I just find this thread funny, but not pointless. Photrio needs 300% boost of volume for Hasselblad-related threads. Even the silly ones.
Like, the 150mm Hasselblad lens might be the „worst“ in resolution, but I still prefer it over the much „better“ 100mm for closeup portraits.
Opposed to more Xtol vs D-76 or Leica M2 vs M3 threads?
Yes, because all developers are the same, and jewelry discussions should have no place in a photography forum!
Back to the original topic. I'm a camera collector/user, and I purposefully went out to gather the original black C T* "V" lenses that match in vintage my 500C/M and 500EL/M. Ended up with the 30mm, 40mm, 50mm, 60mm, 80mm, 100mm, 120-S, 135/Bellows, 150mm, 250mm, 350mm, and 500mm Opton. Not expensive and great users all. I do use them all with regularity, they are all superb for my uses. I could care less which is the sharpest! They are all perfectly fine for me, I'm very content. IMO all Hasselblad V lenses are perfectly usuable.
I standardized on CF lenses, and I agree with your your comments and find all the Hasselblad lenses sharper than any other equivalent focal length lenses that I have used.
Not to gibe but I'm not sure in my case I'd agree with that. My Mamyflex stable of Olde C22/C33 Bodies and modern black Mamy lenses cut the mustard too, I'm been fooled in side by side shoots, I thought afterwards it's Blad, and it's actually Mamy. Definate advanages to having both types around. And not 'spensive, it's to me what I get for what I paid, I have a definate budget. And Large Format is my go-to for uber resolution. Only so much you can do with a 2x2" piece of film. But I'm glad I have my Blads, and Mamys too. Happy Happy. CFV16 Hassy is new and exciting to me, I'm a digital Dodo.
Zeiss has better tonal separation.
Unfortunately there is no such thing in real life. Tonal separation does not exist outside of the Internet. It's a purely psychological phenomena similar to 3D pop and microcontrast. If it existed (and mattered) it would have been measured and listed in a Zeiss datasheet.
Not to gibe but I'm not sure in my case I'd agree with that. My Mamyflex stable of Olde C22/C33 Bodies and modern black Mamy lenses cut the mustard too, I'm been fooled in side by side shoots, I thought afterwards it's Blad, and it's actually Mamy. Definate advanages to having both types around. And not 'spensive, it's to me what I get for what I paid, I have a definate budget. And Large Format is my go-to for uber resolution. Only so much you can do with a 2x2" piece of film. But I'm glad I have my Blads, and Mamys too. Happy Happy. CFV16 Hassy is new and exciting to me, I'm a digital Dodo.
Zeiss seems to have been one of the first lens manufacturers to realise that very high low frequency MTF/ OTF in optics mattered a lot to our perception of 'sharp', rather than simply lots of contrast and/ or resolution. Everyone else essentially caught up to (overtook?) them over a sequence of product cycles (10-20+ years) - but a lot of the classic Zeiss Hasselblad/ Contax designs are quite old (50s-70s) compared to the late-film-era lenses from the competition.
Unfortunately there is no such thing in real life. Tonal separation does not exist outside of the Internet.
My experience is rather different:
I have shot with a wide variety of Mamiya optics from the Universal Press lenses, to multiple generations of TLR lenses, to the 645 family, to the Mamiya 7s.
In my experience, none of them, except the M7, perform anywhere near the Hassy Zeiss optics when pushed to large magnification, not for sharpness nor contrast. At 8x10, you can't see a ton of difference. At 16x20 you absolutely can. The M7 comes closest and performs well at high magnifications.
The other optics I've found that stand up well against the Zeiss lenses are the Fuji glass found in the GA-645Zi and GA690II cameras. Again, they are very fine performers.
Note that in all cases here, I am talking about monochrome film. With color film or digital film scanning, the results might be closer. Film scanning, especially, is going to mask a multitude of sins because - unless you have a drum scanner - you're going to be scan-limited in what you can see.
that's interesting, my experience is rather different again. just shows how difficult the topic is:
In medium format, for me the lenses with the most resolution are those for the Mamiya7 and Mamiya6, hands down.
Years ago, all my Hassy stuff was stolen in Barcelona. While I waited for the insurance money to come through, I rented an M7 with lenses. The first time I saw what the 43mm could do, I about fell out of my chair. That camera and lens family was easily the equal of all things 'Blad. I have often wondered if I made a bad choice replacing the 'Blad and perhaps should have gotten the M7 instead.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?