Hasselblad V-Mount Lens to L-Mount

[_Olivier]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello!

My other system is a Hasselblad 500 c/m, and I'm thinking about using my V series lenses on my SL2. Are people getting nice results with Hassy V lenses on SL systems? What is the recommended/best adapter on the market? 

Thanks,

Olivier

[frame-it]

 

 

 

[_Olivier]

Thanks for the links; I have read through these old posts previously, and most of the info is 6.5 years old. I was hoping maybe there was a newer adapter out there... 

[AZN]

The adapter isn't the problem, it is that the V-Series lenses aren't really suited to high resolution full-frame 35mm digital use.

The lenses, while brilliant on 6x6 film, struggle at the resolutions required by 24MP or higher digital sensors.

Secondly, because the lenses necessarily need much greater image circles, there can be a lot of internal flaring.  This however is realtively easy to solve with DIY black velvet applied to the interior surfaces of the lens adapter mount(s).  Did this myself when experimenting with this 10 years ago using a Kipon Hasselblad V → Sony E adapter.

BTW to short-circuit doubters, I own some pretty good Hasselblad V glass: 

• Hasselblad Distagon CFi 4/50
• Hasselblad Planar CFi 3.5/100
• Hasselblad Sonnar CFi 4/180

I had hoped the 4/180 and 3.5/100 would be good enough (ie. excellent) on my 42MP Sony a7RII…

Nope.

 

[BernardC]

6 hours ago, AZN said:

The lenses, while brilliant on 6x6 film, struggle at the resolutions required by 24MP or higher digital sensors.

They can do it, mostly, but I would look at Contax/Yashica lenses if you want the classic Zeiss look.

[Yellow_78]

I was also thinking about this just the other day! Interested to know if anyone has used the kipon baveyes? 

[hepcat]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 10/19/2023 at 1:45 AM, AZN said:

The adapter isn't the problem, it is that the V-Series lenses aren't really suited to high resolution full-frame 35mm digital use.

The lenses, while brilliant on 6x6 film, struggle at the resolutions required by 24MP or higher digital sensors.

I had hoped the 4/180 and 3.5/100 would be good enough (ie. excellent) on my 42MP Sony a7RII…

Nope.

 

How were the lenses inadequate?    

[smcmason]

Just to share my experience adapting Hasselblad glass to high resolution sensors, here is a 200% crop SOOC from my Hasselblad 250mm CF alongside the same crop from the Fuji GF 250mm both taken on my 102MP Fuji GFX 100: https://lightroom.adobe.com/shares/9034ec749de14dc383957ff8a4a6aad7 

I've had similar results with the Hasselblad 150mm. I find them to be outstanding. 

[AZN]

9 hours ago, hepcat said:

How were the lenses inadequate?    

• Hasselblad Distagon CFi 4/50

Just about any Leica 50mm will run rings around it, let alone the 50mm Summilux-R E60 f/1.4 (ROM)

• Hasselblad Planar CFi 3.5/100

Really wanted this to work as the Planar 3.5/100 is legendary, but then so too is the 100mm Apo-Macro-R f/2.8 (ROM)

• Hasselblad Sonnar CFi 4/180

Maybe for portrature, but the 80-200mm Vario-Elmar-R f/4 (ROM) is more practical

BTW I have all these lenses, so am speaking from personal experience. This is on 36mm x 24mm full-frame digital cameras, which is what the original Q was.  On MF digital I accept that the V series lenses may work well.  Don't know.

But as I said in another thread, if people want to experiment then be my guest.

 

[Tpau17]

Am 19.10.2023 um 02:39 schrieb _Olivier:

I have read through these old posts previously, and most of the info is 6.5 years old. I was hoping maybe there was a newer adapter out there... 

I haven't any experience with Hasselblad, but I use some adapter to connect R- or M42-lenses on my SL-system from Novoflex, they make great quality and perhaps here you can get informations about SL&Hasselblad-V. 

I noticed that they make a 2-part-combination ?!. see here: 

https://www.novoflex.de/de/produkte/adapter/adapterfinder/adapterringkombination-hasselblad-v-objektive-an-leica-t-sl-kameras.html?rgerg=10

[andybarton]

The Novoflex site is excellent - input your camera mount type and your lens mount and they seem to have a solution for everyone.

[hepcat]

8 hours ago, AZN said:

• Hasselblad Distagon CFi 4/50

Just about any Leica 50mm will run rings around it, let alone the 50mm Summilux-R E60 f/1.4 (ROM)

• Hasselblad Planar CFi 3.5/100

Really wanted this to work as the Planar 3.5/100 is legendary, but then so too is the 100mm Apo-Macro-R f/2.8 (ROM)

• Hasselblad Sonnar CFi 4/180

Maybe for portrature, but the 80-200mm Vario-Elmar-R f/4 (ROM) is more practical

BTW I have all these lenses, so am speaking from personal experience. This is on 36mm x 24mm full-frame digital cameras, which is what the original Q was.  On MF digital I accept that the V series lenses may work well.  Don't know.

But as I said in another thread, if people want to experiment then be my guest.

 

I was hoping for a response with more specific details about the performance you saw out of the old Zeiss glass.  "Runs rings around it" is colorful, but not terribly descriptive in objective terms.  How is the the Distagon 50mm f/4 inferior to "just about any Leica 50mm"  in objective terms?

I'm not trying to be pedantic, I'm interested in the "why" of what your experience was.

[Stuart Richardson]

In my experience with V lenses on the S, the biggest problem was chromatic aberration and longitudinal chromatic aberration, along with significant uncorrected spherical aberration (that is soft, glowy detail) at most wider apertures. Contrast in general is significantly lower. In my experience the 50mm focal length was kind of pointless for the reasons AZN said: at least with the FE version, it is massive, heavy, slow and not nearly as good as any 50mm M or L mount lens. 80mm and above make more sense. The 80mm CFE I had was the best of the bunch technically. Doing very well stopped down, and ok wider open. The 110mm, 250mm and 350mm were all good, mediocre and terrible, in that order. 
I agree that C/Y lenses are more fruitful territory here, but if you have the V lenses you might as well try them. To my opinion at least, you lose a ton of their character just by cropping them down to 35mm, regardless of how they do. If I wanted a character lens for the SL I would look more at a lens like the Light Lens Lab speed panchromat or something like that.