Jump to content

50/2,8 Planar C, un-numbered distance markings.


jt991

Recommended Posts

I am mystified by the three un-numbered distance markers on the focusing ring of my (Hasselblad) 50mm Planar; viz between those for 3 & 3.5 ft, 3.5 & 4ft, as well as between the 4 & 5ft markers. In each case there is ample room for a distance to be engraved, but all there is is a blackened line at right angles to the ring's edge exactly like the numbered distances have. Surely not one that got past final inspection o_O
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No mystery: they're just made that way. Zeiss wasn't exactly known for rational design choices back then (and still aren't: witness the ridiculously cheesy self-destructing soft sticky rubber focus rings on their new $4000 Otus lens line). The unmarked lines in this case actually do make some sense: the distance scale is easier to read at a glance than it would be if marked every three inches. Having the sequence as 3ft, 3.25, 3.5, 3.75, 4, 4.5, 5, might be more annoying then useful: your brain more quickly and easily comprehends the unmarked line between two equal distances than it does literal overcrowded markings. The automated depth-of-field indicators on this lens help compensate for the missing distance numbers.

 

You probably meant to say "80mm" lens instead of "50mm" lens: the 80mm has the distance scale you describe, the 50mm is different. The 80mm is a general purpose lens designed for spontaneous shooting, so the scale is compromised for that use. Dedicated macro, copy, or cinema lenses often do have the additional complete distance markings because they are used more slowly and/or need to be preset precisely and repeatably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No mystery: they're just made that way. Zeiss wasn't exactly known for rational design choices back then (and still aren't: witness the ridiculously cheesy self-destructing soft sticky rubber focus rings on their new $4000 Otus lens line). The unmarked lines in this case actually do make some sense: the distance scale is easier to read at a glance than it would be if marked every three inches. Having the sequence as 3ft, 3.25, 3.5, 3.75, 4, 4.5, 5, might be more annoying then useful: your brain more quickly and easily comprehends the unmarked line between two equal distances than it does literal overcrowded markings. The automated depth-of-field indicators on this lens help compensate for the missing distance numbers.

 

You probably meant to say "80mm" lens instead of "50mm" lens: the 80mm has the distance scale you describe, the 50mm is different. The 80mm is a general purpose lens designed for spontaneous shooting, so the scale is compromised for that use. Dedicated macro, copy, or cinema lenses often do have the additional complete distance markings because they are used more slowly and/or need to be preset precisely and repeatably.

 

You're right... I am talking about about my 80mm f2.8 Planar ..... all the years using 35mm cameras mostly with a "standard" (50mm) lens probably the reason for my mistake. And thank-you for your much appreciated explanation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...