The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Hasselblad 180/4 with teleconverter and CFV

nameBrandon

Active member
I'm heading to Colorado in a few weeks and picked up a 180/4 CF that I wanted to pair with a tele-converter and my Cambo WRS / CFVii50c for some mountain peak shots. From what I can tell the best one can do in the teleconverter space is the 1.4x Mutar. I hesitate to pick that up as it actually costs more than the lens itself, and it seems many have had good results with the 1.4XE and even the Mutar 2X which are both cheaper options. I know the 1.4XE and 2XE are not Hasselblad (Fuji, I believe??) but I'm curious if anyone has any direct experience with the 180mm and the various TC options (Mutar 2X or 1.4XE/2XE) on the Sony 33x44 50MP sensor? I'm not so worried about lens speed as this will all be tripod based, I'm more interested in resolution and detail.

The only sample images I've been able to find have been on Phase IQ3 100 back, so would love to see how the combination resolves on the smaller sensor if anyone happens to have any..!
 

jng

Active member
I'm heading to Colorado in a few weeks and picked up a 180/4 CF that I wanted to pair with a tele-converter and my Cambo WRS / CFVii50c for some mountain peak shots. From what I can tell the best one can do in the teleconverter space is the 1.4x Mutar. I hesitate to pick that up as it actually costs more than the lens itself, and it seems many have had good results with the 1.4XE and even the Mutar 2X which are both cheaper options. I know the 1.4XE and 2XE are not Hasselblad (Fuji, I believe??) but I'm curious if anyone has any direct experience with the 180mm and the various TC options (Mutar 2X or 1.4XE/2XE) on the Sony 33x44 50MP sensor? I'm not so worried about lens speed as this will all be tripod based, I'm more interested in resolution and detail.

The only sample images I've been able to find have been on Phase IQ3 100 back, so would love to see how the combination resolves on the smaller sensor if anyone happens to have any..!
Hi Brandon,

I have the 1.4XE and have used it with my 250 Superachromat but not on my 180 CF before I sold it. The 1.4XE works well with the 250 SA, shooting on both the IQ3100 as well as Hassy X1D. There's some loss in contrast/resolution but that's to be expected. Quite honestly I hesitate every time I use the 1.4XE as it bothers me to degrade the optics of these fine lenses. I've done some uncontrolled comparisons between using the 250 SA + 1.4XE vs 250 SA alone and just cropping. I think the latter might be marginally better but sometimes one just wants to use all the pixels one paid for. Also note that the one thing even a perfect tele-extender will do is magnify any of the lens's flaws (all others will add to the flaws as well). So, be aware that while the 180 is an outstanding lens, it does suffer from some magenta fringing on high-contrast borders. I myself am coveting the 350 SA and its dedicated 1.4x extender (which cannot be used on other lenses, alas) but have not figured out how to hide such a beast from my wife. Thus the 1.4XE remains in my kit for instances where I just need the additional reach.

Dante suggests you just bite the bullet and get the 250 Superachromat.

John
 

nameBrandon

Active member
Hi Brandon,

I have the 1.4XE and have used it with my 250 Superachromat but not on my 180 CF before I sold it. The 1.4XE works well with the 250 SA, shooting on both the IQ3100 as well as Hassy X1D. There's some loss in contrast/resolution but that's to be expected. Quite honestly I hesitate every time I use the 1.4XE as it bothers me to degrade the optics of these fine lenses. I've done some uncontrolled comparisons between using the 250 SA + 1.4XE vs 250 SA alone and just cropping. I think the latter might be marginally better but sometimes one just wants to use all the pixels one paid for. Also note that the one thing even a perfect tele-extender will do is magnify any of the lens's flaws (all others will add to the flaws as well). So, be aware that while the 180 is an outstanding lens, it does suffer from some magenta fringing on high-contrast borders. I myself am coveting the 350 SA and its dedicated 1.4x extender (which cannot be used on other lenses, alas) but have not figured out how to hide such a beast from my wife. Thus the 1.4XE remains in my kit for instances where I just need the additional reach.

Dante suggests you just bite the bullet and get the 250 Superachromat.

John
Thanks for the feedback! I came very close to picking up the 250 SA a few days ago, but I so rarely use that focal length.. if I lived somewhere that was not a vast prairie and had interesting mountains nearby it might make sense.. That being said, the 180 + 1.4XE is a test run to see if the quality level is *good enough* for what I want out of that setup.. and if it's not, I'll pick up the 250 SA for the trip and then look to pass it on to someone else when I get back.

My concern is that I've read a few times now that the Mutar's are much better than the XE's and I'm wondering if a Mutar 2X is going to give comparable results to a 1.4XE when it comes to IQ loss, and still provide the extra reach.
 

glennedens

Member
Brandon, my data is old (CFV39 era) so not entirely relevant to the CFV50cII. I had much better luck with the 2x Mutar than I did with the 2XE - this was with the CF 180 and CF 250 (non SA) - regret selling both of those lenses. I've never used the 1.4XE. So only a partial answer to your question. If I can find the disk drive of that era I'll try and post. What price range are you finding CF 250SA's?
 

jng

Active member
Thanks for the feedback! I came very close to picking up the 250 SA a few days ago, but I so rarely use that focal length.. if I lived somewhere that was not a vast prairie and had interesting mountains nearby it might make sense.. That being said, the 180 + 1.4XE is a test run to see if the quality level is *good enough* for what I want out of that setup.. and if it's not, I'll pick up the 250 SA for the trip and then look to pass it on to someone else when I get back.

My concern is that I've read a few times now that the Mutar's are much better than the XE's and I'm wondering if a Mutar 2X is going to give comparable results to a 1.4XE when it comes to IQ loss, and still provide the extra reach.
P.S. Dante just reminded me to tell you that if you’re planning on using these lenses on the Cambo, you can shift right out to to the 20mm limit with the 250 SA on the 33x44 crop sensor (I shift to 15mm with impunity on the larger 40x54 sensor).
 
In my experience the CF Sonnar T* 4/180 performs quite well with the 2XE. Same for the 250SA. I think at some point I found internet sources, which supported the 2XE has its sweet spot around the focal length range of 180-250mm. Take it with a grain of salt though as I don't have a Mutar 2x on hand for comparison.

A 2x converter is nice to have under those special circumstances where you need much more reach. That said, in the age of digital photography I think you can survive just magnifying to taste in post-processing without all the potential artefacts of optical magnification. Completely different story for analog workflows, of course.
 

nameBrandon

Active member
Brandon, my data is old (CFV39 era) so not entirely relevant to the CFV50cII. I had much better luck with the 2x Mutar than I did with the 2XE - this was with the CF 180 and CF 250 (non SA) - regret selling both of those lenses. I've never used the 1.4XE. So only a partial answer to your question. If I can find the disk drive of that era I'll try and post. What price range are you finding CF 250SA's?
Thanks Glenn! This is what I keep reading, the Mutars are much better performers than the XE's.. I wonder if I can find actual tests / examples of this, or if this is perhaps just brand bias in action.. Good to have your data point!

250SA's.. the CF ~$2800-$3800.. the CFi around $5k.

P.S. Dante just reminded me to tell you that if you’re planning on using these lenses on the Cambo, you can shift right out to to the 20mm limit with the 250 SA on the 33x44 crop sensor (I shift to 15mm with impunity on the larger 40x54 sensor).
I definitely am! :) Good to know.

In my experience the CF Sonnar T* 4/180 performs quite well with the 2XE. Same for the 250SA. I think at some point I found internet sources, which supported the 2XE has its sweet spot around the focal length range of 180-250mm. Take it with a grain of salt though as I don't have a Mutar 2x on hand for comparison.

A 2x converter is nice to have under those special circumstances where you need much more reach. That said, in the age of digital photography I think you can survive just magnifying to taste in post-processing without all the potential artefacts of optical magnification. Completely different story for analog workflows, of course.
Good points, and I do think my limiting factor will probably be atmospherics and not so much resolving power, but I'd at least like to remove that variable for this trip. Maybe I'll just grab both the 1.4XE and 2X Mutar and try and see. Thankfully they're reasonably priced.
 
Last edited:

anyone

Active member
I have a 2x Mutar and a 2XE here. In my general, limited use of these teleconverters, I found the 2XE a bit stronger. I never really compared the two though. What I can say is that the quality of both is rather high, but it doesn't even come close to my Superachromat. At some point of time I may buy the 1.4XE, but the offers just weren't right so far.

PS: John, definitely do it. Both the 350mm SA and 1.4 APO are a wonderful combination on the long end, really highly recommended! Besides the lightweight feeling of the bank account afterwards... Expect to spend another few USD on proper lens stabilisation though. Such a long setup really needs the best stabilisation available...
 
Last edited:

nameBrandon

Active member
I have a 2x Mutar and a 2XE here. In my general, limited use of these teleconverters, I found the 2XE a bit stronger. I never really compared the two though. What I can say is that the quality of both is rather high, but it doesn't even come close to my Superachromat. At some point of time I may buy the 1.4XE, but the offers just weren't right so far.
Thank you! What lens are you referring to when you talk about the performance of the Mutar 2X / 2XE? The 180/4 or just a general set of lenses overall?
 

anyone

Active member
As indicated before, I never made a comparison of the two, so my comments are solely based on field use. I'm hesitant to use them since I like native lenses so much better. When I used the converters, I did that with the CF 180mm, CF 250mm SA, and CFE 350mm SA (before I got the Apo teleconverter).

Would I recommend to use any, compared to a native lens? No. But sometimes compromises are needed ..
 

anyone

Active member
You won't be disappointed! If you are precise about focusing. Your camera with live view makes it easier, but since the 250mm SA has no hard infinity stop and an incredibly shallow DOF (someone with more knowledge about optics might explain the phenomenon, but for some reason it is really shallow on the SA lens compared to the normal 250mm CF. Probably it's also not a DOF phenomenon, but that the lens is unforgiving when it comes to focus beyond infinity ... which makes sense).
 
You won't be disappointed! If you are precise about focusing. Your camera with live view makes it easier, but since the 250mm SA has no hard infinity stop and an incredibly shallow DOF (someone with more knowledge about optics might explain the phenomenon, but for some reason it is really shallow on the SA lens compared to the normal 250mm CF. Probably it's also not a DOF phenomenon, but that the lens is unforgiving when it comes to focus beyond infinity ... which makes sense).
AFAIU, focus tolerances are unusually demanding (i.e., manifests itself as shallow area of focus) due to the high order correction across all wavelengths. Live view + electronic shutter are definitely THE best way to yield the Superachromat's full performance. If you're more of a lens geek, highly recommended!
 

nathantw

Member
Not sure this is helpful since it's apples and oranges, but here you go. Hasselblad 180mm f/4, Kenko 2x, Phase One P25 (22MP) with a 36x48 sensor. Please don't shoot the messenger if you don't like the photos or it doesn't meet your scientific parameters.

Hasselblad 180mm f/4 CF shot at f/8, 1/125, ISO 50


Hasselblad 180mm f/4 CF shot with a Kenko 2x (360mm) @ f/8, 1/30, ISO 50
 
Last edited:

darr

Well-known member
Brandon,
I have a CFi 180, 2XE and a CFV50c (same sensor as your CFVii50c). I can do a series of test shots for you from my backyard as I am currently strapped to my studio and computer due to work. My backyard unfortunately is fenced in (helps to keep the alligators away :LOL: ) , but I generally run lens tests using a sign posted at 15 feet and then focus to infinity. I live in flat Florida, so absolutely no mountains available, but lots of trees on my property. Let me know if you want me to run a few test samples for you.

Kind regards,
Darr
 

nameBrandon

Active member
Brandon,
I have a CFi 180, 2XE and a CFV50c (same sensor as your CFVii50c). I can do a series of test shots for you from my backyard as I am currently strapped to my studio and computer due to work. My backyard unfortunately is fenced in (helps to keep the alligators away :LOL: ) , but I generally run lens tests using a sign posted at 15 feet and then focus to infinity. I live in flat Florida, so absolutely no mountains available, but lots of trees on my property. Let me know if you want me to run a few test samples for you.

Kind regards,
Darr
That would be amazing, thank you! Backyard signs work for me!
 

nameBrandon

Active member
Okay, will do them later this afternoon and PM you with RAW files.
I usually run through f/8, f/11, and f/16, but will do all apertures for you.

Kind regards,
Darr
Thank you!! If you could do f/8 and f/11 with and without 2XE that would be more than enough.. No need to hit every aperture unless you want it for your records. :) Thank you again!
 
Top