Hasselblad 40mm f/4 Distagon versions

[Brian Hirschfeld]

Hello,

I am looking to upgrade my 503CW lens kit. Currently I have the 80mm CF, and the 120mm CFi and I am looking to get an 80mm CFE (purely for aesthetic and focusing reasons), and the 50mm f/4 CFi which rounds out to a nice wide-angle. I am also considering picking up a 40mm Distagon. I plan to shoot these lenses almost exclusively with black and white film and possibly some color film. I have no plans to buy or rent a digital back for this system, so if I were to purchase a 40mm (and thoughts on 40mm as a 6x6 focal length are welcome) would I notice any substantial differences between, the C, CF, CF T* FLE, and CFi (CFe?) versions of this lens for shooting film? Thanks,

Best,
BH

[MrSmith]

i had (still have but dont use) the FLE floating element version and used to shoot a lot of jobs on in plus a fair bit of black and white, it was a good lens and i didn't feel it was inferior in quality to the 80 and 120 i also used, a colleague had the older non floating version and when he went digital he felt the need to upgrade to FLE which he still uses with a p45. a lot of people seemed to buy the 50 and rent the 40 when they needed it as a was an expensive lens in the u.k.
no idea what the latest incarnation is like on film though.

[langier]

The CF40 FLE and newer is the way to go.

I think the order that Hasselblad released them started with the origianl 40mm C (compur or combo-I think) that the first and largest physically of all the 40mms lenses. So-so performer as I recall, not even close to the 38 Biogon. The FLE is a modern redesign and has the T* coating that makes this lens superb (and in the ballpark as the 38mm) along with the close-focusing adjustment to get even more IQ from this design. Newer versions (CFi) add some electronic connections, maybe some updated shutter (spring) components, cosmetics and perhaps a bit different glass (a couple of lenses went lead-free and Hasselblad crowed about this "Ecoglass"), but not much else if I remember properly. The T* coatings began at the end of the C lens series sometime in the 1970s or early 1980s.

The key thing with the "V" lenses is getting any of the wonderful Zeiss lenses with the T* coating for the most crisp image quality and least flare. You also stand a better chance of getting your lens repaired with these more durable (and accurate) shutters since the CF and newer lenses came with the updated Prontor shutters and modern lubes.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

There is late version of the Distagon 40 called IF CFE, I don't own it but it seems from the MTF curves it is much better than the older FLE-s. I have a CF FLE and I am pretty sure the IF version is better, but it is rare and expensive.


Here are data sheets for all V series Zeiss lenses: http://www.hasselbladhistorical.eu/HW/HWLds.aspx

Best regards
Erik

Hello,

I am looking to upgrade my 503CW lens kit. Currently I have the 80mm CF, and the 120mm CFi and I am looking to get an 80mm CFE (purely for aesthetic and focusing reasons), and the 50mm f/4 CFi which rounds out to a nice wide-angle. I am also considering picking up a 40mm Distagon. I plan to shoot these lenses almost exclusively with black and white film and possibly some color film. I have no plans to buy or rent a digital back for this system, so if I were to purchase a 40mm (and thoughts on 40mm as a 6x6 focal length are welcome) would I notice any substantial differences between, the C, CF, CF T* FLE, and CFi (CFe?) versions of this lens for shooting film? Thanks,

Best,
BH

[Paul Ozzello]

Your best bet is the CF/Cfi 40 FLE, the IF version while being incredibly sharp (and the better option for digital) has some moustache distortion that is hard to remove. A 'better' alternative to the 40 FLE is a 903 SWC - but it's not as user friendly.

[ErikKaffehr]

Here are a couple of samples from my Distagon 40 CF FLE

http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDJourney/RawImages/Samples2/20130801-CF043616.jpg

http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDJourney/RawImages/Samples3/20130907-CF044069.jpg

http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDJourney/RawImages/Samples3/20130831-CF044055.jpg

There are opinions that I am not making the best of my equipment, but this is about what I achieve. I have not seen many raw images from the Distagon 40, except my own, so I cannot judge.

Raw images are here:
http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDJourney/RawImages/Samples2/20130801-CF043616.iiq

http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDJourney/RawImages/Samples3/20130907-CF044069.iiq

http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDJourney/RawImages/Samples3/20130831-CF044055.iiq

The CF 40 FLE has a few bad problems, in my view. There is a hefty curvature of field, edges bending inward, also chromatic aberration is complex and LR5 is not really good fixing it, Capture One makes a better job on that.

The field curvature can sometimes help, as it often extends depth into the foreground.

I often use this lens at f/11 to f/16, but the center is very sharp at f/8. The enclosed MTF data (from Zeiss) shows how the lens performs.

Best regards
Erik