I have a 150 and a 250 (both C) for Hasselblad. These are fairly good lenses, but once again a feel the itch for a 180. I would consider a CF or a CFi and the 180 would then most likely be contrastier and sharper than the 150, the fast speeds on the 150 aren't accurate and a newer lens is ever so slightly more reliable and comfortable to use. But I feel that rationally, these reasons are not enough to get yet another lens, if you know what I mean. So I was thinking of one thing that bothers me with the 150, it's sensitivity to stray light and flare. Even with the hood on its very sensitive to flare and this is hard to detect in the viewfinder. How is the 180 in this regard? Could I do night shooting with it in the city without worrying about contrast destroying flare or weird light artefacts? Another thing is the close up properties...I don't have a macro and I want one, but OTOH I can do closeups with the 80 or 100 using tubes or use my Nikon if I want to get really close. Plus I would have difficulties packing since I'd probably need both the 100 and 120 to cover different distances. Now I was thinking, how suitable is the 180 for closeups? Let's say that the magnification would be around 1:5. I'm thinking of tubes, but possibly a tele extender and/or close up lenses. If the results are good, then it would be much more convenient to carry around a 100 and a 180 than adding a macro to my bag. Any input appreciated, as often happens, I'm trying to balance my desires for lens purchases with the rational "what do I really need?".