Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,660   Posts: 1,481,567   Online: 891
      
Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    London
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    268

    150mm CF or 160mm CB for Hasselblad...

    So I want to buy a 150-ish mm lens and for my current budget I can get a 150CF or a 160CB. The end use is travel, portraits handheld and for close-ups with tubes. Any particular reason why I should pick one over the other? I have a 80CB and am very happy with it so I don't have any issues with getting a CB lens.

    As far as I can tell, besides the insignificant focal length and aperture differences, the 160CB is perhaps a bit lighter, will have the easier focusing that the newer lenses have and...that's about it? I intend to use the lens handheld and mostly wide open. I'm leaning towards the 160CB simply because it is newer.

    Is there something I'm missing?

    On the other hand...an old 150CT* is half the money of either of those lenses...

    Thanks for any opinions!
    Last edited by film_man; 01-22-2012 at 12:44 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    500ELX, 80CB
    RB67 SD, 65KL, 90KL, 127KL, 250KL
    Nikonos V, 35/2.5

  2. #2
    Olof B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6
    Images
    1
    I would also had gone for the CB160.
    For the reasons that you have mention.
    "and if you do it wrong, you'll end up with lager"

  3. #3
    DanielStone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,933
    Images
    1
    My 150CF is blazingly sharp. And its my #1 go-to lens when I use my Hasselblad kit.

    Of course "blazingly sharp" is when its correctly focused

    and the cost(low if you buy right) of entry with a 150CF is pretty darn tempting. I'm not sure what a 160CB would go for, but since its newer, I'd imagine it'd go for more $$$ than the CF, even one in good condition.

    -Dan

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    London
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    268
    Well the cost is £200-300 for a CT, £400-500 for a CF and I found a couple of mint 160CBs for £500-600. The newest 150CFi ones are anything from £800 to £1200.
    500ELX, 80CB
    RB67 SD, 65KL, 90KL, 127KL, 250KL
    Nikonos V, 35/2.5

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,786
    Quote Originally Posted by DanielStone View Post
    My 150CF is blazingly sharp. And its my #1 go-to lens when I use my Hasselblad kit.

    Of course "blazingly sharp" is when its correctly focused
    ditto

  6. #6
    Slixtiesix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    680
    Images
    21
    Have a look at this test, the 160mm seems no bad lens at all. I would prefer the 160CB over the 150CT* just because the latter is m u c h older and you won´t know whether the shutterspeed are still correct. But I don´t know about macro abilities. On the other hand, the 120/4 is also a very nice lens for portraiture and close ups, and it is light and compact as well.

    http://www.olegnovikov.com/technical...vscfe180.shtml



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin