Trouble determining exact FL when adapting old Hasselblad V lenses

[algrove]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I love adapting various lenses to the SL3 in FF 24x36 mode.

I have recently used the M 75/1.4 with the Leica M-L adapter and will be trying the M 0.95 Noctilux next.

I put on a Hasselblad 6x6 110 f2.0 with adapter today and according to any expert comments-vertical/ horizontal or diagonal they all seem to be way off when compared to my results when looking through the SL3's EVF.

I say this because I checked the frame edges while using the 75/1.4 to get an idea where a 75 composition falls on the SL3. Then I put on the Planar 110 f2.0 and it seemed like it was an 80 or even an 85mm on the SL3 because it cropped the image somewhat considerably from where the M 75/1.4 image looked.

Many charts and experts say the 110 mm should be a 70 or 60 or even a 47mm on a FF 24x36 camera depending on whether calculating horizontal, diagonal or  vertical. None of these given focal lengths seem correct for me.

Real world testing versus experts and charts. Did I do something wrong? Thanks.

 

[darylgo]

110mm/80mm x 50mm = approximate focal length in 35mm terms on a full frame Hasselblad, approximately 70mm in 35mm terms.  On a 35mm camera the focal length 110mm doesn't change, it stays 110mm and the central portion of the glass is used, so the lens should look like a 110mm. 

I'd be interested in your evaluation of the rendering on the SL3 with this legendary lens.    

[jaapv]

The focal length of a lens never changes, but the angle of view does. An 80 mm lens on MF will produce the same angle of view as a 50 mm lens on FF. Mount the same MF 80 mm lens on a FF camera and it produces the same AOV as any 80 mm lens. 

[algrove]

12 hours ago, darylgo said:

110mm/80mm x 50mm = approximate focal length in 35mm terms on a full frame Hasselblad, approximately 70mm in 35mm terms.  On a 35mm camera the focal length 110mm doesn't change, it stays 110mm and the central portion of the glass is used, so the lens should look like a 110mm. 

I'd be interested in your evaluation of the rendering on the SL3 with this legendary lens.    

I will get to that soon.

I must say though that the X2Dii seems better suited to using the 110/2.0 mainly due to better IBIS (the lens is heavy hand held) and if one wants focus peaking (FP) the cyan color is fantastic to use.

I wonder if the X2Dii FP is more accurate than the Leica FP as I have never trusted the Leica because after zooming in I have most always found the Leica FP was not spot on and then had to correct focus. That said doing the same type of zoom in after focusing with FP on the X2Dii the FP was spot on requiring no need to correct focus.

Both cameras weigh nearly the same so that starting point is neutral to me. The adapters are close and both offer tripod mount. I just might find it easier to accomplish shooting with this lens on a monopod.

Edited Wednesday at 01:15 PM by algrove

[Photon42]

Your 110F lens stays 110 on the SL. On the X2D, it will also stay a 110, but will have about the FOV of a 90mm on a FF sensor. Keep in mind the X cameras can only shot these lenses using electronic shutter. That may or may not be relevant for you. Honestly, the 110 is best on a 6x6 film camera. I used it a bit on an old S2, but it is not the same. The crop takes part of the magic of that lens away, in my eyes.

[Stuart Richardson]

4 hours ago, Photon42 said:

Your 110F lens stays 110 on the SL. On the X2D, it will also stay a 110, but will have about the FOV of a 90mm on a FF sensor. Keep in mind the X cameras can only shot these lenses using electronic shutter. That may or may not be relevant for you. Honestly, the 110 is best on a 6x6 film camera. I used it a bit on an old S2, but it is not the same. The crop takes part of the magic of that lens away, in my eyes.

Agreed. The 110mm f2 is magic on 6x6 film. On digital it is still nice but loses quite a bit. Between the SL3 and X2D, I would use the X2D for the 110mm as the sensor area is closer to 6x6 (though still a ways away). 

[algrove]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Wonder if the FE 150/2.8 renders nicely on an X2Dii?

[BernardC]

12 hours ago, algrove said:

Wonder if the FE 150/2.8 renders nicely on an X2Dii?

It's a very sharp lens on the S-006, although not quite as sharp as native S lenses. It has a very different look compared to the 110, being sharp all over the field from wide open. I find that it's the only Hasselblad lens that I can mix into an S project without it standing-out too much. I also use the 110 on the S, but only to exploit its unique look which is very different from any S lens.

If you want a 110/2.0 look on a 35mm body, you should look for a Contax 85/1.4 Planar. They both came out around the same time and have similar optical designs.

[algrove]

27 minutes ago, BernardC said:

It's a very sharp lens on the S-006, although not quite as sharp as native S lenses. It has a very different look compared to the 110, being sharp all over the field from wide open. I find that it's the only Hasselblad lens that I can mix into an S project without it standing-out too much. I also use the 110 on the S, but only to exploit its unique look which is very different from any S lens.

If you want a 110/2.0 look on a 35mm body, you should look for a Contax 85/1.4 Planar. They both came out around the same time and have similar optical designs.

Thanks. Own the 110/2.0, but contemplating getting a 150/2.8 because its 2.8 and not 4.0

Edited Thursday at 02:27 PM by algrove

[BernardC]

23 minutes ago, algrove said:

Thanks. Own the 110/2.0, but contemplating getting a 150/2.8 because its 2.8 and not 4.0

The 150/2.8 is one of the lesser-known V lenses. It wasn't very popular because it only fit the "F" bodies, and the lack of flash sync ruled it out for studio portraits.

Apparently it was designed for ultimate sharpness (over 200 lp/mm on slow film), unlike the more common 4.0 Sonnar and 160 CB. The later V 180 is probably it's closest cousin in the Hasselblad lineup.

[BernardC]

Found my source:

https://www.photo.net/forums/topic/13496-sonnar-fe-150-lens-qualitiy-and-converter-2xe/#comment-705130

Kornelius Fleischer was a Zeiss employee, and a great source of info back in the day.

Edited Thursday at 03:05 PM by BernardC

[Photoworks]

On 10/29/2025 at 2:14 PM, algrove said:

I must say though that the X2Dii seems better suited to using the 110/2.0 mainly due to better IBIS (the lens is heavy hand held) and if one wants focus peaking (FP) the cyan color is fantastic to use.

in the SL3 you have to select the adapted lens to reactivate the IBIS

[algrove]

5 hours ago, BernardC said:

The 150/2.8 is one of the lesser-known V lenses. It wasn't very popular because it only fit the "F" bodies, and the lack of flash sync ruled it out for studio portraits.

Apparently it was designed for ultimate sharpness (over 200 lp/mm on slow film), unlike the more common 4.0 Sonnar and 160 CB. The later V 180 is probably it's closest cousin in the Hasselblad lineup.

I have no F body so I guess getting one for my 503CW etc use is ruled out. The 110 I have seems well suited for all the bodies I have including the X2Dii with X-V adapter.

[algrove]

5 hours ago, Photoworks said:

in the SL3 you have to select the adapted lens to reactivate the IBIS

You see I am getting old and forgot that point. How forgetful I am these days.

Edit-Just now set it to a 135mm as FOV is even over 150mm equivalent and also noticed it was on 60 instead of 120 hz. Much smoother and easier to focus too. Thanks ever so much.

Edited Thursday at 08:59 PM by algrove

[algrove]

6 hours ago, BernardC said:

The 150/2.8 is one of the lesser-known V lenses. It wasn't very popular because it only fit the "F" bodies, and the lack of flash sync ruled it out for studio portraits.

Apparently it was designed for ultimate sharpness (over 200 lp/mm on slow film), unlike the more common 4.0 Sonnar and 160 CB. The later V 180 is probably it's closest cousin in the Hasselblad lineup.

I have that 180 in a CF version and I know it is sharp. Perhaps too long for an SL3 or even a X2Dii at under 10 feet on both. BUT over 1o ft say 15 feet then it might be good for portrait head and little shoulder.

[Stuart Richardson]

1 hour ago, algrove said:

I have no F body so I guess getting one for my 503CW etc use is ruled out. The 110 I have seems well suited for all the bodies I have including the X2Dii with X-V adapter.

The 110mm is also an F/FE lens, so you would not be able to use that on a 503CW either. 

[algrove]

8 minutes ago, Stuart Richardson said:

The 110mm is also an F/FE lens, so you would not be able to use that on a 503CW either. 

I now remember getting the 110 for use on my X2Dii and as such I just nabbed a 150/2.8 with hood, shade (do not know this), B70-77 filter adapter and 77 filter. Some Japanese dealers are now offering no duty on imports as they end up paying them via the shipping charge. OK with me!

[algrove]

Now to adapting these huge lenses on my M11M with red filter. Who cares about the size, I am here to have fun not fantasy.

Edited Thursday at 10:33 PM by algrove