Hasselblad 250mm or teleconverter?

[jools230575]

Evening all

Does anyone have any opinions on the following and what should be avoided?

Currently, I have a 50mm CFE lens, a 80mm CB lens and a 150mm CF lens. Sometimes the 150mm doesn't quite get me what I want, hence the question.

Ideally, I'd like the 250mm CF but funds are tight.

I'm aware of the Hassie converter but it's near enough the same as a 250mm.

Any thoughts on the Vivatar against the Hassie?

Thanks

Jools

[hasselbladfan]

Try the converter and you will notice which pictures were taken with and without. I feel it is not worth it.

At the current low prices of CF lenses (on Ebay), I would place some bets and try to get a real 250mm CF. You will never loose your money at the current rates.

[algrove]

+1, if you own a Hassy, forget tc's. They are never as good as the real thing.  In my opinion tc's are for photo emergencies and not for standard use on such a nice system.

[jools230575]

Thanks for those responses. They're very helpful!

I guess it's now a case of saving up!

Oh, and lastly. Just out of curiosity, would you add any more lenses to what I have? I know there is the 40mm but that is WAAAAAY to expensive.

[langier]

I shot film for many years with my Hasselblad. Since I had the 120 Makro Plannar, I thought I wanted the 250 for the length, but when I tried the 180, I was hooked...

However, I was still a bit "short" on my long lenses. So next I tried a Hasselblad 2xe converter. Worked like a charm and I could never see problems with the images.

Both the Mutar and the 2xe converters are sweat!

What I ended up using the the field was my 50 CF, 180 CF and then using my 2xe to add to the range. Though the lenses were now f/8 and slow, on a tripod even the 50 CF image quality at 100mm was more than adequate. Same for the 180 with the 2xe.

Using the 2xe and my lenses, I had a full-range of focal lengths from 50mm to 360mm and with plenty of image quality to boot! The main thing is to religiously use a tripod, cable release, and great technique so as not to degrade the image quality with vibration since I found that that was the main cause of image softness using the TC.

Later, I added the 1.4 PC-Mutar after getting a 40mm CF and had similar good-quality results, even on the longer lenses, though with them, I seldom used the shift. The 1.4 even worked well with both the 120 and 180mm!

If you do go for a teleconverter, don't scrimp! Get one of the Hasselblad converters and you won't be sorry plus the added benefit of using it with your other lenses.

However, if you find a great price on a CF lens, don't hesitate to latch on to it!

[jools230575]

Interesting. Thanks!

My longest lens is the 150mm. Using my Hassie, it is always on a tripod and NEVER handheld. I'm a landscaper working in low light and the thought of it being handheld is totally alien. Even my 5D Mark II is 99.9% stuck on a tripod.

And so a curious question. What teleconverters are available?

[Gigi]

This also depends on which TC. Someone did extensive testing on the Schneider TC for the Rollei lenses, and found the 1.4x TC to be very sharp, but found some loss in the 2x TC. I have used the 1.4x TC and noticed no degradation whatsoever on these lenses.... of course this is its just background info for your use. In general, tho, 1.4x TC do a better job of maintaining lens integrity than the 2x.

[jools230575]

Looking at the prices of both the 1.4 and 2x teleconverters, it's cheaper to get a 250mm lens!

I did discover the 1.4 mutar shifter though. That is so expensive though.

[John R Smith]

Jools

If what you really want is the 250mm Sonnar, then that is what you buy. The genuine Hasselblad 2x converter is the only one worth having, and it will cost you as much as a decent 250mm anyway. By the by - in my own experience, the 250mm is decent enough, but not quite as nice as the 150mm.

John

[jools230575]

Thanks John.

And John. Can i PM you? I have a question

[John R Smith]

Thanks John.

And John. Can i PM you? I have a question

Jools

Please do - I'll do my best to answer.

John

[pgmj]

Perhaps a C 250 can be found for less than a CF version? I'm not sure if it is available with T* coating, but if you use a hood you would do well enough in most situations with the single coated (chrome) version. The C and CF seem equal looking at the MTF charts.

[langier]

The later, mainly black, 250mm Sonnars did come as a T* version. IMO, the T* version is worth it since that coating handles flare and bright light sources much better than the older lenses.

The issue I have with older pre CF lenses is that parts are scarce and the shutters are not quite as durable. But if the price is right you'll be fine.