• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / X2D / Hasselblad XCD 135/2.8 vs Zeiss 135/2 Apo-Sonnar, Siemens star, corner

Hasselblad XCD 135/2.8 vs Zeiss 135/2 Apo-Sonnar, Siemens star, corner

August 12, 2024 JimK 2 Comments

When I did my review of the Hasselblad XCD 135/2.8 a few weeks ago, a few people asked me to compare it to the venerable Zeiss 135mm f/2 Apo-Sonnar. It took me a while to dig up the lens, but I finally  found it, and ran my usual Siemens star test, using the Zeiss version of the star. I tested with the Hasselblad 907X/CFV 100C, which has the same sensor as the X2D 100C that I used when I tested the XCD 135/2.8. In the previous post I looked at on-axis performance. Now I’ll show you the corner shots.

The particulars:

  • Edelkrone Tripod X Pro
  • Arca Swiss C1
  • Manual exposure
  • MS for XCD 135/2.8, ES for 135/2 Apo Sonnar
  • ISO 64
  • Delay set to 5 seconds
  • Six shots per f-stop
  • Target centered
  •  f/2, f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, f/8
  • Developed in Lr with default settings except for white balance and sharpening set to 0

Crops at about 150% magnification:

Zeiss 135/2 Apo-Sonnar on XCV 100C, corner, f/2

 

Zeiss 135/2 Apo-Sonnar on XCV 100C, corner, f/2.8

 

Hasselblad XCD 135 on X2D, lower left corner, f/2.8

The Zeiss lens is much sharper.

Zeiss 135/2 Apo-Sonnar on XCV 100C, corner, f/4

 

Hasselblad XCD 135 on X2D, lower left corner, f/4

The Zeiss lens is slightly sharper.

Zeiss 135/2 Apo-Sonnar on XCV 100C, corner, f/5.6

 

Hasselblad XCD 135 on X2D, lower left corner, f/5.6

The Zeiss lens is still sharper, and doesn’t suffer from the astigmatism that we see with the Hassy lens.

Zeiss 135/2 Apo-Sonnar on XCV 100C, corner, f/8

 

Hasselblad XCD 135 on X2D, lower left corner, f/8

The Zeiss lens is sharper.

Score this one for Zeiss.

 

 

 

 

 

X2D

← Hasselblad XCD 135/2.8 vs Zeiss 135/2 Apo-Sonnar, Siemens star on axis Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision →

Comments

  1. ian says

    September 13, 2024 at 6:31 pm

    can you say what adapter you have used for this lens?

    Reply
    • JimK says

      September 13, 2024 at 7:44 pm

      Novaflex HAX/NIK.

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • bob lozano on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.