Third party lenses for X2D 100

[cunim]

I am attracted by the X2D for use as a walkaround camera to replace my Sony A7RII. I have had Blads before, so expectations are realistic and I know about what I would be getting into vs other bodies with better developed optics choices.

And there is the problem. The V series lenses are virtual (maybe that's why the V thing). There are lots of older XCD lenses and I do like the 80/1.9, but too heavy for the intended use. To keep things compact I would have to wait for the 90 and 55 V lenses. Rumors show those arriving in December Great planning Hasselblad and way to build confidence in the brand. Never mind.

I was thinking of getting a fully manual lens or two in the meantime, since I rarely use AF. That lens should have some interesting characteristics so it remains useful into the future. The most interesting characteristic I can think of is wide aperture and I am looking at the Mitakon 65/1.4. Any other suggestions, especially for older lenses that can be adapted to fit?

 

[MGrayson]

The Zeiss 110/2 is amazing on the XCD. The HC 100/2.2 is less interesting, but does have the central shutter.

 

[cunim]

That sounds interesting. How do you adapt the lens to the body?

 

[MGrayson]

The Hasselblad XV adapter has no electrical connections - it's a machined chunk of metal with mounts screwed on at either end. (I'm sure other manufacturers make something similar). You stop down the lens manually and use the electronic shutter. IBIS works if you tell it the focal length of the lens. The XH adapter works with Hasselblad HC lenses and does have electrical connections. Everything works as if it were a native lens, but AF is slow and unreliable. You said you were using MF anyway, so not a problem.

Both kinds of adapters.

There are also 0.8x adapters that shrink the image circle so that the larger HC-series lenses just cover the X. Never used one.

 

[jng]

Per @MGrayson the 2/110 is on my list. Also consider the 3.5/100 Planar, which is spectacularly sharp, shows minimal CA and minimal-to-no distortion and rivals the lenses in my tech cam kit. I have the CF version. The CFi version is optically identical but has a smoother focusing helical and electrical contacts that would be moot here.

I use the Hasselblad XV adapter. It's quite sturdy and is also compatible with the tripod collar that they sell for the XH adapter and 135mm lens. I also have the XV adapter from Fotodiox, which works fine except I found the tripod foot to be too flimsy to keep the camera + lens reliably steady. As @MGrayson mentioned, all XV adapters are all dumb adapters so you're limited to using the electronic shutter. Regardless of which adapter you wind up with, it's important to check that the lens locks in place and you can hit infinity focus (all but the Superachromats and the 40 IF CFE have hard infinity stops).

Regarding the elusive 2.5/90 XCD-V, some people sold off their 3.2/90 XCDs in anticipation of the new variant. Given the delays, I'm glad I held on to mine. And from the published specifications the new V variant isn't that much lighter than the original XCD 90, which remains a great lens if you don't need the extra half-stop or improved autofocus performance. That said, I'm really liking my 2.5/55 XCD-V for its compactness and snappy autofocusing. YMMV, of course.

John

 

[MGrayson]

@jng, How does the 3.5/100 Planar compares to the XCD 90/3.2? I find the latter lens (which I also kept) to be optically superb.

 

[jng]

@jng, How does the 3.5/100 Planar compares to the XCD 90/3.2? I find the latter lens (which I also kept) to be optically superb.

.
I haven't done a direct comparison (will add this to my list of things to do) but sharpness aside I would expect the lenses to render somewhat differently (the newer lenses give a more clinical look). Suffice it to say that I have some really nice prints hanging on my wall that I made with both the 3.5/100 and the 3.2/90. I agree that the XCD 3.2/90 is superb, and for most of my use cases involving landscapes and cityscapes, faster AF and near-silent shutters are not a factor for me. So, I'm saving my $$ to add to rather than replace lenses in my kit. Or just trying to get out and shoot more with what I already have!

John

 

[MGrayson]

.
I haven't done a direct comparison (will add this to my list of things to do) but sharpness aside I would expect the lenses to render somewhat differently (the newer lenses give a more clinical look). Suffice it to say that I have some really nice prints hanging on my wall that I made with both the 3.5/100 and the 3.2/90. I agree that the XCD 3.2/90 is superb, and for most of my use cases involving landscapes and cityscapes, faster AF and near-silent shutters are not a factor for me. So, I'm saving my $$ to add to rather than replace lenses in my kit. Or just trying to get out and shoot more with what I already have!

John

I get it. The 2/110 has a *really* different look at wide apertures, so I didn't hesitate to add that one. But "not enough glass" is certainly NOT what's keeping me from getting out and taking photos.

 

[FloatingLens]

If I may… I recently acquired the XCD 3,2/90 and I also have the Planar 3,5/100. I find both lenses to render surprisingly similar; I would characterize the Planar as rather clinical in the V lens lineup. It is just not so perfect wide open like the XCD. The Planar excels for work at infinity. Resolution wise (at 50 Mpx), I see not much difference between both lenses at their optimum aperture, except that XCD pretty much delivers from f3,2 onward. Of course, the workflow with the XCD can be much quicker thanks to AF.

 

[sog1927]

Per @MGrayson . I also have the XV adapter from Fotodiox, which works fine except I found the tripod foot to be too flimsy to keep the camera + lens reliably steady.

I got one of those early on before the Hasselblad XV was available. I removed the foot from mine and use a no-name 75mm tripod adapter ring with an Arca plate when I put it on a tripod.

 

[cunim]

Thanks to all for the valuable comments. Sorry to digress but a question about the X2D. Can I select ES and have the camera use just that mode? I assume it is doable with these manual lenses. What about with other drive modes like focus bracketing using X lenses?

 

[wallpaperviking]

Thanks to all for the valuable comments. Sorry to digress but a question about the X2D. Can I select ES and have the camera use just that mode? I assume it is doable with these manual lenses. What about with other drive modes like focus bracketing using X lenses?

You would need to be very aware of the limitations of ES, otherwise the Fuji's are a better option with adapted lenses.

 

[cunim]

You would need to be very aware of the limitations of ES, otherwise the Fuji's are a better option with adapted lenses.

I am aware of ES limitations in the IQ4. They are limitations of ES, not the camera. I was wondering if the X2D has any special ES issues that make using adapted lenses or alternate drive modes more difficult. Point taken about the Fuji

 

[MGrayson]

I am aware of ES limitations in the IQ4. They are limitations of ES, not the camera. I was wondering if the X2D has any special ES issues that make using adapted lenses or alternate drive modes more difficult. Point taken about the Fuji

Just the ordinary ES problems...



(and horizontal banding with interior lighting).

 

[jng]

I am aware of ES limitations in the IQ4. They are limitations of ES, not the camera. I was wondering if the X2D has any special ES issues that make using adapted lenses or alternate drive modes more difficult. Point taken about the Fuji

I use ES on the X2D just as I do on my IQ4.

I just checked on my X2D w/55 XCD-V and can confirm that all of the drive modes (single exposure, continuous exposure, self-timer, exposure bracketing, interval timer, focus bracketing) work with ES. Presumably this would apply to all of the native XCD lenses as well.

John

 

[wallpaperviking]

I am aware of ES limitations in the IQ4. They are limitations of ES, not the camera. I was wondering if the X2D has any special ES issues that make using adapted lenses or alternate drive modes more difficult. Point taken about the Fuji

Am not sure what the "scan time" for ES is on the Hassy/Fuji but for certain portrait situations, I feel it would be limiting.. Depends what you are using it for I guess..

 

[Thorkil]

inspired by Matts statement about the Zeiss 110/2, just got that sloppy XV adapter on (don't use it in dusty environment) and the 110/2 Zeiss on the X1D yesterday evening,
f 2

​

and just to see if I could get a view of a deer before sunset

f 2 with very sparse PP

​

and a 100% crop

​

Thorkil

 

[MGrayson]

inspired by Matts statement about the Zeiss 110/2, just got that sloppy XV adapter on (don't use it in dusty environment) and the 110/2 Zeiss on the X1D yesterday evening,
f 2

​

and just to see if I could get a view of a deer before sunset

f 2 with very sparse PP

​

and a 100% crop

​

Thorkil

Wow! For a lens with a dreamy reputation, it's awfully sharp wide open.

 

[cunim]

@Thorkil, that crop shows just the effect I am looking for. Trouble is price and availability of the (apparently) legendary 110/2. Given the prices I see on line, the image quality bar rises (just my own viewpoint) In this case, I will see if I can trial the 80/1.9, for comparison. I have a feeling those are going to be readily available used, once the 90/2.5 is on dealer's shelves.










s.

 

[Thyl]

Why get a third party lens when the XCD 90 mm is readily available? According to Hasselblad, it weighs 619 grams, in contrast to the 90 mm "V" at 551 grams. That wouldn't shock me. No idea where to get the lens in Canada, but B&H alleges to have it in stock: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1260274-REG/hasselblad_h_3025090_xcd_90mm_lens.html. And it is USD1000 less than the still-vapour 90 mm V.