What Hasselblad?

[Steven Lee]

I found the 60mm lens too close to the 80mm lens. I use the 50mm for wide angle photographs. I recommend either the 50mm, 80mm, 180mm and 250mm set p or the 50mm, 100mm, 180mm and 250mm setup. I have heard the the 180mm lens is better than the 150mm lens, but I have not used the 180mm lens.

I can comment on that because I just finished an exhausting (and shameful, hehehe) exercise of shooting a test scene with all Hasselblad lenses on a tripod with MLU testing for resolution. I examined the results with a 12x loupe and 9,000x9,000px scans. I did not find any notable difference in the center between 60mm, 80mm, 100mm, 120mm, 150mm, 180mm and 250mm. I am not saying the differences do not exist. Zeiss own MTF charts suggest otherwise. But I simply couldn't see them with the equipment available to me. I suppose if you print murals from Delta 100 you might. Here's the full-sized scan of the 250mm, supposedly the worst lens in the series.

You are right, the 60mm and 80mm are too close. But that's my argument for going with the 60mm, because it does offer a little extra when working in tight spaces.

The FOV difference between 50mm and 60mm is quite notable! It is significant enough for me to carry both lenses sometimes.

The difference between 150mm and 180mm is mostly about bulk, not sharpness or FOV. The 180mm is noticeably heavier and bulkier, so my advice is to get the 150mm. It is also cheaper.

I have no opinion on the 100mm or 120mm. This FOV is a bit of a dead zone for me, as I tend to jump between 60mm and 150mm rarely using anything in between.

 

[chuckroast]

I can comment on that because I just finished an exhausting (and shameful, hehehe) exercise of shooting a test scene with all Hasselblad lenses on a tripod with MLU testing for resolution. I examined the results with a 12x loupe and 9,000x9,000px scans. I did not find any notable difference in the center between 60mm, 80mm, 100mm, 120mm, 150mm, 180mm and 250mm. I am not saying the differences do not exist. Zeiss own MTF charts suggest otherwise. But I simply couldn't see them with the equipment available to me. I suppose if you print murals from Delta 100 you might. Here's the full-sized scan of the 250mm, supposedly the worst lens in the series.

You are right, the 60mm and 80mm are too close. But that's my argument for going with the 60mm, because it does offer a little extra when working in tight spaces.

The FOV difference between 50mm and 60mm is quite notable! It is significant enough for me to carry both lenses sometimes.

The difference between 150mm and 180mm is mostly about bulk, not sharpness or FOV. The 180mm is noticeably heavier and bulkier, so my advice is to get the 150mm. It is also cheaper.

I have no opinion on the 100mm or 120mm. This FOV is a bit of a dead zone for me, as I tend to jump between 60mm and 150mm rarely using anything in between.

I have the 40FLE, 60, 80, 120, 180, and 250. Of these, the 60 far and away gets the most use. it's just a great all around shooter.

But now that Mr. Sirius Glass has extolled the virtues of the 50FLE, I am feeling a serious case of GAS descending upon me. Must ... Not ... Give ... In ...

 

[mshchem]

I can comment on that because I just finished an exhausting (and shameful, hehehe) exercise of shooting a test scene with all Hasselblad lenses on a tripod with MLU testing for resolution. I examined the results with a 12x loupe and 9,000x9,000px scans. I did not find any notable difference in the center between 60mm, 80mm, 100mm, 120mm, 150mm, 180mm and 250mm. I am not saying the differences do not exist. Zeiss own MTF charts suggest otherwise. But I simply couldn't see them with the equipment available to me. I suppose if you print murals from Delta 100 you might. Here's the full-sized scan of the 250mm, supposedly the worst lens in the series.

You are right, the 60mm and 80mm are too close. But that's my argument for going with the 60mm, because it does offer a little extra when working in tight spaces.

The FOV difference between 50mm and 60mm is quite notable! It is significant enough for me to carry both lenses sometimes.

The difference between 150mm and 180mm is mostly about bulk, not sharpness or FOV. The 180mm is noticeably heavier and bulkier, so my advice is to get the 150mm. It is also cheaper.

I have no opinion on the 100mm or 120mm. This FOV is a bit of a dead zone for me, as I tend to jump between 60mm and 150mm rarely using anything in between.

Wow, great test subject. You can really see the DOF on the ruler.

 

[mshchem]

I have the 40FLE, 60, 80, 120, 180, and 250. Of these, the 60 far and away gets the most use. it's just a great all around shooter.

But noe Mr. Sirius Glass has extolled the virtues of the 50FLE, I am feeling a serious case of GAS descending upon me. Must ... Not ... Give ... In ...

I sold my 40mm fle, it weights more than the camera, amazing lens though. I have way too much of this stuff.

50, 80 and 150mm suits most. The 50 FLE is spectacular, but all the Zeiss blad lenses are.

 

[Steven Lee]

I have the 40FLE, 60, 80, 120, 180, and 250. Of these, the 60 far and away gets the most use. it's just a great all around shooter.

But now that Mr. Sirius Glass has extolled the virtues of the 50FLE, I am feeling a serious case of GAS descending upon me. Must ... Not ... Give ... In ...

Haha, true. Sirius is a great GAS instigator. Two more thoughts:

1. The 60mm also has a benefit of having a bit less shake blur when shooting handheld than the 80mm. Enough to notice in practical day to day use, IMO.
2. I had two versions of the 50mm FLE lens. The CF and CFi. While the latter shares the same optical formula and is newer, it is quite annoying that it doesn't share the same filter diameter with the others. Meanwhile it was much more expensive! So that upgrade turned out to be quite questionable. My advice is to get the CF version.

 

[Sirius Glass]

It can also be tamed somewhat by prereleasing the mirror. I use this routinely on a tripod to minimize camera shake during exposure.

This Just In: SLRs are noiser than RFs. Who knew?

I only use a tripod with the 500mm lens with or without the 2XE or for shorter lenses when using dark filters for shadow details. Almost everything I shoot hand held and I need the mirror to see the subject so no prereleasing the mirror.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I can comment on that because I just finished an exhausting (and shameful, hehehe) exercise of shooting a test scene with all Hasselblad lenses on a tripod with MLU testing for resolution. I examined the results with a 12x loupe and 9,000x9,000px scans. I did not find any notable difference in the center between 60mm, 80mm, 100mm, 120mm, 150mm, 180mm and 250mm. I am not saying the differences do not exist. Zeiss own MTF charts suggest otherwise. But I simply couldn't see them with the equipment available to me. I suppose if you print murals from Delta 100 you might. Here's the full-sized scan of the 250mm, supposedly the worst lens in the series.

You are right, the 60mm and 80mm are too close. But that's my argument for going with the 60mm, because it does offer a little extra when working in tight spaces.

The FOV difference between 50mm and 60mm is quite notable! It is significant enough for me to carry both lenses sometimes.

The difference between 150mm and 180mm is mostly about bulk, not sharpness or FOV. The 180mm is noticeably heavier and bulkier, so my advice is to get the 150mm. It is also cheaper.

I have no opinion on the 100mm or 120mm. This FOV is a bit of a dead zone for me, as I tend to jump between 60mm and 150mm rarely using anything in between.

I too have no option on the 100mm, 120mm or 135mm lenses.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have the 40FLE, 60, 80, 120, 180, and 250. Of these, the 60 far and away gets the most use. it's just a great all around shooter.

But now that Mr. Sirius Glass has extolled the virtues of the 50FLE, I am feeling a serious case of GAS descending upon me. Must ... Not ... Give ... In ...

I do not have the 40mm FLE, I have the 903 SWC.

Resist force of GAS, one cannot. Give in to GAS, one must! -- Yoda, Star Wars MMMCLXXXVIII

 

[chuckroast]

I do not have the 40mm FLE, I have the 903 SWC.

Resist force of GAS, one cannot. Give in to GAS, one must! -- Yoda, Star Wars MMMCLXXXVIII

Too many lenses I have, hrrrm

 

[Sirius Glass]

Too many lenses I have, hrrrm

One can never have too many lenses. One can have too many lenses to carry all of them.

 

[Eff64]

I don’t agree about getting a 500C. One shortcoming of these cameras is the focus screens being dark and hard to focus in the early years.

There is a big difference in using them with the improved Acute Matt D screen, split image is my preference.

Overall I think you are better getting the latest camera you can find/afford. A 503, or the 501CM are what I’d be looking for. Unless you are planning to send it out right away for service, if you can get a camera from the mid 90’s vs one from the 70’s, all other things being equal you are better off I think.

I have 7 lenses, but the 60 is sweet. Easy to focus, sharp, and just a bit wider than the 80 without being too wide for general use. That lens is glued to my camera!

 

[chuckroast]

I don’t agree about getting a 500C. One shortcoming of these cameras is the focus screens being dark and hard to focus in the early years.

There is a big difference in using them with the improved Acute Matt D screen, split image is my preference.

Overall I think you are better getting the latest camera you can find/afford. A 503, or the 501CM are what I’d be looking for. Unless you are planning to send it out right away for service, if you can get a camera from the mid 90’s vs one from the 70’s, all other things being equal you are better off I think.

I have 7 lenses, but the 60 is sweet. Easy to focus, sharp, and just a bit wider than the 80 without being too wide for general use. That lens is glued to my camera!

In general, you're probably right. But if I could find a 500C body in decent condition for $200, I'd jump on it

I shot a fair bit with the 500Cs and never really had a problem focusing. Worst case, and after market screen upgrade would cure that. The real benefit of the 501C/M is that it shows you the entire image with that sliding mirror arrangement, whereas the 500C does not display 100% of the image.

 

[Ai Print]

I have a mint Rolleiflex 2.8D, it's a fine camera but I will likely sell it soon as I like to frame more accurately when using MF film and it is a camera I had a hard time really connecting to.

Now Hasselblad, well I have been using them in my career since 1987. After an initial stint with a 500C, some type-II A12 and A24 backs and some black T* C lenses, I ended up with a couple of 500CM's, type-III backs and some CF lenses.

I now use 4x 501CM bodies, 2x Flexbodies, 14x type-III A12 backs, a 40mm FLE, 50mm FLE, 60mm CFi, 80mm CFe, 100MM CFi, 120mm CF, 180mm CFi, 350mm CF and a 1.4XE. I also use this glass along with the native XCD stuff with a 907X and X2D.

I own and use Leica, Nikon, Hasselblad, Sinar and Chamonix and the last stuff I would ever get rid of is Hasselblad. You don't have to go nuts with a huge system, a nice clean and CLA'd late model 500CM, 80mm CF and type-III A12 back will get you all the Hasselblad experience you need. And by the way, a folded Hasselblad body, back and 80 is really not *that* much bigger or heavier than your Rollei 2.8 when it comes down to it.

And as much as I love and use the 60, I would never be without the 80 as it is 2.8 and the most compact lens for the Hasselblad system.

Good luck, have fun, be square.

 

[Arthurwg]

Allow me to be direct and prescriptive here, but I strongly believe that the best choice is the 501CM. Here's why:

• They are the newest, manufactured up to 2005. It's easier to find a truly mint specimen.
• They come with a better stock focusing screen called AcuteMate D. The part numbers of these screens start with 422xxx (instead of 421xxx the older series used) and they alone go for $400+
• They have the gliding mirror feature which reduces vignetting on longer lenses.
• They are coated with the Palpas material inside, which is prone to crack (which is harmless) but supposedly decreases internal light reflections
• They are much cheaper than the higher end 503CW model, which adds TTL flash metering and a motor winder.

I would avoid the 503cw because strangely they command a noticeable premium over 501cm, but their TTL metering is nearly useless.

The 503CW works well with the dedicated D Flash 40 (as does the 503CX) , at least for distances under 15 feet. You may want that some day. The newer gliding mirror of the 503CW is also helpful with longer lenses, which may justify the added cost. But the motor winder has a bad reputation and can be a repair nightmare. Make sure that you get the much-improved AcuteMate screen that originally came with the later cameras. Some unscrupulous sellers will swap that out and replace it with an older screen while selling the newer screen separately at a premium.

And finally, let me also suggest the 60mm lens as the starter lens instead of a more common 80mm.

The 60mm lens was my first with this system and it's still my favorite. Very sharp and easy to hand-hold. Also, I always use a metered prism finder, which makes the whole contraption a joy to use.

And BTW, don't forget the 555ELX. It is a fantastic camera with features not found elsewhere, although it's heavier.

 

[SodaAnt]

And by the way, a folded Hasselblad body, back and 80 is really not *that* much bigger or heavier than your Rollei 2.8 when it comes down to it.

What is a “folded Hasselblad body”?

 

[Sirius Glass]

Grammatically the title should be "Which Hasselblad" not "What Hasselblad". Time for the moderators to put on their Grammar Police Hats.

 

[MattKing]

Grammatically the title should be "Which Hasselblad" not "What Hasselblad". Time for the moderators to put on their Grammar Police Hats.

And to think that all along I've been reading this title as a question and answer pair - i.e.:
Q: What?
A (Sirius): Hasselblad!

 

[Sirius Glass]

And to think that all along I've been reading this title as a question and answer pair - i.e.:
Q: What?
A (Sirius): Hasselblad!

My Blad!

 

[chuckroast]

My Blad! View attachment 348772

Sonnar or later, you're gonna have to stop this. We are trying to stick to the planar meaning of things here.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Mama miya!

 

[chuckroast]

Mama miya!

I'm Rollei-ing on the floor.

 

[Ai Print]

What is a “folded Hasselblad body”?

Waist level finder folded.

 

[mshchem]

The 503CW works well with the dedicated D Flash 40 (as does the 503CX) , at least for distances under 15 feet. You may want that some day. The newer gliding mirror of the 503CW is also helpful with longer lenses, which may justify the added cost. But the motor winder has a bad reputation and can be a repair nightmare. Make sure that you get the much-improved AcuteMate screen that originally came with the later cameras. Some unscrupulous sellers will swap that out and replace it with an older screen while selling the newer screen separately at a premium.

The 60mm lens was my first with this system and it's still my favorite. Very sharp and easy to hand-hold. Also, I always use a metered prism finder, which makes the whole contraption a joy to use.

And BTW, don't forget the 555ELX. It is a fantastic camera with features not found elsewhere, although it's heavier.

And the D-flash or other (I have a little Sunpak too) work great for outdoors fill flash.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Sonnar or later, you're gonna have to stop this. We are trying to stick to the planar meaning of things here.

Let Biogons be Biogons.

 

[mshchem]