Hasselblad 60/3.5 vs 80/2.8
- Thread starter michaelwj
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 69
- Views 13K
Richard G
Veteran
Nice to have that detail. Thanks.
michaelwj
----------------
It's all here Richard; http://www.hasselbladhistorical.eu/HW/HWLds.aspx
Complete lens data on nearly all the Hasselblad lenses.
Richard G
Veteran
One of the refreshing things about the Hasselblad is that the lore is available but unobtrusive. At least to us here with our LTM and other obsessions.
leicapixie
Well-known
I guesss I kinda forgot that way back the Technician who serviced my Rollei (69),
changed the dull dark screen with something clear, bright and easy to focus.
Well not as easy as my Mamiya C series..
I used to swap the Hasselblads given by the agency, for my Mamiyas on pro shoots.
A pentaprism may help in focus, not a Porrolex which is horrible.
changed the dull dark screen with something clear, bright and easy to focus.
Well not as easy as my Mamiya C series..
I used to swap the Hasselblads given by the agency, for my Mamiyas on pro shoots.
A pentaprism may help in focus, not a Porrolex which is horrible.
GarageBoy
Well-known
rulnacco
Well-known
For those above who don't like the relatively far close-focus distance of the 80, couldn't you just carry something that would help overcome that problem? I mean, I have an 8mm extension ring that takes up almost zero space in my bag; I'm not sure just how close I can focus with it, haven't measured/researched it, but it reduces the minimum focusing distance considerably.
Another option is to find one of the excellent Nikon 5T close-up lenses (probably better than Hasselblad's Proxars), which has a 62mm diameter, and attach it with a 62-to-Bay 60 adapter. (If you've got a C T* lens, the 52mm 3T should work fine.)
I know it's just a bit awkward and something extra to carry around, but either option is a simple and relatively cheap way to make the 80 significantly more useful, while still retaining the advantages of size/weight/maximum aperture.
Just a thought; both the above options work well for me, I've found.
Another option is to find one of the excellent Nikon 5T close-up lenses (probably better than Hasselblad's Proxars), which has a 62mm diameter, and attach it with a 62-to-Bay 60 adapter. (If you've got a C T* lens, the 52mm 3T should work fine.)
I know it's just a bit awkward and something extra to carry around, but either option is a simple and relatively cheap way to make the 80 significantly more useful, while still retaining the advantages of size/weight/maximum aperture.
Just a thought; both the above options work well for me, I've found.
Nokton48
Veteran
Or a Zeiss Hasselblad Proxar on your 80mm; I've paid $25 for used Proxars.
rulnacco
Well-known
The Proxars are apparently pretty good, but they're single-element closeup lenses. I've read quite a bit of speculation (albeit none that I've seen backed up with comparison images) that the Nikon closeup lenses should be a little better, as they're two-element achromats. As I happened to have one for my Nikon gear, I just got hold of the adapter and use it on my Hasselblad Bay 60 lenses; it works great!
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
A little while ago I began my Hasselblad journey after many years. Initially I had the 50/4 FLE and the 180/4, both in CF, paired with a 500c/m body. An excellent combo, but heavy, and missing a "walk around 'one-lens' lens".
Those of you who know me know that I am horrible at decisions about what lens to take, and that i like just one lens to make my life easier. Photography is just a hobby, so I like it to be relaxing.
In my ultimate "one lens" quest, I ended up trading the 50 and 180 for a 60 and 80, of which only one will stay. I searched the internets for comparisons between the two and couldn't find one, so here goes. My process and rambling out in the open.
First up, the size of the lenses. The 80 is as small as it gets, the 60 is a bit longer (the 50 is bigger still and the 180 is much bigger). How much longer? A little shy of two lens caps worth.
(please excuse the portly lit iPhone shot)
First win the the 80. Smaller is nicer. But apart from that, the controls are (exactly) the same between the two lenses, the 60 just has a bit more out front.
The front element on the 80 is very recessed and protected, the 60 is close to the front and exposed. I'd imaging the 60 will benefit from a hood more often, but I'm not going to get one. Second win to the 80...
to be continued...
For a one-lens walkabout, getting rid of the 180 was certainly a good move! But for me, the my 50 with floating elements is a necessity and a keeper! I've tried using the 60mm (excellent lens) as my normal one, but usually after couple of shots I switch to the 50 or the 40. So for me, if I could have only one lens, it would be the 50.
