Hasselblad 250mm black non T* telephoto.....questions?

[harlequin]

Hell Team,
Happy Belated New Years!

I finally got a 250mm lens for my 500c and had a few questions...

1) this lens ended up being less cost than some 35mm lenses (Nikon Canon) this focal length doesn’t get rave reviews like 120 and 150mm Hasselblad lenses....? Seen chrome version for sale around $125.00!
2) does the T* coating mean much at this focal length?
3). I notice the front lens element is not recessed in any way, maybe subject to lens flare? Should I get one of the
Hasselblad adjustable lens shade (matte box style) or just a plastic bayonet style shade?

Thanks for your input and any photos taken with this lens...

Vincent/Harlequin

 

[Sirius Glass]

Hell Team,
Happy Belated New Years!

I finally got a 250mm lens for my 500c and had a few questions...

1) this lens ended up being less cost than some 35mm lenses (Nikon Canon) this focal length doesn’t get rave reviews like 120 and 150mm Hasselblad lenses....? Seen chrome version for sale around $125.00!
2) does the T* coating mean much at this focal length?
3). I notice the front lens element is not recessed in any way, maybe subject to lens flare? Should I get one of the
Hasselblad adjustable lens shade (matte box style) or just a plastic bayonet style shade?

Thanks for your input and any photos taken with this lens...

Vincent/Harlequin

I use the squarish plastic bayonet style lens hood, which is also not expensive.

 

[BrianShaw]

Either shade will work. I like the square plastic hood when in the field, and the adjustable when not in the field.

 

[mrosenlof]

The 250 is a Sonnar design which was designed to have few air-glass surfaces, so the T* doesn't make a huge difference for this lens.

That said, I'm a strong believer in lens shades. On my 250, I use the same shade as I do on my 80, and I use it if I have it with me.

I think it's a fine lens. Just by its nature of being 3x normal it's going to get less use than others.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The optical design is the same in the old C lenses as in the later lenses.

 

[itsdoable]

T* increases the contrast on the film, even on the 250 Sonnar, but that is mostly an advantage with colour. I actually prefer the negs from non-T* lenses with B&W film.

The 250 Sonnar was introduced with the original 500c, and remained in production unchanged (except the improved coating) through out the entire life of the V series (right to CFi lenses). That is because it was a good optical design, originally an f/4 lens (with the 1600f), but reduced to f/5.6 for the C series, because the Compur shutter was not big enough for and f/4 250mm aperture. It is thus maximally sharp wide open. The main issue is that it requires very good technique to get an image without motion blur from a long slow lens like this (similar issues have cause people to dislike the Pentax 67 4/300).

I started with a silver 250 Sonnar, but upgraded to a CF lens (it was so inexpensive!). The T* gives you a slightly faster T-stop - always welcome with long lenses.

 

[Sirius Glass]

When I was buying my Hasselblad equipment over ten years ago, most bodies were $400US or less, the 80mm was $600US, most other lenses were $400US to $800US.

 

[eli griggs]

The 250mm is a nice lens and worth getting to know.

Teleconverters allow it to really reach out and a x1.4 converter, with the camera (350mm effected) on a monopod, photographing flocks of birds, other people on a busy street or gathering, etc, can be a fun afternoon, just to see what you can do with that lens, converter or no, IMO.

 

[leicaboss]

T* increases the contrast on the film, even on the 250 Sonnar, but that is mostly an advantage with colour. I actually prefer the negs from non-T* lenses with B&W film.

The 250 Sonnar was introduced with the original 500c, and remained in production unchanged (except the improved coating) through out the entire life of the V series (right to CFi lenses). That is because it was a good optical design, originally an f/4 lens (with the 1600f), but reduced to f/5.6 for the C series, because the Compur shutter was not big enough for and f/4 250mm aperture. It is thus maximally sharp wide open. The main issue is that it requires very good technique to get an image without motion blur from a long slow lens like this (similar issues have cause people to dislike the Pentax 67 4/300).

I started with a silver 250 Sonnar, but upgraded to a CF lens (it was so inexpensive!). The T* gives you a slightly faster T-stop - always welcome with long lenses.

Pardon the ignorance, but I noticed you mentioned the T* variant affords a slightly faster "T-stop", I wasn't familiar with this term but currently understand it as being the measurement of how much light is actually making it through at any given f-stop - with that said, how would I be able to tell the difference in T-stop as far as spec sheets go?

 

[eli griggs]

A stop is a stop, no matter a lens coating or none.

This is the first time I've heard of a 'T-stop' and Hasselblad coated lenses have been around forever.

 

[Sirius Glass]

A stop is a stop, no matter a lens coating or none.

This is the first time I've heard of a 'T-stop' and Hasselblad coated lenses have been around forever.

Early Hasselblad Series V lenses [started 1957] only had one lens coating. Later the multicoated lenses were brought out and labeled 'T*'.

 

[itsdoable]

A stop is a stop, no matter a lens coating or none.

This is the first time I've heard of a 'T-stop' and Hasselblad coated lenses have been around forever.

All Zeiss' Cine lenses are marked in T-stops instead of f-stops. Lenses for still photography are marked in F-stops.

F-stops define the actual diameter of the opening as a ratio wrt to the focal length, and is geometrically a constant if the transmission is 100%. It defines the DoF and bokeh, or how out of focus the background and foreground will be,

T-stop is the actual Transmission (the "T") taking into account the attenuation of the glass, which is different for each lens. The value is the equivalent F-stop if the transmission was 100%. Thus it is always higher - many f/2.8 lenses are ~t/3.0. If you look at apodised lenses (ie: STF lenses or some soft focus lenses), they show a T-stop and an F-stop. T-stop or exposure, and F-stop for the geometric aperture & effective background blur.

 

[eli griggs]

It sounds like simple zone system lens calibration, a good but tedious proposition, especially if you repeat with more than one camera.

Thanks for describing the "T-stop" factor.

 

[Sirius Glass]

All Zeiss' Cine lenses are marked in T-stops instead of f-stops. Lenses for still photography are marked in F-stops.

F-stops define the actual diameter of the opening as a ratio wrt to the focal length, and is geometrically a constant if the transmission is 100%. It defines the DoF and bokeh, or how out of focus the background and foreground will be,

T-stop is the actual Transmission (the "T") taking into account the attenuation of the glass, which is different for each lens. The value is the equivalent F-stop if the transmission was 100%. Thus it is always higher - many f/2.8 lenses are ~t/3.0. If you look at apodised lenses (ie: STF lenses or some soft focus lenses), they show a T-stop and an F-stop. T-stop or exposure, and F-stop for the geometric aperture & effective background blur.

T stops are used for movie camera lenses, not Hasselblad lenses. Two different animals.

 

[btaylor]

There are at least a couple of reasons for vine lens T/stops: one is very precise exposure especially when multiple lenses are used in a scene which is common- the closer exposure is the less post work and better match shot to shot. The other is the use of zoom lenses- they have so many elements they really affect effective light transmission.

 

[Sirius Glass]

There are at least a couple of reasons for vine lens T/stops: one is very precise exposure especially when multiple lenses are used in a scene which is common- the closer exposure is the less post work and better match shot to shot. The other is the use of zoom lenses- they have so many elements they really affect effective light transmission.

I think you mean "cine" not "vine". T stops are used in the movie industry. We do not get much movie stuff here because if it moves we shoot it.

 

[btaylor]

Yes, “cine.”
Looks like the “c” is right next to the “v” on my tiny iPhone keyboard.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Yes, “cine.”
Looks like the “c” is right next to the “v” on my tiny iPhone keyboard.

Use a knife to sharpen your fingers.

 

[drmoss_ca]

Use a knife to sharpen your fingers.

A pointed remark!

 

[gorbas]

T* is Zeiss lens coating, T stops are precize iris opening marks. They are not related in any way.

 

[Sirius Glass]

T stops are used for movie camera lenses, not Hasselblad lenses. Two different animals.

I think you mean "cine" not "vine". T stops are used in the movie industry. We do not get much movie stuff here because if it moves we shoot it.

T* is Zeiss lens coating, T stops are precize iris opening marks. They are not related in any way.

Which is what I have been posting. We don't need no stinkin' T stops unless we are ice skating and hockey stops are much better.