Hasselblad v series lens with best resolution

[Scotthenrylabonte]

what lenses of the hasselblad v series have the best resolution? I’m currently looking at the 100mm cf 3.5

 

[McDiesel]

@Scotthenrylabonte on this page you can download PDF datasheets with MTF curves for all lenses. If I were to guess, I would say the 100mm or 180mm

 

[ruilourosa]

100 or 38

 

[Alan9940]

They're all good, but IMO the "best" is the 100!

 

[MarkS]

There aren't any bad ones. In a previous career I used the 135/5.6 Makro-Planar, and that had extremely high resolution. But since it requires a bellows, it is not the most flexible of optics. It was unsurpassed for closeup work.

 

[MattKing]

I'm going to ask a question that I often just think to myself.
If they are all good, why does it matter to you if one is slightly different than another.
In more than 50+ years of photography, I can't think of a photograph I've made that was unsatisfactory due to the optical deficiencies of a lens. And I've used lots of mid-level lenses - even a few mediocre ones.

 

[Paul Howell]

If a given lens can resolve 200 LPM (TMax100) what is the point if a lens can resolve say 300 LPM? True there are few films that resolve beyond Tmax100, Microfiche, Ortho, or copy separation, film, not readily available in MF. It might matter if OP is shooting with a high pixel digital back otherwise not so much. I would be looking at newer lens with improved coating and better contrast.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The 100mm is the sharpest to my eye. Some say that one should not use it to take portraits of women. I just use it when I need that focal length and do not think about the sharpness since all the Hasselblad lenses are sharp.

 

[Alan9940]

The 100mm is the sharpest to my eye. Some say that one should not use it to take portraits of women. I just use it when I need that focal length and do not think about the sharpness since all the Hasselblad lenses are sharp.

+1

 

[GLS]

The 100mm is an incredible performer, and the 180mm isn't far behind it (I own both). The 250mm Superachromat is possibly the best though; going by the MTF curves it's already essentially diffraction limited wide open.

 

[McDiesel]

I'm going to ask a question that I often just think to myself.
If they are all good, why does it matter to you if one is slightly different than another.
In more than 50+ years of photography, I can't think of a photograph I've made that was unsatisfactory due to the optical deficiencies of a lens. And I've used lots of mid-level lenses - even a few mediocre ones.

Applying the principle of charity, I usually assume that the person who's asking has a technical application in mind: duplicating work, archiving, digitization, etc.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Applying the principle of charity, I usually assume that the person who's asking has a technical application in mind: duplicating work, archiving, digitization, etc.

Or this could be a case of serious tetraplyoctomy. Put that in your pipe and smoke it!

 

[MattKing]

Applying the principle of charity, I usually assume that the person who's asking has a technical application in mind: duplicating work, archiving, digitization, etc.

Certainly possible. Although I would expect that sort of qualification in the question itself - not simply a "best resolution" question.
But I often find that one of the most valuable benefits of experience is that one gains a better sense of the relative importance of things.
The fine differences between how one Hasselblad lens performs vs. how the next one performs are particularly small. I fear that, in this context, too much weight is being placed on "resolution".

 

[Sirius Glass]

One should forget about resolution with Hasselblad and look at the provided MTF curves instead. Those show the overall optical quality.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

@Scotthenrylabonte on this page you can download PDF datasheets with MTF curves for all lenses. If I were to guess, I would say the 100mm or 180mm

from a technical point of view ,it's probably the 180 but, they are all excellent performers.

 

[guangong]

I'm going to ask a question that I often just think to myself.
If they are all good, why does it matter to you if one is slightly different than another.
In more than 50+ years of photography, I can't think of a photograph I've made that was unsatisfactory due to the optical deficiencies of a lens. And I've used lots of mid-level lenses - even a few mediocre ones.

Took the words right out of my mouth. Never heard of a faulty Hasselblad lens. That goes for almost all lenses and cameras with fixed lenses above a certain price level of whatever manufacture. Nonetheless, Arnold Genthe’s famous pics of San Francisco earthquake were taken with a Kodak Brownie. So much for lens quality vs ability.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I have older non-T and some newer T coated V lenses. They are all good enough for me. I have an older 120mm macro that even has some fungus, and it's still very sharp. Likewise, I love sharp lenses with good micro-contrast, but I don't use them for everything. As for the 100mm being too sharp for portraits? Hogwash! I have Zeiss Softars #1 and #2 and use the #1 for many subjects, including portraits. I can make a sharp lens as "bad/soft" as I want, but I can't make a "bad/soft" lens sharp as I want. I'll take the first option every time. People today don't seem to use specialty filters like we did in the good old days. At least, I don't seem to hear much talk about filters anymore. JohnW

 

[BrianShaw]

I have older non-T and some newer T coated V lenses. They are all good enough for me. I have an older 120mm macro that even has some fungus, and it's still very sharp. Likewise, I love sharp lenses with good micro-contrast, but I don't use them for everything. As for the 100mm being too sharp for portraits? Hogwash! I have Zeiss Softars #1 and #2 and use the #1 for many subjects, including portraits. I can make a sharp lens as "bad/soft" as I want, but I can't make a "bad/soft" lens sharp as I want. I'll take the first option every time. People today don't seem to use specialty filters like we did in the good old days. At least, I don't seem to hear much talk about filters anymore. JohnW

 

[kinglang]

100mm

 

[Sirius Glass]

what lenses of the hasselblad v series have the best resolution? I’m currently looking at the 100mm cf 3.5

@Scotthenrylabonte on this page you can download PDF datasheets with MTF curves for all lenses. If I were to guess, I would say the 100mm or 180mm

100 or 38

They're all good, but IMO the "best" is the 100!

The 100mm is the sharpest to my eye. Some say that one should not use it to take portraits of women. I just use it when I need that focal length and do not think about the sharpness since all the Hasselblad lenses are sharp.

+1

The 100mm is an incredible performer, and the 180mm isn't far behind it (I own both). The 250mm Superachromat is possibly the best though; going by the MTF curves it's already essentially diffraction limited wide open.

100mm

Yes, the votes are in and the 100mm lens is the sharpest, but we knew that from the MTF curves supplied by Hasselblad.

 

[ruilourosa]

100 cf + PAN f + fx1+ mlu+ strong tripod= too much :-D

 

[GLS]

100 cf + PAN f + fx1+ mlu+ strong tripod= too much :-D

Or with document films.

Resolution on images I've shot with the 100mm and Agfa Copex Rapid is something else.

 

[Hayek]

what lenses of the hasselblad v series have the best resolution? I’m currently looking at the 100mm cf 3.5

Look no further.

 

[eli griggs]

There aren't any bad ones. In a previous career I used the 135/5.6 Makro-Planar, and that had extremely high resolution. But since it requires a bellows, it is not the most flexible of optics. It was unsurpassed for closeup work.

I loved that 135mm lens/bellows set-up, it was very sharp, and if you took your time, delivered great photographs.

It remains on my short list of Hasselblad lenses, together with the 350 mm or 500mm for landscapes.

This does no include the SWC, camera, lens set-up that would almost complete my bucket list, with, hopefully enough time to enjoy them.

The 135mm simply rocks when you need sharp details, period.

 

[cramej]

Took the words right out of my mouth. Never heard of a faulty Hasselblad lens. That goes for almost all lenses and cameras with fixed lenses above a certain price level of whatever manufacture. Nonetheless, Arnold Genthe’s famous pics of San Francisco earthquake were taken with a Kodak Brownie. So much for lens quality vs ability.

OT, but this piqued my interest so I had to look up the photos. They are quite fascinating, though he did say in a book that he used a 3A Kodak Special given to him from a shop!