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.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.
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 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 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 ...
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 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 ...
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
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!
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.Allow me to be direct and prescriptive here, but I strongly believe that the best choice is the 501CM. Here's why:
I would avoid the 503cw because strangely they command a noticeable premium over 501cm, but their TTL metering is nearly useless.
- 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.
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 finally, let me also suggest the 60mm lens as the starter lens instead of a more common 80mm.
What is a “folded Hasselblad body”?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.
Grammatically the title should be "Which Hasselblad" not "What Hasselblad". Time for the moderators to put on their Grammar Police Hats.
My Blad! View attachment 348772
Mama miya!
Waist level finder folded.What is a “folded Hasselblad body”?
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.
Sonnar or later, you're gonna have to stop this. We are trying to stick to the planar meaning of things here.
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?