Which 50mm Zeiss for Hasselblad 501C?

[Sirius Glass]

They already had a great optical prescription for the lens. Rather than redesign the whole lens, the design could be improved with an adjustable front element.

 

[Ai Print]

The CF, CFi and CFE lenses use B60 filters and are multicoated [marked with a red T*]. One set of B60 filters will work for almost all those lenses. I use CF lenses. CFi and CFE have electrical connections for digital backs. CFE lenses have floating elements in the front for finer focus control close up. The CFE lenses are a bit more pricey.

This is not entirely correct. The CFE lenses have the electrical contacts on the back, the CFi lenses do not (I own the 100mm 3.5 CFi). The 50mm F4 CFi is bay 70, not bay 60 which is why I opted to pass on it for filter size consistency. Also, the only V system lenses to have user adjustable floating elements have been the 40mm and 50mm starting in CF build and to my knowledge, there was no 50mm CFE.

The 40mm FLE eventually went to a non-user adjustable FLE internal focus version in the last iteration of the V system focal length. It is by far the sharpest, best corrected in the corners and now sells used for more than it did new, if you can find one. It is the only lens I wish I could swap out as my CF FLE version kind of gets taken to task with my CFV50c back.

I have the 50mm F4 CF FLE and it is simply outstanding and I believe it represents the best value in Hasselblad V 50mm lenses right now.

 

[Slixtiesix]

The 50mm F4 CFi is bay 70, not bay 60 which is why I opted to pass on it for filter size consistency.

There was also a step-down adaptor available for this lens that allowed to use B60 and could permanently stay on the lens. However, it was rather rare...

 

[Chris Livsey]

It is by far the sharpest, best corrected in the corners and now sells used for more than it did new, if you can find one.

Whilst not common it does sell below the £3,500 it was in 2008, just.
ProCentre have one at £2,195 + VAT = £2,634
http://procentre.co.uk/sales-secondhand-hasselblad-v-and-x-system.php

 

[Sirius Glass]

One could get a Hasselblad 903 SWC or 905 SWC for less and those are rectilinearly correct while the 40mm lens CFE or not can never be rectilinearly correct due the the retrofocus design.

 

[Ai Print]

One could get a Hasselblad 903 SWC or 905 SWC for less and those are rectilinearly correct while the 40mm lens CFE or not can never be rectilinearly correct due the the retrofocus design.

That is a viable option for some, but I never liked the workflow and the fact it is a one trick pony camera body. It just never really worked for me.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Screw the work flow, it is all about the photograph and what the lens can do. The 38mm Biogon lens can do a much better job than any of the 40mm lenses, even the latest lens.

 

[ic-racer]

One could get a Hasselblad 903 SWC or 905 SWC for less and those are rectilinearly correct while the 40mm lens CFE or not can never be rectilinearly correct due the the retrofocus design.

But, at 3% barrel distortion for the 40mm, the appearance in photographs is that of a rectilinear lens.

38 biogon vs 40 distagon comparision:

 

[Chris Livsey]

One could get a Hasselblad 903 SWC or 905 SWC for less and those are rectilinearly correct while the 40mm lens CFE or not can never be rectilinearly correct due the the retrofocus design.

But, , I can fit the 40mm on my H1, and admittedly loose some of the 6x6 coverage.

 

[Richard Man]

The SWC/M is the funnest camera I have, and I have RF (Leica), 4x5, pano (XPan and 617). The SWC is just a joy to use.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

When I wanted a lens for architecture and nature shots, I chose the SWC. The 40mm lens makes no sense to me and I'm sure it cannot match the SWC for architecture and interiors.

For general wide angle shots, the 50/4 CF FLE fits nicely between the SWC and the standard 80mm.

 

[Ai Print]

When I wanted a lens for architecture and nature shots, I chose the SWC. The 40mm lens makes no sense to me and I'm sure it cannot match the SWC for architecture and interiors.

For general wide angle shots, the 50/4 CF FLE fits nicely between the SWC and the standard 80mm.

I think the 40 FLE is fantastic on landscape shots and is great on film. Even after borrowing one three times, I just never liked working with the SWC so I opted to not get one.

 

[rrunnertexas]

The information here is great - I am so thankful for all of the help!

I found a 50mm T* lens, the older model for a decent price (and return policy). I think I am going to give it a shot and see what I think about it.

From all the replies I can see that the FLE lens is the one I want, but it is at least twice the cost, so the older model will have to do for now.

I hope the lens will arrive soon so I can shoot a roll with it and see the results with different subjects.

Time to get shooting!

David

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have the CF lens. As you pointed out the CF FLE, also called CFE if I remember correctly, is twice the price. I personally have never needed the the CFE.

 

[Slixtiesix]

Sirius, you are siriusly wrong this time! (which stuns me since you seem to know everything about Hasseblad). The successor to the CF FLE was the CFi (FLE). There was never a CFE version of this lens. But there was a 50/2,8 FE. I think they never offered the 50/4 as CFE not to cannibalize sales of the 50/2,8 FE...

 

[Sirius Glass]

I wrote "if I remember correctly". Since I do not buy any Hasselblad lenses newer than CF, it is out of my usual range. Check my past posts and you will see that often I write "CF and later lenses" to avoid these problems.

 

[Ai Print]

Sirius, you are siriusly wrong this time! (which stuns me since you seem to know everything about Hasseblad). The successor to the CF FLE was the CFi (FLE). There was never a CFE version of this lens. But there was a 50/2,8 FE. I think they never offered the 50/4 as CFE not to cannibalize sales of the 50/2,8 FE...

To expand on this a bit, the designation of CFi means "CF-improved" which they are for the most part having easier to turn focus, sync cord locks, a bit better coatings & inner baffling for improved contrast / color saturation and improved ergonomics. The CFi lenses do not have electrical contacts for data, only the CFE (CF-Electrical) FE or H series medium format lenses do.

And once again, to clarify the topic of FLE vs no FLE. The only two Hasselblad V system lenses to employ a floating element that is user adjustable are the 40mm and 50mm starting with the CF builds. The 50 concluded with the 50mm FLE CFi as mentioned above while the 40mm ended up as a CFE-IF in it's last iteration.

While CF lenses are no doubt my favorites overall, there is no denying the improvements I see in my CFi 100mm 3.5.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Thanks for the clarification. As I said I standardized on the CF lenses.

 

[Chris Livsey]

But there was a 50/2,8 FE. I think they never offered the 50/4 as CFE not to cannibalize sales of the 50/2,8 FE...

I don't see how that can be true, the 50mm f2.8 FE couldn't be used on a 500 series body so how could it take sales away from a potential 50/4 CFE?
Anyway in later years, around 2000, they did get in a mighty tangle with E and i versions not to mention the CB ones.

For example I have a CFi 120mm obviously no data bus connection but the new body shell and bayonet. There was a CFi f4/180 to match that spec in 2000 but my 180mm is a CFE with the data bus and the new shell etc. So are all CFE versions i versions as well, I think that is so? But FE lenses did have the databus but do not appear, from the pictures I have, to be i construction. ( I own no F series lenses of any variety)

AFAIK another lens that was available as an i the 150mm f4 Sonnar never made it to an E version either. There was an 80mm CFE in 2000 but by 2008 only the CFi version (which should be older?) was listed.

 

[Slixtiesix]

I don't see how that can be true, the 50mm f2.8 FE couldn't be used on a 500 series body so how could it take sales away from a potential 50/4 CFE?

Because buying an E lens for use on a 500 series would be a no brainer anyway, since none of them has an integrated meter ;-) So if you had a 203FE/202FA/205FCC, they already offered the 50/2,8 FE (from the early 90s on). So it would have made no sense to offer an 50/4 CFE as well. Plus, the 50/2,8 was more expensive, so buyers had to chose the more expensive lens if they wanted auto exposure.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

The 50/4 CF FLE lens was very expensive when new. It could also be the case Hasselblad was keeping the lens somewhat more affordable by having a second manually operated ring.

What the heck?;
It's just money;saves you from spending it elsewhere

 

[rrunnertexas]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/18736302@N03/23771159002/in/dateposted-public/