hassy 80mm lens recommendation
I'm looking to buy a 80mm lens for my hasselblad (i have a 50mm) and i've noticed on KEH that the Hasselblad 80 F2.8 F T*(200/2000 SERIES) (B50) is about half as much as the other versions in the same condition. Anyone know this lens? Are the other ones worth the extra money?
I don't think the 2000 series have a shutter in the lens.
Depends, getting an F series optic, it means you will need a focal plane device, as (like Mike said) there's no shutter or shutter speed ring on them.
The focusing ring is at the front, the aperture one at the rear, this ring operates separate from the shuter speed one on the body, but a cross-coupling button on the lens, engages both to keep the EV values.
The advantages over the CF series I use, are speed and closer focus ability and pretty much that's it, if I remember correctly, maybe some other hasselblad users drop by and point something I've missed.
PS- As for the 200 series you mentioned on the thread title, well, they will mount, but no databus is present on them, therefore, you're unable to take full performance out of your 200 series camera.
Thanks guys! i had no idea about the shutter.
Not quite missed, but...
Originally Posted by André E.C.
If when mentioning "speed" you mean to say that the F lens has a larger maximum aperture, you have not missed something, but instead overstated the case.
All Hasselblad 80 mm lenses are f/2.8.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
The guys are correct. The 200/2000 series Hasselblads used focal plane shutters in the body, so the lenses were much cheaper to produce. It also meant they were usually "faster" because there were no mechanical restrictions forced by a shutter within the lens. The 500's use the lenses with shutters, and therefore cost more. Be careful what you buy as they may be the wrong type.
The 100mm C lens may be a better choice, if you have the option, the 80mm is a wide angle on 6x6 & requires more optical resource. If you look at the Zeiss site the 100mm kills the 80mm.
But the 100mm may be too narrow, for you.
Originally Posted by Xmas
Last edited by John Koehrer; 12-08-2008 at 11:27 AM. Click to view previous post history.
Heavily sedated for your protection.
The normal way of describing a normal lens is to measure the diagonal of the negative. In 24x36mm it's about 43mm and on a Hassy it's 78mm. So even though an 80mm on a Hassy would translate into about 44mm, it's absolutely not a wideangle.
What also matters is the rectangular shape of e.g. 35mm and the square format of 6x6 (which is really 55x55mm). Now, comparing 6x4.5 with 24x36 you will find that the 80mm gives almost exactly the same ratio as a 50mm on 24x36.
The 100mm is a very nice lens, there's no doubt about that. Apart from the "extra" 20mm, it's a bit special in that it's optimized at the very infinity. (It was constructed for NASA.) So for e.g. far landscape photography it's of course at its best. But saying that the 100 "kills" the 80mm isn't true. If so, I would believe that Zeiss would have reconstructed the 80mm a long long time ago, instead of producing the very same lens from the fifties up until now.
For myself I wouldn't mind having a 100mm I would personally rather go for a 110mm which suits my needs and personal taste better. I know that given a good tripod and some nice light, I can still produce very large prints from the 110.