Menu
What's new
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 V lenses on Phase One XF with IQ4/150

Bill Caulfeild-Browne

Bill Caulfeild-Browne

Well-known member
I have an opportunity to pick up some older Hasselblad V lenses. (I have the mount adapter). Does anyone have any experience with them on the IQ4 - are they up to the standard needed for the 150 mpx sensor? (The Distagon in particular)
Thanks for any input.
 
A

anyone

Well-known member
Which Distagon are you interested in? The 40mm? If yes, only the 40mm CFE IF (latest generation) performs exceptionally well on my IQ1 60. The earlier versions were not good enough. Cannot comment on the IQ4 150.
 
J

jng

Well-known member
I had a similar experience with the 4/40 IF CFE on the IQ160 and imagine it would perform well on the IQ4 150. It's touted to be the sharpest of the entire lineup, a claim that's backed up by the published MTF charts. It does, however, suffer from a fair amount of moustache distortion. I found the 4/50 FLE, or at least my copy, to be sharp on center but soft at the edges, which I attributed to field curvature. If you're after a flat focus plane and edge-to-edge sharpness, this may not be the lens for you.

Other lenses that I've used on either the IQ160 and/or the P1 100 Mp or 150 Mp sensors:

4/120 Makro-Planar, 5.6/135 Makro-Planar, 4/150 Sonnar, 4/180 Sonnar: all excellent - they can show just a bit of purple fringing on high contrast edges, but this is easily correctable in post, should perform well on the IQ4 150.

5.6/120 S-Planar, 3.5/100 Planar, 250 Superachromat, 350 Tele-Superachromat: superb, can confirm that they work well @ 150 Mp (would probably place the 40 IF/CFE in this category if I were to extrapolate based on my experience @ 60 Mp).

5.6/350 Tele-Tessar: not the sharpest tool in the shed, shows quite a bit of purple fringing.

YMMV, of course. Which lenses are you considering? And I assume to complement your current P1/SK lenses?

John
 
J

jng

Well-known member
Bill Caulfeild-Browne said:
Thank you both. I was thinking of the 40 mm Distagon but I'll have to check if it is the CFE. (I suspect not).
I appreciate your input.
Click to expand...
Bill,

There’s the 40 CF/CFE, which is the older floating lens element design that probably won’t play so well on your IQ4 150 (ditto for the 40 C). The 40 IF CFE is the better lens. Look for the IF designation and if it’s a CFE model, the absence of the additional ring at the front of the barrel that adjusts the floating lens element.

John

EDIT: what @anyone said!
 
A

anyone

Well-known member
I wouldn't know how they should be mechanically different on the mounting side. My V-lenses (C, CF, CFE) look exactly the same on the mount side and are compatible with all V bodies.
 
FloatingLens

FloatingLens

Well-known member
The IF has certainly a reputation on digital as last addition to the system. That said, the 40 CF FLE is a stellar lens. It just cannot shine on digital so much because of the sensor stack/filter glass. I am saying that because it really performs on film up to the format edges in my experience – not into the extreme corners though.

Long story short: has anybody given the FLE version a shot on a newest gen BSI sensor back? I wouldn't be surprised that could fix some of the smearing.
 
J

jng

Well-known member
FloatingLens said:
The IF has certainly a reputation on digital as last addition to the system. That said, the 40 CF FLE is a stellar lens. It just cannot shine on digital so much because of the sensor stack/filter glass. I am saying that because it really performs on film up to the format edges in my experience – not into the extreme corners though.

Long story short: has anybody given the FLE version a shot on a newest gen BSI sensor back? I wouldn't be surprised that could fix some of the smearing.
Click to expand...
Fair enough - based on the published MTF charts the IF is almost certainly sharper corner-to-corner than the CF/CFE version, but that's not to say that the latter wouldn't be perfectly fine in real world use on the 150 Mp BSI sensor.

In the comments section on Bin-bin's old Flickr post, he mentions that although he didn't do any rigorous tests he suspected that his CFE would fall short for landscapes, but this was some years ago so probably based on using the IQ3 100. You may be right about the smearing at the edges of the older sensors that may be cured with the BSI sensor - I just took a look at the lens product sheets and was a bit surprised to see that the exit pupil of the CF/CFE is ~10mm behind that of the IF CFE. (now emerging from rabbit hole, hopefully long enough to get a few things done in what's left of the day...)

John
 
P

Paul Spinnler

Well-known member
I had the 40 CFE and found it lacking in the corners (soft) and not nearly as good as modern lenses (such as say the SK BR 35).

Your mileage may vary. I think a lot of the positive commentary comes from old forum posts and internet info on this, but it does not really compare too well to new offerings. A fine lens in the V-system days, but this is the film era and MF analogue requires a lot less resolution than a Phase IQ4 150.

I tried it many years ago on an 80 MPX sensor and sold it immediately again. It was not that good when approaching the edge of the frame ...

Would try in situ before you buy. Lens designs have improved significantly since the 2000s ... maybe you can get some raw samples from people who have it ...
 
Last edited:
mristuccia

mristuccia

Well-known member
FloatingLens said:
The IF has certainly a reputation on digital as last addition to the system. That said, the 40 CF FLE is a stellar lens. It just cannot shine on digital so much because of the sensor stack/filter glass. I am saying that because it really performs on film up to the format edges in my experience – not into the extreme corners though.

Long story short: has anybody given the FLE version a shot on a newest gen BSI sensor back? I wouldn't be surprised that could fix some of the smearing.
Click to expand...
I owned the CF 40 FLE and I can confirm that even on my "modest" CFV-50c it didn't perform well in the corners, even at f8. At least my copy.
I've sold it and bought the 40 IF, which is in a total different league, unfortunately also price wise.

Marco
 
P

Paul Spinnler

Well-known member
Sorry I had the IF -> I didn't check the differences, ie the latest and greatest. It still didn't cut it into the corners of a then full-frame sensor (Aptus 12) ...
 
J

jng

Well-known member
Paul Spinnler said:
Sorry I had the IF -> I didn't check the differences, ie the latest and greatest. It still didn't cut it into the corners of a then full-frame sensor (Aptus 12) ...
Click to expand...
Hmmm, interesting. My 40 IF performed great on the IQ160 and also on the smaller sensor of my X1D, on par with the XCD45, which is quite sharp. I sold it mainly because it was redundant (not to mention overly massive - it's a beast!) with the XCD45 as well as my Rodie 40HR (used on the X1D's bigger brother sensor). Regardless, I think your earlier suggestion to "try before you buy" was a good one. Even if the lens by design is excellent, not all copies measure up, especially if they've been abused by previous owners.

John
 
V

vjbelle

Well-known member
I have Hasselblad V (60, 80, 120, 180) lenses and on my Actus with either my 100s or 4150 the only lens that is up to the task is the 180mm. That particular lens is exceptional. The 120 falls apart at the edges regardless of aperture. The 80mm has extreme curvature. The 60 is unusable in my opinion. Film is an entirely different platform where all of the lenses perform very well.

Victor B.
 
  • Like
Reactions: med
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top