative article on the subject of vignetting can be found here. It concludes with: "It should be mentioned that vignetting is not always a bad thing. A lens designer can deliberately introduce vignetting in favor of a better control of aberrations, sacrificing field coverage for overall contrast and sharpness."

Links to other useful and concise articles about optical characteristics from the same author can be found here.

I'll be happy to suggest additional resources describing how vignetting may be used in lens designs to improve overall imaging performance for anyone interested.
 
Last edited:
Bashir Lunat said:
I think software solution may or may not work when using modern software depemdent lenses on a film camera. True or false?
Click to expand...
Can you identify any software-dependent lenses that are offered in a film-camera lens mount?
 
Oren Grad said:
Bashir Lunat said:
I think software solution may or may not work when using modern software depemdent lenses on a film camera. True or false?
Click to expand...
Can you identify any software-dependent lenses that are offered in a film-camera lens mount?
Click to expand...
Do you call the Hasselblad H-system mount a film camera mount? You could use film backs on many of the H-system cameras.
 
TechTalk2 said:
TechTalk2 said:
Fuji, like other contemporary lens manufacturers, incorporates automatic lens corrections because it expands the range of available tools and options when designing new lenses and allows for making them better.
Click to expand...
Capture One lists the Fuji lens profiles contained in their raw data which they support. Adobe applies Fuji lens corrections automatically without any user intervention required as in this example.

Reducing specific lens aberrations requiring optical correction by including some degree of under-correction in other aberrations, which can be well corrected thru digital post processing (such as vignetting or distortion for example), provides more freedom to lens designers. Innovations in lenses and improvements in image quality have been made possible by incorporating software correction into modern lens design methods.

This article from Richard Butler, Technical Editor at DP Review, may be of interest to some... A distortion of the truth? Here’s why we’re not against software lens corrections
Click to expand...
Capture One provides a lot of control over how much digital correction you want to apply to the image. They typically provide two lens correction profiles: 1. Manufacturer profile which is embedded in the raw file (the data for the corrections), and 2. Capture One’s own profiles after extensive testing.

If people want to match the in-camera JPEG, they should use manufacturer profile. The reason I loosely grouped Sony and Sigma together is because in my testing, I see more digital distortion correction on their lenses than I see on GF lenses, but as others have pointed out, GF lenses also lean on digital correction.
 
Oren Grad said:
Bashir Lunat said:
I think software solution may or may not work when using modern software depemdent lenses on a film camera. True or false?
Click to expand...
Can you identify any software-dependent lenses that are offered in a film-camera lens mount?
Click to expand...
Define software dependent lenses. Several M lenses have mandatory SDC in LrC, but the image looks fine without SDC. Some V mount lenses can benefit from SDC..
 
JimKasson said:
Oren Grad said:
Bashir Lunat said:
I think software solution may or may not work when using modern software depemdent lenses on a film camera. True or false?
Click to expand...
Can you identify any software-dependent lenses that are offered in a film-camera lens mount?
Click to expand...
Do you call the Hasselblad H-system mount a film camera mount? You could use film backs on many of the H-system cameras.
Click to expand...
The H-system mount is no longer a current product.

That said, there was one H-mount lens intended specifically for digital use, the HCD 28, which was designed to require software correction. It's my understanding that Hasselblad took various steps to disable use of the HCD 28 with the HM16-32 film back.
 
Last edited:
SrMi said:
Oren Grad said:
Bashir Lunat said:
I think software solution may or may not work when using modern software depemdent lenses on a film camera. True or false?
Click to expand...
Can you identify any software-dependent lenses that are offered in a film-camera lens mount?
Click to expand...
Define software dependent lenses. Several M lenses have mandatory SDC in LrC, but the image looks fine without SDC. Some V mount lenses can benefit from SDC..
Click to expand...
There are many film-era lenses, notably but not exclusively zoom lenses with substantial linear distortion at the FL extremes, which can benefit from correction in post-processing, if one scans the captures into the digital domain. But the corrections now designed into many lenses for mirrorless camera mounts are substantially more extreme, and would be very problematic on film cameras - if you could even find a way to mount the lenses at the required flange focal distance and control focus and aperture, an impracticality that makes the question purely academic.

With Hasselblad H and Pentax 645 now dead and Nikon and Canon running out the string on the F and EF mounts, respectively, the M and K mounts are the only remaining film-camera mounts that are continuing as ongoing product lines and having new lenses designed for them.

It is conceivable that at some point Leica will either abandon film cameras entirely, and allow itself to produce new M-mount lenses that require massive software correction for reasonable results - or create a new sub-line within the M line and take steps to disable use of those lenses on Leica film cameras - perhaps with a mechanical mount modification that allows compatibility only in one direction, or some electronic validation signal that would be missing on a film body. We shall see.

As for Pentax, they appear to be committed to SLRs. Pentax's continued use of optical viewfinders makes extreme linear distortion and vignetting in a lens design problematic, placing limits on how far you can use software correction to expand the optical design space compared to designing lenses for mirrorless cameras with EVFs. Again, though, we shall see.
 
Last edited:
Oren Grad said:
JimKasson said:
Oren Grad said:
Bashir Lunat said:
I think software solution may or may not work when using modern software depemdent lenses on a film camera. True or false?
Click to expand...
Can you identify any software-dependent lenses that are offered in a film-camera lens mount?
Click to expand...
Do you call the Hasselblad H-system mount a film camera mount? You could use film backs on many of the H-system cameras.
Click to expand...
The H-system mount is no longer a current product.

That said, there was one H-mount lens designed specifically for digital use, the HCD 28. It's my understanding that Hasselblad took various steps to disable use of the HCD 28 with the HM16-32 film back.
Click to expand...
There are three Hasselblad H System lenses designed specifically for digital use which make up the HCD lens series. Lenses in the HCD series also have software lens corrections incorporated into their design. They are the: HCD 24 mm f/4.8 (2012), HCD 28 mm f/4 (2006), and HCD 35–90 mm F/4-5.6 (2008).

The HCD lens series was optimized for a 36.7 × 49.0 mm sensor size (sometimes referred to as 36 × 48 mm format simply because that's double the area of full-frame format), but their image circles provide enough coverage for 40.0 × 53.4 mm and 40.2 × 53.7 mm sensors.

Initially the HCD 28 mm was only usable with Hasselblad digital backs due to the software corrections incorporated into the lens design. That limitation was removed thru a firmware update to allow use with film backs and other makes of digital backs and the earlier firmware restriction was not very long-lived.

Hasselblad introduced a system of automatic software lens corrections called DAC (Digital Auto Correction) for H System lenses in January 2006. The HCD 28 mm followed later that year introducing automatic lens corrections as part of the lens design concept. It's an excellent lens made smaller, lighter, and better by adopting new digital capabilities into its design.

More information on H System lenses is available from Hasselblad or lens-db.com.
 
Last edited:
JimKasson said:
JimKasson said:
rokoko said:
Bashir Lunat said:
Here is one!

https://photographylife.com/reviews/hasselblad-xcd-25mm-f-2-5
Click to expand...
Very interesting, thanks! I didn't notice they were reviewing lenses other than FF Nikon/Canon etc. for quite a while.

This lens reminds me the Nikon 20/1.8. Assuming the test/measurement from them bearing the same system error, I put them together:

ed8916f4dff041e28d7babd3c91308f7.jpg.png

f707b44f667c49478d50e53925f26a15.jpg.png

I wish they could do the same for the GF lenses, if not the GFX bodies, at least.
Click to expand...
This is system resolution, not lens resolution.
Click to expand...
They acknowledge that:

Note that the MTF test below is not comparable to any existing full-frame lens review on our website. Normally, all of our full-frame lens reviews can be compared against one another (even across camera brands – we account for that), but that does not hold true with such a different sensor size and resolution as this.

In other words, no meaningful conclusions can be drawn between the numbers in the chart below versus the numbers in our existing full-frame reviews! I want to get that out of the way first and make it clear to anyone who wants to try – I promise that you won’t learn anything useful.
Click to expand...
Thanks Jim! You are right, it's system resolution, not the lens. Also there is no meaningful P value if only testing one copy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TechTalk2
How successful were Hasselblad products in 2024?
Replies
6
Views
11
TechTalk2
TechTalk2
B
XCD 35-100 2.8-4
Replies
7
Views
277
nurf
N
as1mov
Hasselblad X2D II: Focusing with older lenses
Replies
0
Views
61
as1mov
as1mov
yogi4fitness
Flare resistance: XCD 35-75 vs GF 45-100
Replies
4
Views
43
yogi4fitness
yogi4fitness
SrMi
XCD 35-100E review (digitalcameraworld.com)
Replies
1
Views
2
JAKORO
J

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top