Next move, deciding what to add for my Hasselblad...
It's time to add a wide to my 501CM. I have an 80, I have a 250, I just need something wide.
I think a 50 would be a nice addition, as the 40 looks too bulky and probably too wide for everyday use (I'll use it for street and travel), plus I can see me buying a SWCM or XPan in 18-24 months for ultra-wide purposes.
What are the differences between the various 50 models? I have found that I can get either of (all in excellent condition):
1. CT* for £250-300
2. CF for £400-500 (which I've read is a CT* with the CF style body...?)
3. CF FLE for £600-700 (which I've read is a big improvement)
4. CFi FLE for £900-1000 (which I've read is an even better lens)
My main concern with the CF/CFi FLE lenses is that knowing me, I'll probably end up never setting the FLE ring to what it should be. Is that going to affect the performance negatively? I mean, if a FLE is a big improvement only if the FLE ring is used and ends up actually being worse than a CT/CF if the FLE ring is not adjusted properly, not much point in it!
The other thing is, given the prices above, I'm tempted to skip the CF versions. The plain CF is more money vs the CT* for no improvement (if my assumptions are correct) whereas if I'm paying CF FLE money I might as well go for a CFi and have added peace of mind (for the newer lens) and the modern body/controls. So it kind of looks like CT* vs CFi. Not a usual comparison perhaps. The CFi is still within budget but £300 vs £900 is a lot of film and processing. In fact, it is a weekend on the Eurostar to Paris, which is probably better use of the money...hmmmm.
I guess what I'm trying to say is, is the CT* so much worse than the CFi for street/travel use, where corner sharpness may not be the most important aspect of my photos?
Anyway, thanks for any help!
hi, both lens types are great, but the FLE is used for close up,
read this thread and it will answear your questions about it.
Ok great, thanks for that link. So my question is then:
if I don't set the FLE ring on a FLE lens (say I leave it to infinity or whatever settings it has), is the performance at my regular distances (say 2-20m) affected to the point of the result of a FLE lens with the wrong FLE setting being worse than the plain CT*/CF?
By the way, I'm not the kind of person that sits down splitting hairs and checking negatives with a loupe. So if we're just splitting hairs here then no worries.
I love my 50mm Distagon. My only complaint is that it starts to vignette in the corners if I put a 67mm filter on it using a Hasselblad Bay 60/67mm ring. My solution probably will be to use a step-up ring to a larger filter. I'm not sure, but the design of the FLE model may reduce or eliminate this problem.
I have the CF 50mm lens. I am happy with it. If I need to focus closer up, I use an extention tube. The cost of the CF plus the extention tube is less than a CFE.
Gee, and no snarky attacks from QG!
Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!
Nothing beats a great piece of glass!
I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
As far as I´m informed, it does not make too much a difference whether the FLE-ring is used for closer distances or not, that´s why Zeiss decided to drop the FLE in their current "Classic ZV" series for Hasselblad. Some time ago there was a discussion over there on photo.net and Dr. Kornelius Fleischer, a Zeiss employee, said that they decided so because photographers often tended to forget adjusting the FLE-ring and because the gain in resolution for close-ups was quite small.