Buying Hasselblad lenses?

[spotmeter]

Just received my CFV-50 back for my 501CM and am finding the quality of the images takes me back to my Velvia days.

I tested my four lenses (50,80,150 and 250) and found the 80 and 150 are stellar from center to corner.

But the 50 is only useable at f16 and 22, and the 250 has terrible CA in the corners, and even some in the center.

I want to replace the latter two lenses. I wonder if it is better to purchase a lens with a later serial number? Did Zeiss generally improve their Hasselblad lenses over time?

The 50 and 250 serial numbers start with 67. The much better 80 and 150 start with 72 and 75.

I see the newest lenses have serial numbers of 88 and 89.

Since the back is so good, I am also looking at getting the 60, 100 and 120.

Also wondering if the 250 SA is a better choice than the 250. Is excessive CA inherent in this lens? Or do I just have a bad copy?

Finally, I see some lenses are available in CFE and CFi. Is the CFi design any better?

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

My sample of the 50/4 is OK.

You can compare Zeiss data here: http://www.hasselbladhistorical.eu/HW/HWLds.aspx

Lightroom and Capture One can remove lateral chromatic aberration 'automagically' by checking a checkbox.

Best regards
Erik

[spotmeter]

What are the first two serial numbers of your 50mm?

Which version of the lens do you have?

[Chris Livsey]

No issues with a 50mm FLE here Serial 704 on P20.

You are aware that serial numbers are a poor guide to actual year?
The earlier lenses are date marked as follows:
C Lenses
You can tell the age of C and C T* lenses from the three or four digit code marked in red on the lens rear barrel. It can be found by focusing the lens to its closest focusing setting and, from the rear, looking inside the barrel.
The last two numbers indicate the month and the remaining one or two numbers indicate the year when 1957 has been added to it.
Therefore a lens with the code 2104 would have been manufactured in April 1978.

CF Lenses
The newer CF lenses use a different code system which is found in the same location as the C lenses and is usually in red.
It consists of a one letter and two number code. The letter represents the month with "A" being January "B" February etc. And the following two numbers are the last two digits of the year in reverse.
Therefore a lens with the code H98 would have been manufactured in August 1989.

You may find lenses with more than one code. I understand if returned to the factory for major work, element replacement for example, the work date code would be added.

Later lenses do not have the date code and I am not personally aware when this changed eg my 120mm makro planar is a CFi with no date code, serial 88.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

My serial number is 7094214

Here are some 45/4 images:

http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDJourney/RawImages/MFDB_VS_DSLR/Forsmark3_20130626-CF043211.jpg

http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDJourney/RawImages/MFDB_VS_DSLR2/Brahe_20130907-CF044064.jpg

The impression I have is that the lenses are quite similar between generations. Two exceptions I am aware of are the 100/3.5 and 40/4 CFE IF, both of those lenses are probably excellent performers. I have the 40/4 CFE (non IF), 50/4 FLE, 80/2.8 CFE, 120/4 CF and the 150/4 CF.

Best regards
Erik

What are the first two serial numbers of your 50mm?

Which version of the lens do you have?

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

The 120/4 has significant field curvature.

http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDJourney/Lenses/SonnarVSPlanar.html

Some more info:
http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/76-my-medium-format-digital-journey?start=14

Best regards
Erik

Just received my CFV-50 back for my 501CM and am finding the quality of the images takes me back to my Velvia days.

I tested my four lenses (50,80,150 and 250) and found the 80 and 150 are stellar from center to corner.

But the 50 is only useable at f16 and 22, and the 250 has terrible CA in the corners, and even some in the center.

I want to replace the latter two lenses. I wonder if it is better to purchase a lens with a later serial number? Did Zeiss generally improve their Hasselblad lenses over time?

The 50 and 250 serial numbers start with 67. The much better 80 and 150 start with 72 and 75.

I see the newest lenses have serial numbers of 88 and 89.

Since the back is so good, I am also looking at getting the 60, 100 and 120.

Also wondering if the 250 SA is a better choice than the 250. Is excessive CA inherent in this lens? Or do I just have a bad copy?

Finally, I see some lenses are available in CFE and CFi. Is the CFi design any better?

[Martin Wouterlood]

Hi,

The 120/4 has significant field curvature.

Best regards
Erik

The mtf literature from Zeiss states:

"This is the must-have lens for every photographer doing serious
close-up work. We believe that no studio photographer
specialised in advertising, product, food, technical or industrial
photography can really do without it. Combined with a motorized
Hasselblad SLR or the Hasselblad FlexBody for creative
selective tilting of the sharpness zone, the Makro-Planar® T*
4/120 CFE lens is the compact workhorse lens for day-to-day
studio work - be it analog or digital.
Optically well-designed makro-lenses like the Makro-Planar® T*
4/120 CFE lens differ from other lenses in two ways.
First: Their performance is optimized for subjects like the one
you’re just looking at: A flat page slightly larger than a human
head with intricate detail plus color. Which means that the image
quality and light distribution is extremely good, even in the
corners and even at full aperture. This is exactly what is needed
for serious professional copy work of subjects that are smaller
than the ones ideally photographed with the Carl
Zeiss Planar® T* 3,5/100 CFi lens, e. g. delicate drawings (so
the two lenses complement each other very well in the hands of a
demanding photographer).
Second: A basic type of lens design is chosen that maintains its
performance characteristics very constantly on a high level over a
wide range of reduction ratios or distances.
Like from half life-size (1:2) to infinity, in the case of the
Makro-Planar® T* 4/120 CFE lens.
It is based on the Carl Zeiss Planar® lens design type, which
offers very good close-up potential and is therefore also chosen
as the basis for the ultra high resolution Carl Zeiss S-Planar®
lenses for the micro-lithography, which are - in their new version -
called Starlith, the most sophisticated lenses of our day.
Although the Makro-Planar® T* 4/120 CFE lens can and should
be used for subjects as small as postcards, the built in focussing
helicoil allowes only to focus down to a single page. This has
been done for safety reasons: Since most of the Hasselblad SLR
cameras in use with professional photographers today do not
incorporate TTL exposure metering, we believe that the lens
should not easily focus down to such reduction ratios without
warning, where exposure compensation is absolutely unavoidable
for professional results. Adding an extension ring for closer
focussing should remind the photographer to apply the
necessary compensation.
The CFE version of the Makro-Planar® T* 4/120 lens allows for
fully automatic compensation of exposure in extreme close-up
photography provided a Hasselblad camera with built-in TTL
exposure meter is used.
Preferred use: Close-ups of all kind, products, industrial,
documentation, copy work, digital photography"

It looks like here it is supposed to be very flat field, but only for close distances, and that is likely why the infinity curves show such a drop towards the edges...otherwise, it has been described by Zeiss personnel as being better chromatically corrected than most other makers' apo designs, and in my experience (nowhere as much as many of you though, no doubt) is a really nice piece of glass...just building on your comment and trying to give a more comprehensive idea of this lens, as many people dismiss it out of hand.
Also, if I remember correctly, Leica showcased their initial S camera with this lens before they created their own S lenses.
Hope this helps.
Martin

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Thanks! I should have been more specific.

The two articles I point to discuss this in some detail. Zeiss actually publishes two sets of MTF curves, one set is for infinity (bad) another for close up (good).

Stopping down to f/11 makes the 120/4 good at infinity. Another point, if you focus on a point, it will be sharp.

I use my 120/4 a lot.

Best regards
Erik

It looks like here it is supposed to be very flat field, but only for close distances, and that is likely why the infinity curves show such a drop towards the edges...otherwise, it has been described by Zeiss personnel as being better chromatically corrected than most other makers' apo designs, and in my experience (nowhere as much as many of you though, no doubt) is a really nice piece of glass...just building on your comment and trying to give a more comprehensive idea of this lens, as many people dismiss it out of hand.
Also, if I remember correctly, Leica showcased their initial S camera with this lens before they created their own S lenses.
Hope this helps.
Martin

[Chris Livsey]

Also wondering if the 250 SA is a better choice than the 250. Is excessive CA inherent in this lens? Or do I just have a bad copy?

I don't own either but that is not going to stop me commenting in the great tradition of forums 

The SA is a special case. It is corrected outside the normal visible light spectrum, particularly in the near UV region it is not T* multicoated but has an "ordinary" coating. Whilst its performance on film is outstanding before purchasing, given the premium it commands, I would investigate how it performs with digital sensors given their filtration and sensitivities. It may be passing more non visible light is not an advantage in the digital world. It is becoming apparent as sensors develop that integration between the lens and sensor, regarding the sensor as part of the optical chain (with its filters and reflections) is increasingly important. eg the A7r with the native Zeiss lens outperforms "better" glass with the sensor it was designed for.