I have to say a few words about my new camera, the Hasselbald X2D Mark II and in particular about how the XCD series of lenses fit in. I know this is technical, so perhaps for the very few. I am tired of photography forums where this new camera is causing a commotion.
If I want to use the continuous focus on the Hasselblad X2D II, that restricts us to the new lenses because only their motors are fast enough to support it. And if we want closeup shots tracking insects, etc. that limits us to the XCD 28mm (8.7 inches but poor MTF), XCD 25mm (9.8 inches and OK MTF), 38mm (11.8 inches, rearward focus), and the XCD 20mm-35mm (12 inches, and good MTF).
For me that means the XCD 20mm-35mm is perhaps my best bet, although it is a bit heavy.
The only closeup or macro lens in the XCD lenses is the aging but excellent XCD 120mm f/3.5 with a minimum focus distance of 16.9 inches, not exactly close. It does not go to 1:1, but only to 1:2 magnification. And we have to use extension to reach that, something like 60mm and that may well throw the quality of the image off. The aging Hasselblad macro lens, the XCD 120mm f/3.5, only goes to 1:2 magnification.
And the features of the new Hasselblad X2D II, in particular the continuous focus, drive a wedge between the old and the new XCD lenses. Now there are two trains running, one includes the new lenses with powerful motors to manage the tracking and continuous focus and all those older XCD lenses that cannot power those new lenses and cannot do continuous focus.
This situation finds me using the new lenses handheld and taking off my L-Bracket and putting it aside, although most of the older lenses can be used handheld as well, just not for tracking subjects. Of course, using the smaller, lighter weight lenses without having the L-bracket on feels much lighter in the hand than I am used to, so I like that. My RSS L-bracket weighs enough to notice. I’m taking it off, meaning no tripod.
At the same time, dragging all the lenses around, old and new, itself is revealing. It shows me how very, very good some of those lenses are. Although old, heavy, and clunky, lenses like the XCD 80mm f/1.9, the fastest of all the Hasselblad lenses, is a work of art and produces just lovely photos. It’s the same with the XCD 120mmm f/3.5 Macro lens which also produces gorgeous images, as does the XCD 65mm f/2.8 lens. However, these have older motors in them
And while the older lenses can be used on a tripod or off, the newer XCD lenses with fast motors can be used handheld to track flying insects and birds. It’s too early for me to say how facile the new Lidar laser system assists in the process, but the ability to shoot in the dark is something I have never seen before. I’m going to have to get used to these breakthrough features.
Going out shooting the large Datura (Moonflower) blossoms in the early light with the older XCD 80mm f/1.9 and the newer XCD 28mm f/4 was a lesson in itself. Both lenses produce great images, but the 80mm blows the 28mm out of the water in terms of quality, even though it is heavy, clunky, and is happier on a tripod, at least for me. It also works handheld reasonable well, but that is too heavy for me.
And so, a very skilled Hasselblad user told me he is retiring those older lenses and switching to the newer lenses for most of his work, very much what I would like to do if I could. It makes perfect sense, and sends me examining the qualities, especially the MTF graphs to see how they look.
MTF (Modulation Transfer Function) graphs in photography illustrate a lens's ability to resolve fine details by plotting contrast (modulation) against spatial frequency, showing how well the lens transfers image details from the subject to the sensor. It pays to learn to read MTF graphs.
And if I sort the lenses I have by their MTF graphs, the older lenses win hands down as to quality for the most part, and some of the new tribe of lenses are a bit of a mess, when it comes to MTF. Or perhaps it is just the copies I have, yet I have examined very carefully and the MTF of lenses like the XCD 30mm F/3.5 are almost perfect (but slow and clunky), while the new XCD 28mm are not clunky, but not as good quality images when it comes to clarity. Of course, they all work fine. I just don’t want to leave the older ones with their better MTF behind.
At the same time, despite the older lens’s superior MTF scans, they are much harder to use, heavier and slow, so I can understand why many photographers are putting them on the shelf. And if truth be told, I would like to retire the clunkers and depend more on the new set of lenses, although some will never be good for landscape or very fine work.
So of course, I am looking carefully through the new set of lenses for those very few lenses that actually are the most useful for my work. And while I read the splurge of articles and watch videos on the new Hasselblad X2D Mark II, I see the majority of photographers switching to the new lenses, even though many of them have bad rearward focus shifts and field curvature, not to mention too much astigmatism.
My belief is that most of the folks not distinguishing the MTF scans are street photographers, where fine quality is defined differently from closeup photography or still-life. It seems that convenience strikes again, compared to the pain of weight, slowness, and better MTFs.
Of course I get it. At 84 years I too celebrate small, lightweight lenses, lenses that you can put in your pocket or messenger bag. I would love to leave my tripod at home and will see if and how that can be done.
Going outside with two of the heavier XCD lenses, the XCD 120 f/3.5 which weighs 2.5 lbs. and the XCD 80 f/1.9 which weighs 2.3 lbs. and shooting them handheld, the XCD 120 won’t hunt and I could get no usable handheld shots. It needs the tripod.
The XCD 80mm f/1.9 on the other hand, almost the same weight, was fairly usable handheld, but much better on a tripod. Since it is of a later vintage, it all seems to come down to the age and power of the lens motors. The XCD 80mm works somewhat handheld, but not with continuous focus. The XCD 120 needs the tripod and perhaps would be happiest in the studio or eventually sitting on the shelf.
Of course I see why photographers are migrating to the new lenses, finest image quality of not. Perhaps we are redefining lens ‘quality’ to include ease of use and weight, not just as I have grown up with, the final image quality is all that counts, not matter how much we suffer.
My conclusion is that I have to re-double my effort to examine the MTF charts of the XCD lenses, especially the “V’ series. I already know that the XCD 75mm MTF is good, and the XCD 28mm MTF is probably not so good, except for use as a walk-around lens. Photographer Lloyd Chambers found ALL of the XCD ‘V’ lenses not suitable for landscape work, because of significant rearward focus shifts and field curvature, not to mention too much astigmatism which leaves it is up to us to determine how good the “V” XCD series are for city and other work. They seem to do OK. People like them a lot.
Anyway, I am loving the new Hasselblad X2D Mark II, and find it a much more usable camera for my work.
[Photo taken with the Hasselblad X2D II and the XCD 80mm lens.]
