Hasselblad 50mm f/4 CF FLE vs f/2.8 F

Hi! I have been using a 201F with the 80mm F and 150mm F. I have the

opportunity to get the 50mm CF FLE for a reasonable price, but I was a

little tempted to get the 50mm F instead for the extra stop. I'm just

wondering if anyone's tried both the lens? By looking at both the

lenses, I got a feeling that they have rather different optical

formulas. Is one significantly better than the other, especially in

terms of distortion and sharpness? Am I right believe that since the

50mm F has the same optics as the FE, that it has FLE as well?

 

Thanks for your help!

Hello,

I tried to mount 50mm CF FLE on my 201f ordered recently. Unfortunately I can not focus infinite because the gap between lens' focusing ring and 201f's shutter adjusting ring is too narrow. So, when I turned focusing ring toward to infinite, it went back towards to 201f a litter bit and finally was blocked by shutter ring of 201f.

Anyone experienced this before?

I use the CFi FLE 50/4 on Canon EOS FF body with Arax tilt shift adapter. The lens is wonderfully sharp edge to edge. Cannot say about 50/2.8.

 

Have often considered if I should replace it with 50/2.8 given that I will never use a leaf shutter based system and would prefer the extra stop. I use it mostly for landscape so the extra stop is not critical but I could use it in low light conditions if needed - specially since one can control DoFwith tilt instead.

My 205TCC has a shutter ring around the lens mount as well, and my CF50/4 FLE works just fine. As for adapting it to a Sony A7, it is hardly worth the time. There are several native 50'ish lenses which outperform the CF50 without the nuisance of an adapter, the occasional need to recock the shutter, and using the DOF preview lever to attain diaphragm control.

The 50/4 CF FLE lens should mount and operate properly on a 201F camera body: the 200 series are weird, but few users have ever complained of CF mounting issues. OTOH, you may have a one in a million combination of lens and body that just aren't meant for each other. The only way to fix that is to have both items evaluated (and possibly adjusted) by a trained Hasselblad repair technician.

 

There is a small chance that the previous owner of your lens occasionally removed the focus ring (plastic band holding the rubber grip) to use a quick focus handle, then after switching back failed to fully re-install the focus ring. Look at web photos of the CF FLE lens, and check to be sure the focus ring on your lens is in the same position. It might need to be gently but firmly pushed forward a little bit, so it can clear the 201F body shutter speed ring. The lens focus ring should snap into proper position, nice and even with the focus index numbers. If that doesn't seem to be the issue, then again I'd recommend having lens and camera evaluated by a technician. The barrel may have been re-assembled incorrectly after a previous service.

 

Re adapting Hasselblad lenses to smaller format cameras: this has been sneered at endlessly for reasons that aren't entirely clear to me. It works just fine, some of the lenses perform splendidly on smaller sensors, so if you happen to own both a Hasselblad system and a smaller digital system and want to try it there's really no reason not to. Simple adapters are cheap, and for tripod work the size/weight increase is irrelevant. I agree it would be silly to buy a Hasselblad lens specifically to use with a smaller format camera. But if you already own the glass, it can be a fun cheap way to experiment with "the Zeiss look". Personally, I found the old-style 50mm "C" lens to be a stunner on Nikon, Canon and Sony FX cameras: really incredible. My one regret in trading that old lens for the CF FLE is that I can't get the same results from the newer lens as easily.

 

It is also worth repeating what ami-maitra noted above: using a CF lens with tilt shift adapter on smaller FX and 33x44 digital cameras is a very popular, sensible setup for architectural photographers.

Edited March 22, 2019 by orsetto