I would agree that this doesn't look like a reused part. The letter where "100mm" is printed looks factory. I took a look at the hasselblad service manual and while the part number for this DOF ring for 100mm vs the 150mm is different, that may just be to account for the different lettering. The part itself looks to be inter compatible. I would think that this could be a factory error, but hard to say.This doesn't look like a reused part, because the 100mm model markings are on the same ring as the DOF range marks... And the entire DOF range seems to be more compressed vs what's on mine. I wonder that perhaps at some point they've decided to re-calculate the DOF scale using a tighter circle of confusion, and left f/32 by mistake? Also, @Kodachromeguy your link shows the typical DOF scale ending with f/22.
Maybe they had already made aperture and DOF scales going to 32, but decided not to let the lens stop down more than 22, maybe because of some mechanical reason, and made new aperture scales but kept the DOF scales to save money. So perhaps this is the rare first batch.
Yes, this is odd. On the lens in the photograph that the OP posted, ∞ to 10m is adjacent to the ƒ/22 mark on the DOF scale. But on the lens in the Camera West advertisement, ∞ to 10m lies helf way between ƒ/11 and ƒ/16. My lens will arrive today, and I will take a roll of Panatomic-X to test it.This doesn't look like a reused part, because the 100mm model markings are on the same ring as the DOF range marks... And the entire DOF range seems to be more compressed vs what's on mine. I wonder that perhaps at some point they've decided to re-calculate the DOF scale using a tighter circle of confusion, and left f/32 by mistake? Also, @Kodachromeguy your link shows the typical DOF scale ending with f/22.
Yes, this is odd. On the lens in the photograph that the OP posted, ∞ to 10m is adjacent to the ƒ/22 mark on the DOF scale. But on the lens in the Camera West advertisement, ∞ to 10m lies helf way between ƒ/11 and ƒ/16. My lens will arrive today, and I will take a roll of Panatomic-X to test it.
Here is a CF version of the lens:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/144828603998
On this unit, the 10m mark is again located half way between ƒ/11 and ƒ/16.
The position of the 10m mark is actually between the 22 and the 16 mark, just the angle of the photo makes it look like its on 22. The focus scale can be used past the f8 marks as long as you make a mental note that they are about a stop off (f11=f8, f16=f11, f32=f22, etc). I just ran a roll of Acros through the camera and will develop it tonight to validate sharpness and functionality to ensure nothing else is wrong.Yes, this is odd. On the lens in the photograph that the OP posted, ∞ to 10m is adjacent to the ƒ/22 mark on the DOF scale. But on the lens in the Camera West advertisement, ∞ to 10m lies helf way between ƒ/11 and ƒ/16. My lens will arrive today, and I will take a roll of Panatomic-X to test it.
Here is a CF version of the lens:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/144828603998
On this unit, the 10m mark is again located half way between ƒ/11 and ƒ/16.
The position of the 10m mark is actually between the 22 and the 16 mark, just the angle of the photo makes it look like its on 22. The focus scale can be used past the f8 marks as long as you make a mental note that they are about a stop off (f11=f8, f16=f11, f32=f22, etc). I just ran a roll of Acros through the camera and will develop it tonight to validate sharpness and functionality to ensure nothing else is wrong.
I would contact Zeiss about this and see what they have to say. I did some googling, and the scale looks indeed like the one for the 150mm.
Or Hasselblad New Jersey.
Ahem...
WE'RE MOVING TO A NEW LOCATION!
HASSELBLAD INC.
201 S. VICTORY BLVD.
BURBANK, CA 91502 USA
Dear Customers,
In order to improve our services, we are moving the US Hasselblad service center to a new location in Burbank, California, starting November 7, 2022. Please update your records with our new address.
Due to this adjustment, our US repair service may experience temporary delays. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.
To learn more about this change or to contact customer support, please e-mail us at support.us@hasselblad.com
We expect to complete this move by the end of November 2022. Thank you for your patience and understanding.
Hasselblad USA moving from New Jersey to California
Just got this email: WE'RE MOVING TO A NEW LOCATION! HASSELBLAD INC. 201 S. VICTORY BLVD. BURBANK, CA 91502 USA Dear Customers, In order to improve our services, we are moving the US Hasselblad service center to a new location in Burbank, California, starting November 7, 2022. Please update...www.photrio.com
Don't you remember Sirius - they moved to be closer to you
(there was a thread about this, and I told that joke there too)
I recently acquired a Hasselblad 100mm 3.5 CFi lens. When examining it I notices a peculiarity. The minimum aperture f-stop value is f/22, however, the DOF scale has marking for f/32. I thought this was odd so I went and took a look online. Pictures I found of the lens online only has DOF marking that go up to f/22. Additionally there are some differences in how the DOF scale is marked such as the number '8' missing from my lens and only being marked by a line.
Everything else about the lens seems normal and the front of the lens is also correctly marked for being a 100mm f/3.5 lens. I have attached an image of my lens. Anyone have any idea why mine is like this? The DOF scale looks inaccurate when compared to images of the lens online. When the lens is set to the infinity position (like the attached image), the 'm' marking is at the f/11 mark. However, images online show the 'm' marking at the f/8 mark.
Edit: After comparing this lens against images of other CFi lenses, it looks like the DOF scale matches the 150mm lens. Could there have been a mix up?
View attachment 325785
No it slipped my mind. I have been knee deep in GAS buying the Nikon mount Tamron SP 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DI VC USD G2 AF Lens with the 2X extender and TAP programming device, Nikon AF Fisheye Nikkor 16mm f/2.8D, and Nikon f/3.5 15mm lens, 95mm filters for the Tamron and two sets of Nikon Bayonet rear filters for the 13mm, 15mm and 16mm lenses. I am so full of GAS that I could just explode.= Warning do not follow closely behind me!
But…but…none of these will fit a Hasselblad…
Or are you just hoarding?
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?