Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,483   Posts: 1,571,190   Online: 1105
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    113
    Looking at the KEH 80mm lenses, the one you linked to is the one that caught my eye. I have a non-T* 80mm I've always been happy with, but I've also spent years wondering if a T* version wouldn't be "better". Getting a T* will save you wondering.

    I'd love to have a 100mm, as a couple of folks recommend, but going by KEH prices, it is nearly twice the price of an 80mm for similar condition. Maybe someday I'll get one and find out it is worth the extra money, but the price difference equals a lot of film.

    Len

  2. #12
    Dave Swinnard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Parksville, BC Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    254
    If you plan on getting, at some point, the Bay50, 60, 0r 70 filters will allow the use of the fine Hasselblad compendium lens shade whereas a threaded filter with a stepping ring won't. Don't know if it matter to you but it's something to consider.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    161
    Images
    5
    Please also bear in mind the older C series of glass has a shutter for which parts are increasingly difficult and expensive to service. Parts are plentiful for the later series.
    Whilst optical formulae have remained constant the coatings and later the internal reflection finishes have changed and improved.
    If you examine the MTF graphs the difference between the 80 and the 100 is significant. As others have stated though what do you want to shoot? As a wide shooter, well wider, say 35mm lens on the 35mm format I find the 80/100 a touch long and would prefer the 60 or 50. Where are coming from? If you are a 50 shooter then fine. that decision is probably more important than worrying about a coating or finish.
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/red_eyes_man/

    Photographer not a job description - a diagnosis.

  4. #14
    Douglas Fairbank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Bushey, UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    60
    I would like to ad some info to this thread. There is no reason the servicing of the older C lenses should be more expensive than the CF etc series, my charges are the same for both lenses. While it is true that many parts are no longer available that rarely affects servicing, furthermore parts like shutter blades are the same for C and some CF models. I would agree that later coatings (T*) improved the performance and better internal blacking also gave better contrast so later lenses can be more desirable.

    Douglas Fairbank
    www.classicv.co.uk

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Live Free or Die
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,516
    Images
    90
    The CF and other newer series lenses have a rubberized focusing collar, where on the C lenses the focus collar is narrower and all metal. On the C lenses the f/stop ring and shutter speed ring are linked and you press a lever to move them independently. The CF and newer lenses work the other way around, you can lock them together if you want, but they are independent otherwise. There are plusses and minuses for each arrangement. The linking is nice if you want to make a quick change to get a better shutter speed, or DOF change without changing your exposure.
    OTH, when the light changes, the linking can get in your way a bit, but once you're used to the operation it's not a big deal.

    The C lenses are found in single-coated and multi-coated versions, the Multi-coated ones have the T* designation, and the most common ones are black. Mechanically the C lenses are all the same.

    If you plan on mostly using the large filters you already have, adaptor rings are plentiful and you can adapt either series easily. The only issue I'd think, with doing that, would be that the standard lens hoods for either lens wouldn't work with such large filters, though with something like a 77mm you could probably just hold it in front of the hood.

    The other difference is that the CF lenses don't have a self-timer for releasing the shutter.

    If you want to save a bit of money, my first choice would be a C series T*. Otherwise, doing things like adapting your filters will be slightly easier with the larger CF series lenses, and most people find the ergonomics of the CF's a little better.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    132
    C and CT* lenses, in my opinion, both look and feel better than the later variants. They are cheaper, but are also more likely to require a CLA, so make sure you are getting a good deal ($50 bucks more for a CF is probably a sound investment). CF and later lenses are faster to use (really only matters when using handheld). Also, if you use a flash, the PC connectors hold better and are a little more reliable (in my experience). Optically, sample variation from lens to lens is going to be a larger factor than any additional coatings, etc.

    The prices on the C/CT* 80s on Keh seem a bit high. I would opt for the later model at that price, or prowl around the classifieds here and ebay to try and get a cheaper C/CT* lens. For what it's worth, I prefer the 60mm. Haven't had the privilege of shooting with a 100mm yet.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    46
    As I generally shoot with a 50mm in 35mm, and I like the view the 80mm on my Yashica TLR(that I need to sell to be able to afford the Hasselblad) gives, I think the 80mm lens is right for me. So its between the CT* and CF, and I guess I'll make a decision when I get the cash.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    132
    No, of course-- to each their own! The 80mm is an excellent lens and I am sure you'll be happy with any iteration of it. One of my primary reasons for getting a MF SLR was to use odd focal lengths which are unobtainable with fixed lens cameras (my absolute favorite lens for the system is the 120mm).

    Hang onto the Yashica if you can though; sometimes it's very nice to have a TLR as they are quite a bit more compact and easier to hand hold (as well as quiet, unlike the satisfyingly loud Hasselblad).

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    161
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Douglas Fairbank View Post
    I would like to ad some info to this thread. There is no reason the servicing of the older C lenses should be more expensive than the CF etc series, my charges are the same for both lenses. While it is true that many parts are no longer available that rarely affects servicing, furthermore parts like shutter blades are the same for C and some CF models. I would agree that later coatings (T*) improved the performance and better internal blacking also gave better contrast so later lenses can be more desirable.
    As the OP is USA based I was basing remarks on cost on the situation over there eg. http://www.gilghitelman.com/repair.html "* Add $50 for older C lenses"
    No connection or experience as I am this side of the pond and would be availing myself of your services, should the need arise.

    I wonder if you could, from your experience of lenses in a quantity most of us cannot even approach, please comment on the post above " Optically, sample variation from lens to lens is going to be a larger factor than any additional coatings, etc.".
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/red_eyes_man/

    Photographer not a job description - a diagnosis.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    132
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Livsey View Post
    I wonder if you could, from your experience of lenses in a quantity most of us cannot even approach, please comment on the post above " Optically, sample variation from lens to lens is going to be a larger factor than any additional coatings, etc.".
    Hi Chris,

    I mean that the differences between any two (or three, or four, or five) Hasselblad 80mms is going to be as great or great than the difference between a C and a CF. Meaning, they are all optically identical in design, and the image quality is going to be more effected by the individual lens than it is by the series it is placed in. I think it's commonly accepted that there is going to be sample variation within any lens manufacture, one doesn't need to have used 100 of the same lens to know that. Part of the reason people pay more for Zeiss/Leica/etc. is that, in theory, this variation is less than with another brand due to the standards of manufacture. Once the lens leaves the factory, of course, you have no idea what's been done to it. A perfectly cared for C is likely to be better than a CFi that is been dropped several times and never serviced. Mainly, I was just trying to say not to worry to much about which series a lens is made in, and not to get too caught up in the changes in coating which, from what I have read, are mostly Zeiss marketing. Get the lens that fits your budget and feels best in your hand (and if you are worried about the single coating on the C lenses, just put a hood on them!).

    Also, I do not believe that most repairmen charge differences based on C vs. CF lenses, but ask around in that case.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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