Hasselblad 50mm Lenses & Filters

waffles · Mar 2, 2020

I’m in the market for a gently used Hasselblad Distagon 50mm for my 203fe. And I’m trying to choose between the CF f/4, the CF f/4 FLE, the CFi f/4 FLE, and the FE f/2.8.

I noticed that while the CF f/4 FLE lens has a front mount that will accept a standard B60 lens cap, the literature from Zeiss indicates that it takes a 93mm drop-in filter. Meanwhile, the CFi version of the same lens uses a B70 lens cap and B70 filters. And to top it all off the FE lens has a thread that accepts 86mm threaded filters, but again the information from Zeiss says it is designed for 93mm drop-in filters.

First of all. I never plan to stack more than one filter on the front of this lens. Most often, I would use either a Yellow #15 contrast or an Infrared. But at the same time I don’t want to get any vignetting when I use my filters. I already own a set of B60 filters that I use with my 80mm and 180mm CFE lenses. So I’m tempted to go with the CF version of the 50mm. But that is backwards thinking.

My first question is this: Why did Hasselblad go from a B60 to a B70 front mount diameter when updating to the CFi series? Were there problems with vignetting on the CF and CF FLE lenses? From a cursory glance, both the CF FLE and the CFi seem to have the same optical formula, so I’m surprised to see they use different filters at all.

And second, besides the extra stop, are there any advantages to going with the FE? I notice that there were two versions of the FE lens made, one in West Germany and one in Germany, with the latter one weighing slightly less. I took a look at a copy of the West German 50mm last year, and was disappointed to see that the front element rotated as the lens was focused. Does anyone know if the same is true for the newer version?

Which would you choose and why?

RalphLambrecht · Mar 2, 2020

waffles said:
I’m in the market for a gently used Hasselblad Distagon 50mm for my 203fe. And I’m trying to choose between the CF f/4, the CF f/4 FLE, the CFi f/4 FLE, and the FE f/2.8.

I noticed that while the CF f/4 FLE lens has a front mount that will accept a standard B60 lens cap, the literature from Zeiss indicates that it takes a 93mm drop-in filter. Meanwhile, the CFi version of the same lens uses a B70 lens cap and B70 filters. And to top it all off the FE lens has a thread that accepts 86mm threaded filters, but again the information from Zeiss says it is designed for 93mm drop-in filters.

First of all. I never plan to stack more than one filter on the front of this lens. Most often, I would use either a Yellow #15 contrast or an Infrared. But at the same time I don’t want to get any vignetting when I use my filters. I already own a set of B60 filters that I use with my 80mm and 180mm CFE lenses. So I’m tempted to go with the CF version of the 50mm. But that is backwards thinking.

My first question is this: Why did Hasselblad go from a B60 to a B70 front mount diameter when updating to the CFi series? Were there problems with vignetting on the CF and CF FLE lenses? From a cursory glance, both the CF FLE and the CFi seem to have the same optical formula, so I’m surprised to see they use different filters at all.

And second, besides the extra stop, are there any advantages to going with the FE? I notice that there were two versions of the FE lens made, one in West Germany and one in Germany, with the latter one weighing slightly less. I took a look at a copy of the West German 50mm last year, and was disappointed to see that the front element rotated as the lens was focused. Does anyone know if the same is true for the newer version?

Which would you choose and why?

I chose the CF lens and would again because, it works fine with the B60 filters and is of excellent optical quality

itsdoable · Mar 2, 2020

I've owned the C, CF and F, and used all versions, but not all sub-versions. Personally, I think the CF FLE is the nicest compromise of optical performance and weight.

The series 93 drop-in filters were introduced around the mid-CF range as a way of standardizing the filters for wide angles. In all cases, an adapter ring was provided with the lens that took the series 93 filters. On the 50F, the adapter screwed into the 86mm thread. On the 50CF FLE, it attached to the external bayonet (the internal bayonet is a B60). On both those, a tall B60 (CF FLE) or 86mm (F) will start to vignette at wide apertures, resulting in slightly darker corners (which are probably not noticeable). On the 50F, a thin 86mm filter does not vignette.

They are all decent lenses. The FLE has better correction at close focus due to the floating element. The F/FE has an automatic floating element and 1 stop brighter. The v2 FE front barrel does not rotate during focus. Thus the v2 FE is probably the most advanced lens optically and mechanically (as long as you don't need a leaf shutter).

I probably take out my CF as much as my F, since the CF is still pretty descent, is smaller and lighter (significantly), which suits carrying around more.

waffles · Mar 2, 2020

itsdoable said:
I've owned the C, CF and F, and used all versions, but not all sub-versions. Personally, I think the CF FLE is the nicest compromise ...

Thank you for all that information!! It sucks that Hasselblad tries so hard to push the 93mm filters on us, because as far as I know Hasselblad is the only company to ever sell 93mm drop-in filters and they’re all crazy expensive. At least with B60/B70 they have a little competition from Heliopan and B+W

waffles · Mar 2, 2020

itsdoable said:
They are all decent lenses. The FLE has better correction at close focus due to the floating element. The F/FE has an automatic floating element and 1 stop brighter. The v2 FE front barrel does not rotate during focus. Thus the v2 FE is probably the most advanced lens optically and mechanically (as long as you don't need a leaf shutter)

Thanks for confirming that the v2 doesn’t rotate. The automatic floating element the main reason I’m considering the FE. I don’t really need the extra stop. But a rotating front element is a deal-killer for me. I’ve never seen the v2 come up for sale in the US. One was being sold on eBay in Japan a few weeks ago for $1,500 tho.

GLS · Mar 3, 2020

itsdoable said:
On both those, a tall B60 (CF FLE) or 86mm (F) will start to vignette at wide apertures, resulting in slightly darker corners (which are probably not noticeable). On the 50F, a thin 86mm filter does not vignette.

And this is the reason they went to a B70 mount with the 50mm CFi FLE; to prevent vignetting. Otherwise it is the same optical formula as the CF version.

Sirius Glass · Mar 3, 2020

RalphLambrecht said:
I chose the CF lens and would again because, it works fine with the B60 filters and is of excellent optical quality

So do I.

rulnacco · Mar 3, 2020

I'll add my own recommendation for the 50 CF FLE. I've not used it with filters much at all, so I can't comment on vignetting--and that has been covered here in very useful detail--but the image quality is truly excellent, and it's very reasonably compact. When I travel the country, I usually throw a 500CM with an 80mm attached into a small Tamrac bag and the 50 FLE in the other half of it, and I'm good to go. It seems to hit the sweet spot of price, size and quality in a wide-angle.

etn · Mar 14, 2020

waffles said:
My first question is this: Why did Hasselblad go from a B60 to a B70 front mount diameter when updating to the CFi series? Were there problems with vignetting on the CF and CF FLE lenses? From a cursory glance, both the CF FLE and the CFi seem to have the same optical formula, so I’m surprised to see they use different filters at all.

My understanding is that Hassy indeed moved from B60 to B70 to reduce vignetting. Both CF and CFi have the same optical formula per the datasheets (see hasselbladhistorical.com).

The main advantage of the 50 CF FLE over the CFi is the possibility to re-use your B60 filters. I have a 50 CFi and am sometimes tempted to replace it by a CF for this reason.

Apart from that, it comes down to whether you want the various (and debatable) improvements Hasselblad/Zeiss made on CFi lenses: new helicoid, new PC flash sync port, "Nivarox" shutter springs, internal material to reduce reflexions, etc. I find the helicoids of my CFi lenses generally feel better than my CF, but most other CFi advantages are marketing BS if you ask me - particularly as the optical formulas are identical (save for the 38mm, but that's a different debate!) I like the looks of CF lenses better but that's just me. Both CF and CFi lenses are equally easily serviceable with ample availability of spare parts. Both will serve you equally long (and will probably outlast all of us here.)

From what I can tell, the price difference between 50 CF FLE and 50 CFi is not as extreme as it is with other lenses.

GLS · Mar 14, 2020

etn said:
I like the looks of CF lenses better but that's just me

I tend to agree, plus the flash sync port on the CFi/CFE lenses is a structurally weaker design (as I have unfortunately discovered). However in the balance the nicer helicoid and more reliable shutter of the CFi/CFE lenses wins out, IMO. Of course with the 50mm CFi having to get additional B70 filters is a pain as you say, but there are other options like the Lee system which only requires you to buy an additional B70 mounting ring rather than a whole other set of filters. Then again, for simple shooting situations (say, just B&W filters) it is more convenient to carry/use a few B70 filters than an entire Lee setup, which is why I have both. Swings and roundabouts.

waffles · Mar 17, 2020

I ended up getting the 50mm CFi and a B70 red filter. We'll see how it works out when I shoot some landscapes with it next week!

eli griggs · Mar 17, 2020

With so many mentioning to "B" or bayonet mounts for the cameras, I want to remind folks that for the Bay 60, an adapter for 67mm to B60 is a less expensive option, as is a 72mm, to Bay 60, likewise you can go to the larger threaded/bay adapters for the B70.

All the choices of both Bay and Threaded filters means you can shop around, within the larger offerings (add in Slip-on filters as well) and find top quality filters for more competitive pricing for budgets.

Buy as good adapters as you can, but you only need one of each size to get your bag geared up.

IMO.

Arthurwg · Mar 17, 2020

The 93mm filters are necessary for both the 350mm and 500mm CF lenses.

Sirius Glass · Mar 17, 2020

Arthurwg said:
The 93mm filters are necessary for both the 350mm and 500mm CF lenses.

I have the filters for the 500mm lens, but frankly I do not use the lens often. Consider that both of those lenses need a tripod, the perhaps the 2XE extender, an orange filters [two f/stops] or a red filter [three f/stops], correction for the Zone System, ... soon you are out of f/stops. On the positive side, carrying the 500mm lens around is part of my physical fitness program.

eli griggs · Mar 17, 2020

Sirius Glass said:
I have the filters for the 500mm lens, but frankly I do not use the lens often. Consider that both of those lenses need a tripod, the perhaps the 2XE extender, an orange filters [two f/stops] or a red filter [three f/stops], correction for the Zone System, ... soon you are out of f/stops. On the positive side, carrying the 500mm lens around is part of my physical fitness program.

Have you tried the 100 mm square filters with either lens and what is your opinion on these, one way or another, for those two lenses.

IMO.

waffles · Mar 18, 2020

Arthurwg said:
The 93mm filters are necessary for both the 350mm and 500mm CF lenses.

I believe you can use standard 82mm threaded filters with the 350mm lens, if you remove the lens shade.

eli griggs · Mar 18, 2020

waffles said:
I believe you can use standard 82mm threaded filters with the 350mm lens, if you remove the lens shade.

Are those shades easily remove and reinserted, all across the "V" line of 350/500mm lenses?

On day I hope to add these and a 50mm to my kit, but my copy of the Wilder book does on on lenses above the CF series?

Cheers

Sirius Glass · Mar 18, 2020

eli griggs said:
Have you tried the 100 mm square filters with either lens and what is your opinion on these, one way or another, for those two lenses.

IMO.

I have never used the gel filters because I believe that they are too fragile. I have Hasselblad, Heliopan and B+W filters for the Hasselblad with a few Tiffen or Hoya for the filters not made by those three companies.

eli griggs · Mar 21, 2020

I use all three of the the first brands you mention, and search in this order, B&W, Heliopan and Hasselblad, and also the best Tiffen I can find, but that's a last resort.

I have Hoya filters in other sizes and have no complaints about them, but I am standoffish when it comes to the larger 6x6 format lenses, feeling I do no know enough about them to chance 'wasting' resources.

I have and am still building my B&W colour contrast kit, and I like good
Kodak 3" gels when I can find those as well, because they will fit into my striped down pre-Ani. Speed Graphic and folders, etc I have or might one day have.

The Hasselblad pleated bellows light shade takes the gels well and I am trying to put together a proper set of adapters for threaded, series and larger than needed Bay 70 filters, as well as the B60 filters themselves, for the Bay 60 lenses I am using.

For smaller lenses, out side the 6x6 cameras, (my most complete color correction for b&W films are in the 49.5 - 52mm ranges), for 55, 58 lenses and up to the Bay 60 filters, I will search for adapters as well, however, that said, my focus on the Bay 60 - 67- 76 filters is primary and will continue to be, up until I complete the Hasselblad set, including up to 10 stop ND filters.

Hasselblad 50mm Lenses & Filters

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency