No use for 80mm after 55110 filters

[Beavis]

Does anyone not use their 80mm since they purchased the 55-110. Many Pentax 645N users never mount their 75mm f2.8 after purchasing the 45-85 f4.5. Any similar experiences with the 80 & 55-110 ? I guess I'm asking how good is the zoom compared to the 80mm.
2)I've allways used Hoya filters, 1 coat per side. I'm sure there is no noticable difference between a good brand like Hoya and Hassy when it comes to uv filters. Are they worth the extra $$$'s ? Thanks in advance.

 

[nickt]

Hi Anthony
Hard to believe but I have found the zoom to be very slightly sharper than the 80mm! The zoom is however a very heavy lens so I still like to use the 80mm when hand-holding and like having the extra stop and a half of light...

Nick-T

 

[simonpg]

Hi. I cannot speak about use of the Hassey primes after buying the zooms. However, with regard to the UV filter choice, I have a firm view that others may not fully agree with.
Why spend (ok, no other lens choices available on the Hassey) such an investment in a system and sensational optics only to add second rate glass to the front? Think about it - what passes through the first piece of glass has an impact on what the next optics in the chain will receive. I just would not dream of adding any poor quality uv filter to any of my Hassey or other lenses. Yes the options are limited and pricey, but it is only logical.
Yes, the difference noticed my very often be litte or none depending on what you shoot and how etc.. But at that critical time it will. The issue is much the same for the whole Hassey/Zeiss system you invested in - is it always different to say a Bronica SQA? Probably not.
Last week, I saw a guy buy a $4k Nikon DSLR and a $3k top end lens and when asked what UV he wanted - he said "the cheapest possible" !
Hoya makes good stuff but there are categories. I use the double sided multi-coated pro version. To keep the cost down (as we all want to do), I just negotiate harder rather than buy consumer versions. I also hunted around for very good used Hassey versions - KEH has them occasionally.
Finally, I suggest you avoid the trap of thinking of the uv as only a protector that may get broken anyway. It is more than a protector - yes if it gets damaged that is better than damaging the Zeiss front element or more, but the uv's role and affect is more significant.

 

[Beavis]

Good point NickT about the weight, the rep also says there is no noticable image quality difference between them. As I move very much photographing dogs I think the zoom will save me some movement and help get the shot I sell quicker. Been working out for years, time for it to pay off handling the zoom.
Simon, you explain it very clearly, I agree. With such a big jump in investment it only makes sense to choose hassy, they would not design a filter that compromises the image. I got caught up in all the multi coated hype from everyone trying to make us beleive camera/lens manufacturers can't produce a filter as good as them.

 

[ttlied]

Antony, I would no be too suprised if somebody told me that Hasselblad don't make the filters themselves, but that they are actually produced by someone else, e.g. Schneider (=B+W)...

 

[Beavis]

I went with the Blad UV-Sky, better constructed than other brands I have used.

 

[timc]

Hello to all,

I am at present about to dig deep into my pockets and buy a H1 for wedding work, up until this I have heard mixed views about this application and whether the camera is up to it, somebody take me out of my misery and point me in the right direction about the results they have had and films used with it

 

[colin]

Tim, I'm biased,but.............I would go for the Contax 645. I've had mine since they were originally introduced in 1998. Can't say enough positive things about it. I've tried the Hassy, just not my cup of tea!
Colin
ps. I use my C645 for weddings.