Medium Format Forum

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

Oh Lord, what have I done!

HSPluta

New Member
Last night I finally bit the bullet and bought myself the camera I have wanted for almost 40 years. I picked up a very decent condition 1985 500C/M in black. It came with both an A12 back and a WLF.

Now the big question, what lens to start with!

I am a hobbiest and will be using this camera primarily to shoot landscapes, cityscapes, floral ( macro ), and architecture. I have gotten spoiled in the last few years shooting through high quality zooms and really have not paid attention to what focal lengths I tend to use the most. I would guess 28mm - 80mm in 35mm format. Plus a lot of work with an 85mm prime and a set of extension tubes.

Who would like to make some recommendations?

Budget of course is always a factor.

Best regards, -Harry
 
Last night I finally bit the bullet and bought myself the camera I have wanted for almost 40 years. I picked up a very decent condition 1985 500C/M in black. It came with both an A12 back and a WLF.

Now the big question, what lens to start with!

I am a hobbiest and will be using this camera primarily to shoot landscapes, cityscapes, floral ( macro ), and architecture. I have gotten spoiled in the last few years shooting through high quality zooms and really have not paid attention to what focal lengths I tend to use the most. I would guess 28mm - 80mm in 35mm format. Plus a lot of work with an 85mm prime and a set of extension tubes.

Who would like to make some recommendations?

Budget of course is always a factor.

Best regards, -Harry

Get a Distagon 50mm. I bet you will love it. If budget allows get a CF50FLE, otherwise a CF50 or a C50 will do (in order of lowering the cost).

For makro, dunno, I am not a makro guy (at least not with the Blad).

Wilko
 
Now the big question, what lens to start with!

Who would like to make some recommendations?

Hi Harry,

Congratulations, you'll enjoy the 500.

As far as the lenses are concerned, there are two prominent lens
combinations (leaving the 120 Macro out for the moment)
1.) 50mm + 80mm + 150mm + 250mm
2.) 40mm + 60mm + 100mm + 180mm
Combination (2.) is more expensive than (1.)

So you need to do some research on what your needs are and what
the budget allows.

40mm is the widest angle you can get for the 500 and it is very useful
for architecture work.

The 60, 80 and 100 are good starter lenses IMO, personally I shot
more than two years with just the 80mm before buying any other lens.


Anyway, just my thoughts, at the end its a very personal decision.

Best Regards,
Ralf
 
My first 15 years with Hasselblad werre a 500cm, a 60mm and a 150mm.
90% pictures of landscape were taken with the 60mm
70% of portrait were with 150mm.

I never was happy with the 80mm.

The 50mm fle is a very good lens too. The 60mm is a small but excellent lens. If you take only one lens for a journey, the 60mm is the most versatile.
Old 60mm are the same as the last CFi in optical quality, old 50mm are not as good as the new 50mm FLE.
 
Be aware that the 120mm Makro does not focus very close to subjects, and is thus not a "makro lens" like you know them from 35mm SLRs. As I understand, it is called "makro" because it is optically optimized for close subjects.

If you expect to take photographs of insects etc. with the 120 you will be disappointed. I learned this the hard way.
 
To make t5hings even more difficult lenses for Hasselblad are available from 30 mm till 500 mm focal length.

It is not only a wide range of focal lengths but also a variety of applications for certain focal lengths:

Standard lens is 80 mm or 100 mm.
The 100 mm Planar is an exceptional lens with ultra low distortion and increased resolution compared with the 80 mm.

Most used WA is the 50 mm, the FLE versions are top of the cream.

For portraits 150 mm Sonnar is recommended.

The 180 has a suitable focal length but its increased contrast is not always an advantage.
A well known user of the forum says:
"You will have big problems with any female over the age of twelve by using the 180 for portraits"





This may help you to find your way in over 50 years of Carl Zeiss lenses produced for Hasselblad cameras:


icon1.gif
Difference between C/CF/CFE/CFi
The first generation lenses for the 500 series Hasselblad cameras were called "C" lenses after the name of the shutter : Compur.
The first C lenses were produced in 1956 a year before the 500C camera became available.
Starting in 1971 C lenses received an improved 6 layer coating called T*
All lenses are subcequently T* coated except superachromat versions.

C lenses were superceded by CF lenses in 1982 and later for some focal lengths.
The shutter was replaced by a Prontor one.
The F indicates these lenses can also be used with 200 series bodies that have a focal plane shutter.
To accomodate full functions of these cameras the Prontor shutter is not used when the lens is set to "F"
The lens stays open to allow viewing of the subject immediately after the picture is taken.
Winding the camera is not necessary. This is similar to any 35 mm SLR camera.

The CF series was improved in 1998.
Improved lenses were known as CFi models.
Improvements were: better anti reflection coating, different helicoid, better PC for flash or digital back and a new type mainspring to improve already very good reliability.

Some improved lenses also received data bus contacts for cameras of the 200 series that have built in light metering systems.
These lenses were known as CFE models.
Of course CFE lenses also function on 500 series bodies without the light measuring system.
Technically for 500 series bodies CFE and CFi lenses are the same.

To complicate matters some lenses are available now used as CF, CFE and CFi versions.

The 80 mm started life as a CF lens changed in 1998 into a CFE model and is now available as CFi lens.
Similar things happened to the 120 Makro Planar lens:
The lens started as CF changed over to CFi became a CFE and is now again available as CFi lens.
All CFE versions were dropped because the 200 series cameras were phased out in 2004.

For a user of a 500 series body there is no difference between a CFE or a CFi version.
Keep in mind the CF version is older and does not have the later improvements.
Still the CF is a very good lens.
The helicoid of the later lenses is ergonomically better although not everybody agrees on this.

Carl Zeiss also made an economy version of certain lenses.
These lenses are called CB and were available in four different focal lenghts: 60/80/120/160 mm.
Economy version as in 1700 euro against 1950 euro for the 80 mm lens.
Not a big difference and certainly not big enough to persuade buyers to buy CB lenses.
Production and supply of CB lenses stopped after a couple of years.


source: hasselbladinfo forum
 
Thanks so much for the input. So far it sounds like the 60mm might be about right to start. Adding a longer lens a little later. I see that there is a CB line of lenses as well as the C & CF lenses, are these as good as the others?

I wanted to ask another related question. In 35mm a fast lens is f2.8 or faster. I have a couple of primes that are f1.4. A good fast lens is great for throwing the background out of focus when run wide open. I am intrested in this more for portrait shooting then macro ( as using extension tubes or bellows reduce the depth of field quite nicely ).

I am noticing that the Hasselblad, and for that matter all MF, lenses seem quite a bit slower. What is considered a fast lens that will allow good control of the background.

Thanks for answering the new guy questions!
-Harry
 
Hasselblad dsigned a special series cameras and lenses for those who are interested in faster lenses.
These 2000 and 200 series bodies have a focal plane shutter.
The lenses do not have a shutter which allows a construction that makes the lens one or even two stops faster.

Users of 500 series cameras are quite happy with F4 for WA and longer lenses.
The 80 mm is F2.8 the 100 mm is F3.5

Please note the 150 Sonnar with F4 means DOF is limited and quite good for portraits.
Use of the 110mm F2 lens for portraits at full aperture means nose and ears are OOF when focused on the eyes.
The 110 F2 lens is one from the range for focal plane shutter bodies and can not be used with 500 series cameras.
 
I am a hobbiest and will be using this camera primarily to shoot landscapes, cityscapes, floral ( macro ), and architecture. I have gotten spoiled in the last few years shooting through high quality zooms and really have not paid attention to what focal lengths I tend to use the most. I would guess 28mm - 80mm in 35mm format. Plus a lot of work with an 85mm prime and a set of extension tubes.

I shoot landscapes and architecture. I have the 38mm [SWC], 50mm, 80mm, 150mm, 250mm lenses and the extension tubes. The least used lens is the 150mm.

The equivalence to 35mm when comparing the width of the Hasselblad to the width of the 35mm is approximately:
38mm => 24mm the FOV is close enough to the 40mm lens for this comparison.
50mm => 32mm
60mm => 38mm
80mm => 50mm
150mm => 95mm
250mm => 160mm

Notice that the 60mm is like the too narrow a wide angle of the 35mm lens only worse. The 60mm is just too close to the 80mm lens. Since you like to take portraits, you would probably be happy with the 150mm lens.

Steve
 
Harry

Whilst all the foregoing is undoubtedly good advice, may I just add a counter argument here for the moment. I have an extensive V-system kit, with two bodies, seven lenses, God knows how many film backs, prisms, hoods, etc etc. Before the 'blad I shot film for years with a Rollei 2.8F. Now then, the lens that everyone tends to disregard or overlook is the good old 80mm 2.8 Planar. This was standard issue with the basic 500 cameras for many years with very good reason. It is the fastest lens in the line up, so you have the brightest and best image on your screen to focus with. It is the lightest and most compact, so just great for hand-held shooting on a long country walk. The angle of view is close to the way the human eye naturally sees things, which makes for easy composition. And the 80mm from the C-series onwards is one of the sharpest and most punchy in the range. The MTF charts may not look as clean as the 100mm or whatever, but in practice a good 80mm is great not just at infinity but close up too, which you certainly can't say for the C-series wideangles. The 80mm Planar was a classic on the old Rolleis, a classic on the 500C, and it is just as good today.

So don't overlook the "standard" lens in your deliberations. For true macro work on the 500, you will need the bellows and the 135mm. This will do insects, postage stamps and suchlike, if that's what you want. For normal close-ups (down to 1:5 ratio) the 120mm S-Planar is an absolutely stunning lens, corrected specifically for the near-field. The wideangles are, I am afraid, the weakest in the Zeiss range for Hasselblad. The old C-series 50mm and 60mm are OK at 20ft to infinity, but close-up they are pretty grim. The CF series with floating lens elements are better if you can afford them. The ancient C-series 40mm is the size of a funeral urn and about as useful. For portraits, as everyone has said, the 150mm Sonnar is the business and the old 150mm C-series lenses are just as good as the latest CFs in my opinion. So you can save a bit of money there.

Have some fun with it

John
 
Bear in mind that you may want to get a CFV digital back at some time in the future, where there is a crop factor of 1.5, making your wide angle lens less of a wide angle, also you may want to get a 200 series camera with the focal plane shutter and TTL metering, in which case having a CFE lens with the electronic contacts is a real advantage. Unfortunately CFE variants are more expensive. I don't like having lots of lenses, so at the moment I have an 80mm CFE and a 40mm CFE, the latter being my "standard" lens.
 
I shoot mostly landscapes, though some "cityscape". I use the F series exclusively since I have more need for the higher speed of the 200/2000 bodies (goes up to 1/2000th) and the lenses are usually one stop brighter and many times focus closer than the corresponding shutter lenses.

If choice of one lens I usually take my 50 F2.8 (focuses to 32cm!!!) or my 80 f2.8 normal lens. I also very often use my 150 mm f2.8 for landscapes or in a city equally to what I used to do with an 85mm (for 35mm cameras). The 250 F4 is also a nice lens which converts to a 500 f8 with a converter. These are my lenses. For macro I use a bellows with the 80 or 50 mm lens (there is of course the dedicated 135 mm bellows lens).

All this said they are nice to use on the camera due to their larger aperture making focusing easier.

Beware though that weight might be an issue if to much equipment is brought outdoors.

Enjoy your hasselblad. Its addictive to use these cameras!!!
 
Beware though that weight might be an issue if to much equipment is brought outdoors.

Enjoy your hasselblad. Its addictive to use these cameras!!!

Weight?
Who cares about weigth?
The 50 mm F 2.8 is only 1200 grs, old version, or a little over 1000 grs later version.
 
Again I would like to thank everyone for their suggestions. I just checked with the local Helix Photo and their rates for lense rentals are about $20us a day. Once my body is delivered I am going to rent a few of the suggested lenses and go for a bit of a walk-about to size them up.

I will post back in a couple of weeks with my results.

Best regards,
Harry
 
Weight?
Who cares about weigth?
The 50 mm F 2.8 is only 1200 grs, old version, or a little over 1000 grs later version.

Yea wieight... For this reason I have a Berghaus Atlas backpack good for 110l and heavy weights. Surely needed when I'll pack down my whole family and Hasselblad stuff. I recommend this photo bag for all users, particularly those who do not want to part with anything in case an opportunity to use your entire range of equipment. This type of backpack was also ussed by special forces in several West European countries - so your Hasselblad should be a piece of a cake in it.

I must admit though that gotten married and having children has weakend me somewhat and take a selection nowadays of stuff. To my defense is that while backpacking with tent and other things one need to feed the family. So food must also be brought - for half a week this amounts to a little weight. You all know that a hungry family makes for poor photography - your concerns are turned elsewere.


Cheers,

polarcircle
 
To my defense is that while backpacking with tent and other things one need to feed the family.

Hm, I always thought the concept behind marriage was that you no longer had to carry your kit but that it would be carried for you.... ?

:confused:

Wilko
 
There has been a lot of good advice here. I would start with just one lens and add the others step by step. A 3,5/60 or 2,8/80 mm lens is a good choice, especially as their optical designs have not changed during my lifetime. So not too much money is needed for a start. When you buy one of these lenses, look out for good condition which is more important than age. I took the first few thousend shots with my Hasselblad 500C/M and a 80 mm lens (it took quite some years before I could afford a 50 mm).

Ulrik
 
Hassey lenses

I have the old 80mm C T* and it is very sharp. Also I have the old 120 S Planar and it is magnificent. Recently I acquired a mint 50mm CFE Distagon and again it is very sharp. I use those on a ten year old 503CW with winder and on that rig I hung a Phase One P25+. This is an awesome combination.

As far as the speed of the lenses, you must remember that MF has less DOF by nature and the lenses don't need to be as fast as those of 35mm. I use the 120mm S Planar for Portraits (with a tiffen black mist) and at F5.6 I can't really pull nose to ear like I want so I stop down a bit.

Check out the lenses for 4x5 (5x4 if you are British) and you will notice that a "fast" lens is F5.6. My Fujinon A 360mm is f11 wide open I believe, but so sharp it hurts. :)

BC
 
Back
Top