• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

I want A Hasselblad. Talk Me Out Of It!

Latest Gallery

Dump Truck Hat Trick

D
Dump Truck Hat Trick

  • 0
  • 0
  • 11
Street-Lamp

A
Street-Lamp

  • 2
  • 2
  • 70

Photrio On the Go

Mobile Photo

...paper, scissors 426585

koraks

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
204,299
Messages
2,866,868
Members
102,218
Latest member
333Ford
Recent bookmarks
0
chuckroast said:
I've used the various flavors of 250mm f/5.6 - C, C T*, CF. There is no such thing as a bad Hasselblad lens, but I much prefer the 180mm f/4 Sonnar CF or CFi to the 250mm unless, of course, you want the longer reach.

I find the 180mm to be sharper, easier to handle, with better overall rendering than the 250s. Of course, it won't be that much longer than your existing 150mm which is a classic. I had both and sold the 150mm in favor of the 180mm.

I've used the 350mm a small bit, but it's really unwieldy.
Click to expand...

I sold my Hasselblad kit but kept the 350mm Tele Tessar because it has a spot of fungus in the lens. I've used it a few times on my Fuji GFX camera with an adapter - here's a crop from a GFX50R with the 350 Tele Tessar.
DSCF0100-100crop.jpg
 
djdister said:
I sold my Hasselblad kit but kept the 350mm Tele Tessar because it has a spot of fungus in the lens. I've used it a few times on my Fuji GFX camera with an adapter - here's a crop from a GFX50R with the 350 Tele Tessar.
View attachment 422690
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, The 350 Tele-Tessar is prone to chromatic aberrations when used with a GFX sensor. I finally swapped it for a Superachromat 350.
 
Alexander6x6 said:
If you're shooting analog, I highly recommend the Tele-Tessar 250/4 lens. This lens is relatively lightweight, and its F/4 aperture makes a big difference when focusing.
Click to expand...

That would have been my recommedation but you need a camera with a shutter for it as it is an F-lens.

With respect to the optical performance of the 5.6/250 mm C, CT*, CF one may have noticed that nobody used terms like "excellent" or "very sharp" to describe its performance and at least mine wasn't. It's a good lens but a landscape with lots of fine foliage, taken on low-speed film and a large print can show it is not on a same level with the 150 or 180. The fine detail will be a bit soft in comparison. Too soft for my taste while others, as I already know, have little to no objections. But still, look above and read some lips, carefully.

My 250 CT* also had a propensity to put quite a haze on the film when there was too much light outside the frame. The hood doesn't help a bit but the compedium works wonders. I suppose the slender housing doesn't provide enough room for effective baffling of the lens which I guess the CF remedied.

In contrast to others, I quite liked the handling. It's a long lens physically and from its FL and belongs on a tripod for that reason alone in my view. And there it handled as it should.

In essence I always lusted after the superachromat or the F-variant (I had a 2000fcw) but never made the move because of their price. When put up to the right task the 5.6/250 CT is still a lovely lens and I took several keepers with it (tripod, compendium, prefired mirror, medium detail level on subject) You just have to understand its limits.
 
Last edited:
Indeed, the compendium hood works quite good, and even better when used with the appropriate mask.
 
BrianShaw said:
Indeed, the compendium hood works quite good, and even better when used with the appropriate mask.
Click to expand...

I assumed that as a given and always used the compendium with the correct mask for the focal length. For the Bronica GS I own two compendiums actually as the masks are harder to get separately than a compendium with the mask you need.
 
skahde said:
That would have been my recommedation but you need a camera with a shutter for it as it is an F-lens.
Click to expand...
My mistake — I didn't pay attention to which camera we were talking about.
skahde said:
In essence I always lusted after the superachromat or the F-variant (I had a 2000fcw) but never made the move because of their price. When put up to the right task the 5.6/250 CT is still a lovely lens and I took several keepers with it (tripod, compendium, prefired mirror, medium detail level on subject) You just have to understand its limits.
Click to expand...
The Superachromat 250 is supposed to be the sharpest Hasselblad lens. I have a copy from 1972 and it performs excellently even with a digital GFX sensor. It doesn't cost as much as the new ones. Mine cost about 900 Euro.
 
CFV16 500CM 250 C T Star Sonnar EI 200 by Nokton48, on Flickr

Handheld 500C/M CFV16 Digital Back 250mm f5.6 black C T* Zeiss Sonnar, EI 200 Metered with the Olde CDS Meter Prism, set the EV on the lens, this is the result. Lazy Dan :smile:

500mm Oberkochen 500ELM CFV16 EI 200 EV 14.5 by Nokton48, on Flickr


This is the first test of the 500mm F8 Oberkochen Opton Hasselblad lens. EL/M Body with Olde Hasselblad CDS Meter Prism indicated EV14.5. Set that on the lens, this is the result. Hasselblad CFV16 Digital Back set to Ei 200, camera/lens mounted on a Plaubel Peco 2 Way Head, attached to sturdy Manfrotto legs. The pretty new Magnolia tree is our yard was blowing visibly, the 500mm shutter seems to have frozen it, there was a lot of leaf movment in the breeze. It is fun to play with the new digital back and I am loving the saturated colors I'm getting. Hasselblad says it's the fat pixels, but also how much space is around each pixel. Anyways I'm loving the color right out of the camera. Shooting distance was 28 feet, the absolute minimum focus distance on the lens. So I will add extension tubes if needed. I love the way this lens vaporizes the background. Beautiful Bokeh.
 
Last edited:
Battle of the Bands Hasselblad Fujiroid by Nokton48, on Flickr

Battle of the Bands. Hasselblad 500EL/M 350mm F5.6 Tele-Tessar Fuji 400 Instant Film (came from Japan). Always liked this one, instant photography is so much fun. Nobody there had ever seen it before. BTW our Band won the competition. The 250 and 350 can be handheld with fast film.
 
Last edited:
I found that I used the Hasselblad CF 250mm lens useful handheld, but the Hasselblad C 500 lens has a heavy swing weight and hard to use handheld, I only use the tripod with it.
 
SONY DSC by Nokton48, on Flickr

Wowie Zowie! My New To Me Hasselblad Superwide C T* with Hasselblad CFV16 Fat Pixel Digital Back. Initial tests look really good! I am stoked to have this, the previous owner sawed down the tripod Block underneath, so the CFV16 goes right on. Set the Back to "SWC" and away we go. YAY!
 
Nokton48 said:
SONY DSC by Nokton48, on Flickr

Wowie Zowie! My New To Me Hasselblad Superwide C T* with Hasselblad CFV16 Fat Pixel Digital Back. Initial tests look really good! I am stoked to have this, the previous owner sawed down the tripod Block underneath, so the CFV16 goes right on. Set the Back to "SWC" and away we go. YAY!
Click to expand...

Nice camera here!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:
Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom