Red Lettering on Hasselblad Lens

I just bought my first Hasselblad, a 500C. It came with one of the original chrome 80mm Zeiss Planar lenses. Everything looks great, but I noticed that all the lettering on the front of the lens is red. I have seen photos of this lens, or later generations, with a red "T" or maybe "T*", but never one with all the lettering in red. Has anyone seen such lettering? Does it mean that the lens is somehow different from the normal Planars of that vintage?

Maybe post a pic of the lens front so we can see exactly what you mean? Never heard of an all-red front name ring before, but its certainly possible. Could be an early example of the lens, if original serial number is below 28253xx, it has a round-shape aperture ring EV tab, and lacks a depth-of-field preview catch on the barrel. At some point Zeiss might have done a deep repair involving major barrel or glass parts replacement: an all-red name ring could have been a way they identified such work at the time. Or, it could be as simple as the white paint got worn off and a prior owner (or Hasselblad service center) refilled the engravings with red.

 

Other than historically significant rarities like verifiable NASA-spec space items, randomly odd Hasselblad gear is strangely not very collectible. Little things like an all-red name ring that would increase the value of a Leica lens 10x does nothing whatever to the value of a Hasselblad lens. Silver barrel C lenses with T* multicoated glass have become a little more sought after by collector/users: if this lens is a silver T* then you've got nice somewhat scarce 80mm Planar. The most important points are whether the glass is clean and the shutter/aperture are working accurately and reliably: if so, enjoy your new Hasselblad!

Here's a shot of the lettering on the lens. Still waiting for my film order to arrive so I haven't tried it out yet. Everything else about the lens looked like I expected.

 

Thanks for the general history!

 

That's pretty cool (OK, "warm"). You can see the white peaking out underneath the red in spots. I have a feeling that was added by a previous owner. Of course if it was factory painted, they would have put white in first anyways.

Interesting! Definitely never saw one like this before now. The red is very cleanly applied: factory OEM or carefully redone later.

 

The serial number range places it around 1969-1970 or thereabouts: the number on the name ring isn't as accurate at nailing this as the two letter date code you can find inside the rear barrel if you crank the lens to minimum focus. Supposedly some early silver T* lenses left the factory without a T* trademark, this could have been flagged by a red name ring but I think the T* 80mm began in the high 55xxxx serial numbers. Of course anything is possible, Zeiss had the most scattershot disorganized serial numbering system of any goods mfr in history (their serial numbers are essentially meaningless: can vaguely give an idea of whats what, but they frequently contradict themselves with inconsistencies).

 

Hard to tell from your pic, but the glass looks like standard pre-T* version most typical of silver lenses. If held under a bright overhead artificial light, pre-T* will show multiple stacked reflections of the light, T* just two or three. Both types of coating are fine: T* is a fraction better at handling harsh lighting and marginally better with color transparency film, while pre-T* is often preferred for the way it renders tones on BW film. Use a proper lens hood and the difference is like splitting hairs. Genuine vintage 'blad hoods sometimes go for crazy prices, check eBay or web stores for (ahem) Chinese knockoffs which are just as good and a lot cheaper (as little as $10). The 80mm C lens takes size B50 aka B57 hoods and filters.

Edited April 22, 2020 by orsetto

The red is very cleanly applied: factory OEM or carefully redone later.

 

With a bit of practice, it's surprisingly easy to get clean results in engraved lettering.

 

This one isn't perfect, but was the closest I had to a before and after at hand. Basically what I do on these is brush on Testor's Enamel, blot it off, wait a couple of minutes for it to get "tacky" and then use a non-marring scraper(I use sharpened pegwood, but a toothpick will also work) to get the tacky paint off everywhere other than the engraving.

 

Nice job Ben. I have a Tessar off one of my 1000Fs that had weak ft/meter markings on the barrel. I used nail polish and once tacky, swabbed off the excess with a solvent. It wasn't easy, it wasn't perfect, but its much better than it was.

This lens is from 1968 According to Hasselblad Historical's "lens date" search feature. I've used this a lot, for my ownvHasselblad stuff and also when looking at items online, mostly Ebay. But I wasn't aware that the serial numbers would vary from the one on the face of the lens vs one inside the lens featuring a 2 letter date code? Hmmm! Now I gotta go look at my own lenses.

 

Hasselblad Historical

Zeiss is notorious for meaningless serial numbers, tho over the years some zealous Hasselblad enthusiasts managed to compile a reasonably accurate table of numbers coordinated to dates for the more popular lenses. The most accurate dating entails looking for Hasselblads own numbering scheme: easy with bodies and backs via the two letter serial number prefix, harder with the lenses because those were made separately by Zeiss. Fortunately there is an additional Hasselblad date code inside the rear barrel of 'blad lenses, usually visible if you turn the focus ring to minimum distance. It can be any color, but is often dark or stenciled which can be hard to make out against the gray black barrel finish.

 

The inner barrel date code decryption key can be found on this dedicated page of the Hasselblad Historical site (scroll down to the bottom):

 

Hasselblad Historical - How to find out when your Hasselblad was made

Zeiss serial numbers are not meaningless. They are issued, as are all serial numbers, for production planning purposes. Not to help consumers date products (most manufacturers try to hide date information from curious customers, even when it is contained in a serial number. There are reasons for that. One, for instance, is that consumers are hessitant to buy a brand new product when they can see that it was not made yesterday or the day before yesterday, though there is nothing wrong with, say, a lens that was made last year or the year before that.) So even when you or i may not able to pry a production date from a serial number, such a number is not "meaningless" or even notoriously so.

Zeiss assigns serial numbers to production batches. If they plan to put a number of lens X into production, a block of that many serial numbers is reserved, assigned to those lenses. When these lenses are actually produced, and whether that happens in one batch or in several separate batches is down to sales and manufacturing logistics.

Edited April 24, 2020 by q.g._de_bakker

Zeiss serial numbers are not meaningless.

 

Yeah, they are. Ask anyone who collects them or is trying to parse a specific example of multiple identical-looking revisions they put out within a five year span. Until the modern era, Zeiss hadn't remotely followed traditional batch lot numbering for the majority of their products, never mind dating coordination, and their record-keeping was hopeless. Serial numbers were assigned utterly at random, a "batch lot" consisting of twenty here, thirty there, with vastly separated numbers even if they were mfd the same hour the same day on the same line.

 

I'll cede you that they were a little more organized with the Hasselblad lenses, esp CF and later. The silver C lenses, however, were subject to occasional serial number shenanigans. The serial number date lookup table at your Hasselblad Historical site is easy and quite useful for most lenses, but even you have the separate page explaining the fallback dedicated barrel number date coding (linked above). There are plenty instances of C lenses with factory-swapped or odd serial number rings that require closer examination of optics or barrel to determine mfr date or coating type: that was the point of my sidebar response to Ricochetrider, and we were both deferring to your Hasselblad site as gospel.

Edited April 25, 2020 by William Michael

Zeiss and the companies that make up Zeis were nor are in the business of providing customers or collectors with means to trace the provenance of items they get their hands on. Serial numbers are not invented or used for that, but for internal record keeping that serves quite different purposes. That's true for any serial numbers used by any company.

 

Zeiss numbers do not lend themselves to what collectors would like to use them for.

And yes, collectors do want to know something about the provenance of their items. And Rick Nordin has indeed put together tables, putting approximate dates to serial numbers by collecting other data that helps doing so. And yes, the stamp found inside the baffles of some lenses provides a good clue.

But that does in no way make Zeiss serial numbers meaningless.

Edited April 25, 2020 by William Michael

If you ever need to re-highlight any engraving, it's much easier to use plaster-of-paris than paint. You just mix the plaster into a thin paste and rub it into the engraved lettering. Any excess is easily removed as a powder after it dries.

 

You can even colour the plaster with watercolour pigment in its wet state, or use a marker pen after it dries.

 

The plaster fill isn't quite as hard-wearing as paint, but it's really easy to redo if it falls out.

Moderator Note:

 

Stick to the topic and the content and not to the person publishing it.

 

William

Of course if it was factory painted, they would have put white in first anyways.

 

I think Zeiss would have used their "Zeiss" red on any of their lenses. The "red" on this lens looks pink and it shows distinct uneven wear. Zeiss may have painted white first but that could have presented problems to overcome like doubling the painting process and white paint leeching through to the red even if the white paint was absolutely dry. If Zeiss had painted it this way, they wouldn't want pink as the final color.

 

Personally, I think the "red" on this lens is not Zeiss's standard red and that some owner did it.

 

Arrows show whatever it is, crayon, lipstick or something else non-permanent coming off unevenly which would be contrary to a proper Zeiss job IMO

I think Zeiss would have used their "Zeiss" red on any of their lenses. The "red" on this lens looks pink and it shows distinct uneven wear. Zeiss may have painted white first but that could have presented problems to overcome like doubling the painting process and white paint leeching through to the red even if the white paint was absolutely dry. If Zeiss had painted it this way, they wouldn't want pink as the final color.

 

Personally, I think the "red" on this lens is not Zeiss's standard red and that some owner did it.

 

Arrows show whatever it is, crayon, lipstick or something else non-permanent coming off unevenly which would be contrary to a proper Zeiss job IMO

 

Aside from what you pointed out(which I agree with), I also think that there's some pride with Zeiss/Hasselblad in caring about the aesthetics of the whole package.

 

I think we can all agree that front trim ring is primarily cosmetic. Yes, it does give some protection to the front elements and lens internals, but it would have accomplished this every bit as well with no markings at all.

 

If you look at the design of the entire package, white lettering on black is the norm. This is true not only on the lens, but also on name plates on the body.

 

Chrome does get black, red, or even green lettering, but the "non black" lettering serves a purpose.

 

Later on, the T* on the trim ring was in red, but that also seemed to be a decision to highlight what Zeiss considered an important feature of the lens. It was also a deeper, darker red(more like what's seen on the shutter lock) and not the red/pink shown here.

 

The red lettering here just looks wrong to my eye.

 

Of course, I have been wrong many times before, and this may indeed be an unusual variant. The color+aesthetics+white peeking out make me think not, though.

I think Zeiss would have used their "Zeiss" red on any of their lenses. The "red" on this lens looks pink and it shows distinct uneven wear. Zeiss may have painted white first but that could have presented problems to overcome like doubling the painting process and white paint leeching through to the red even if the white paint was absolutely dry. If Zeiss had painted it this way, they wouldn't want pink as the final color.

 

Personally, I think the "red" on this lens is not Zeiss's standard red and that some owner did it.

 

Arrows show whatever it is, crayon, lipstick or something else non-permanent coming off unevenly which would be contrary to a proper Zeiss job IMO

[ATTACH=full]1339021[/ATTACH]

 

I agree with kmac. Why pink?

Refurnishing old lenses is a long time hobby, and this is what I've learned cleaning out grime from paint filled engraved markings.

 

The paint in the engravings is easily removed when you clean it with a solvent and a small brush or pick. The engraving depression is excellent protection for the paint, so it lasts regardless.

 

If the metal is painted black, then they usually fill the engraving with white before a colour.

 

If the metal is anodized, and the engraving is done after anodizing (thus bare silver grooves), then they do not pre-fill with white paint. The is because most colours are a little transparent, and painting on black make the colour darker. The white under colour makes the colour brighter - and that is desired for most markings (ie; distance scales)

 

Refilling engraving with colour paint (or white) is very easy, a small brush, and a quick wipe with a smooth cloth. Paint stays in the grooves, only the paint not in the grooves gets wiped off.

 

(note: this is not the case for modern plastic decoration rings as paint/print technology is quite different)

 

If someone tried to clean the above red-marked lens, then I'd expect to see the the fading effects that kmac's arrow point to, even if it was factory.

 

But honestly, the red decoration ring looks like a post-factory modification to me.