250mm for Hasselblad

film_man · Jan 26, 2011

Hello,

I'm looking to get a 250/5.6 for my V system, mainly for landscape use. I've found a few of these but not too sure which one to go for. All with clean glass:

250C for £150-250
250CT* for £200 (not so sure about glass condition on this, need to check)
250CF for £500

Now I don't particularly like the handling of C lenses with their fiddly constant aperture coupling and heavy focusing but since I'll be using the lens not that often on a tripod I reckon it won't matter that much. Would you say it is worth getting perhaps an older lens and getting it serviced (costs about £100-150 to service) so I have a "new" one vs getting a CF that might need servicing in a few months?

Also, is there an obvious image quality difference between the C, CT* and CF versions? Because if a CF is visibly better than a C/CT* I'll get one of these.

Thanks.

sandermarijn · Jan 26, 2011

film_man said:
Now I don't particularly like the handling of C lenses with their fiddly constant aperture coupling and heavy focusing but since I'll be using the lens not that often on a tripod I reckon it won't matter that much.

Assuming a similar state of abuse, the CT*'s and CF's are equally stiff. IOW, the difference between the one sample to the next will exceed any difference between the two types. My experience at least.

I also have a CB lens. Those, and the crazy-expensive CFi's, are smooth-focusing.

film_man said:
Would you say it is worth getting perhaps an older lens and getting it serviced (costs about £100-150 to service) so I have a "new" one vs getting a CF that might need servicing in a few months?

Unless you hate the EV-coupling, go for a serviced, cheaper CT*. The CF will add nothing but harder edged aperture blades (looks ugly in the OOF highlights, IMO). The CF will of course add the F setting, but I don't think many people use that.

film_man said:
Also, is there an obvious image quality difference between the C, CT* and CF versions? Because if a CF is visibly better than a C/CT* I'll get one of these.

I see no difference, speaking for CT* vs. CF. I don't know about C lenses.

sandermarijn · Jan 26, 2011

Forgot to say: the C(T*) lenses have built-in self-timers, the CF's (and later) don't. Yet another point of consideration

jbbooks · Jan 26, 2011

I would not purchase a C. One of the things that appeals most about the Zeiss T* lenses is the consistency they have, from one lens to another, of their excellent contrast and color.

I like the CT*, because I am used to their aperture and speed coupling and I do not like the CF the way it was changed in that regard. More importantly, I do not like switching from one to another. If, like you, I preferred the CF style lens; I would stay with that, especially if you are going to buy one in less than good condition and have it serviced.

In regard to condition, the reason you buy a lens is for the glass and that should be flawless. If it is not, the price should be deeply discounted. A lens with flawed glass may produce a usable image, but it will not bring a normal price if sold to a knowing buyer. If you buy a lens with glass issues and the price is not reduced, compared to a similar lens with mint glass, you should expect to have to deeply discount the lens if you, later, decide to sell it. Make your seller take that loss, in full. Do not allow him to pass any of it on to you.

Q.G. · Jan 26, 2011

All depends on condition.
If the C is in good shape, and you do not mind the C-controls, why not? Keep in mind that a newer lens may actually be in worse condition.

Coatings do not matter that much, the difference between the T coating on the older C lens and the T* coating is minimal. Usings a good lens hood does more, and is needed using T* lenses as well as uncoated lenses.

The optical design of the f/5.6 250 mm Sonnar hasn't changed since it first became available for the 1000-series Hasselblads in the mid 1950s. It did not need to, since it was very good to begin with.
And they do indeed all perform equally well. Indistinguishable.

jelke · Jan 26, 2011

film_man said:
Hello,

I'm looking to get a 250/5.6 for my V system, mainly for landscape use. I've found a few of these but not too sure which one to go for. All with clean glass:

250C for £150-250
250CT* for £200 (not so sure about glass condition on this, need to check)
250CF for £500

Now I don't particularly like the handling of C lenses with their fiddly constant aperture coupling and heavy focusing but since I'll be using the lens not that often on a tripod I reckon it won't matter that much. Would you say it is worth getting perhaps an older lens and getting it serviced (costs about £100-150 to service) so I have a "new" one vs getting a CF that might need servicing in a few months?

Also, is there an obvious image quality difference between the C, CT* and CF versions? Because if a CF is visibly better than a C/CT* I'll get one of these.

Thanks.

Ansel Adams used an early 250 to shoot his Moon over half dome picture.
http://www.hasselbladinfo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5128

film_man · Jan 26, 2011

Thanks for all the suggestions. I generally do not like the coupled C/CT* controls but since I'll be using the 250 pretty much on a tripod I can live with that! On the other hand I couldn't live with them for something general purpose like my 80 (or a 150 that I will also be buying after the 250 which I'm almost sure will be a CFi one).

I think I'll go for the C/CT* lens, they are less than half the price of the cheapest CF I can find and thus I can afford a service and a hood and still have spare money for an A24 that I'm also eyeing. Plus I found a couple of silver 250C that just look cool.

film_man · Jan 26, 2011

By the way, which hood does the 250C and CT* take?

Q.G. · Jan 26, 2011

A bayonet 50 hood, initially called "150", later "100-250"

film_man · Jan 26, 2011

Thanks QG.

TheFlyingCamera · Jan 26, 2011

Another thought - the C lenses have an older shutter for which the supply of parts is now dwindling, and it is possible that it may need a repair which either cannot be done or cannot be done cost effectively. Especially if this is a lens you will not use frequently, this is more of an issue because as with all things Hasselblad, they tend to fail more often if they are not used regularly than they do if they are.

film_man · Jan 28, 2011

Well, I ended up buying the CT*. £200 for that, apparently in excellent condition, works fully and is boxed. Well...apart from "3 tiny light marks on the front element that can only be seen if you tilt it into the light hard and which will not affect image quality". Hmmm...we'll see, if it is no good I can always return it for a refund.

Q.G. · Jan 28, 2011

Congratulations!
And have fun with the lens. It's a good one, so that will not be hard.

film_man · Jan 28, 2011

Thanks!

skahde · Feb 1, 2011

I have CT and though it tolerates specular hightligths it needs a bellow-shade when there is a diffuse bright sky in the picture. As it has only 6 air-glass surfaces I suspect this to be more a problem of the internal baffling - or lack thereoff - as there simply isn't room inside its shallow tube. I can't compare to a CF but expect it to be better in this regard.

film_man · Feb 4, 2011

I bought the hood for it. Well, I bought the normal hood, which is tiny but I guess it is better than nothing. I see it more as front-element protection. Quite annoying that with these old style lenses you cannot have both the hood and cap on.

Anyway, I don't generally mind a bit flare, adds a bit of flair to the photo and I can work around it.

Q.G. · Feb 4, 2011

film_man said:
I bought the hood for it. Well, I bought the normal hood, which is tiny but I guess it is better than nothing. I see it more as front-element protection. Quite annoying that with these old style lenses you cannot have both the hood and cap on.

You can, using the later style bayonet 50 lens cap, which fits in the hood, and mounts on the inner bayonet.
Still, a pain to put on and take off with the shade on the lens.

Sirius Glass · Feb 5, 2011

I have only gotten CF lenses and therefore all the shutters are the new design and still easy to get service and parts. The lenses that I have, yes there are some CF lenses that use other size filters, all take the B60 filters. This keeps life simple. Others like the look of the C lenses.

Steve

Q.G. · Feb 5, 2011

And your point is, Steve...?
:confused:

Sirius Glass · Feb 5, 2011

Q.G. said:
And your point is, Steve...?
:confused:

It is a good idea to choose and then stick to buying either C lenses or CF lenses rather than have a collection of both B50 and B60 filters and lens hoods.

I thought that you would be able to figure that out. Would you like me to draw a picture for you the next time I post?

film_man · Feb 5, 2011

Well it's a good thing I don't use filters then and I like to have a hood for each and every lens!

mikebarger · Feb 5, 2011

Have any of you guys had to trash a C lens due to parts not being available? I had a main spring replaced in a 150mm.

Mike

Q.G. · Feb 5, 2011

Sirius Glass said:
It is a good idea to choose and then stick to buying either C lenses or CF lenses rather than have a collection of both B50 and B60 filters and lens hoods.

I thought that you would be able to figure that out. Would you like me to draw a picture for you the next time I post?

Maybe you could draw one for yourself to study before you post?

film_man · Feb 6, 2011

Maybe you boys could calm down a bit.

Sirius Glass · Feb 6, 2011

film_man, this is typical of Q.G. When he does not understand something he questions to poster by making a thinly veiled attack. When the post is explained, he then makes fun of the poster because he, Q. G., did not get it. He did this all the time at www.hasselbladinfo.com. Ask him how that worked out for him.

250mm for Hasselblad

Membership Council

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency