Medium Format Forum

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

1600F + Tessar 80mm lens - first impressions


Active Member
I am sure most members are aware that my home in Australia has become home for a mint / like new 1600F and its companions the original film back, WLF and Tessar 80mm f2.8 lens.

But, like my other elderly cameras, permanent residency in Melbourne comes at a cost - you must work.... and I can tell you this beloved baby works and works beautifully.

A full user report of my first impressions
will get posted very soon. But, in the meantime, I wanted to share a few images I have taken - with Ilford Delta 100 Pro (the first film I took) and Fuji NPZ 800 (the second film I have taken).

I hope these images show exactly why I am smiling all the way from Melbourne to Algovia in Southern Germany - to the very doorstep of Jurgen Loob who made this possible.

While 72dpi over the web is hardly much of a test / demonstration I'm sure you'll see what I mean.

The upshot is that the Tessar 80mm f2.8 is a GEM in every sense of the word - even resolution of very fine detail, excellent sharpness and very low distortion (so low most viewers of the negatives or prints will never see any!).

The B&W shots are taken with Ilford Delta 100 Pro; the colour taken with Fujifilm NPZ 800. There is NO MANIPULATION. The scans are from a standard Fuji Frontier lab at the maximum resolution it can scan a 6x6 negative. My report will comment on lens performance based on close examination of the original negatives on a light panel under a loupe.

So, see what you all think! :)

NB: The colour image of the river and skyline has a building on the left that seems to be distorted (or falling) - it is not. It's an optical illusion due to the weird shapes on both sides and has caused much comment here.


  • 1600F-Tessar-Docklands-450.jpg
    55.4 KB · Views: 567
  • 1600F-Tessar-Docklands-450.jpg
    55.4 KB · Views: 566
  • 1600F-Tessar-Ducati-2-500.jpg
    117.4 KB · Views: 565
  • 1600F-Tessar-Ducati-2-500.jpg
    117.4 KB · Views: 565
  • 1600F-Tessar-Thalis-450.jpg
    62.3 KB · Views: 564
  • 1600F-Tessar-Thalis-450.jpg
    62.3 KB · Views: 564

So you finally got the hang of it!

Using these older cameras means getting acquainted with non automatic stop down and not forgetting that every time you take a picture as well as a few other not so easy things to remember.

Using these is like driving a convertible car; You cannot explain the feeling.
It is nothing compared to a car with all windows and the sunroof open.

With modern films these cameras proof they can still deliver good quality images.
In a way they are spoilt with new developments.
I am sure the 1600F likes being put to work again.

Thank you Simon for posting your first 1600F images .
Now , as you are successfully working with your 1600F , I would like to follow you .

I have a question to those of you , who also have a 1600F/1000F with the 2,8/80 TESSAR lens . Do you also have an original hood for the 80mm TESSAR ???
If so , could you please give me the diameter and the length of that hood .

Up to now I have tried very hard to get a used original hood , but without success .

Regards Jürgen
Anyone tried to use CFV digital back with an old F body ?

On my 1000F I got a trinar 80mm/2.8 Was it a adaptation or did it realy exit as new ?
It is not possible to use a digital back with older cameras that have a focal plane shutter. Besides that the shutter may be damaged.
There are plenty of CFV backs but those old shutters are rare.

Hasselblad supplied Kodak Ektar and Zeiss Tessar lenses for the 1600F and 1000F cameras.
All others like the excellent Kilfitt Makro lens and the Trinar were third party lenses.
Paul and Ulrik

One of you might have an original HASSELBLAD hood for the 2,8/80 mm TESSAR .
I tried to figure out the diameter and length of the hood in RICK NORDINs compendium but only the figures for the original 2,8/80 mm EKTAR lens are given .
Also , if you two "vintage specialists" should have an original hood for sale , please let me know . I will buy the hood , if its in good state .

Regards Jürgen

If I had one I would send you a hood.
They are so rare for the Tessar lens that I have not even seen one let alone have one.
So far the only reference I have is a picture in Ricks compendium.

I will try to find a solution though.
If Ulrik has one that can serve as a sample I will have a small batch remanufactured
exclusively for members of the 1600FUC of course.
If no sample is available I will get the dimensions and take it from there.

Good thing is the Tessar lens is not very prone to flair.
The Ektar 80 mm is even better in that respect.

You are right, a shade is an important item.

I agree Paul about the Tessar not being prone to flare. Jurgen and I commented to each other, while discussing how to rig an "after market" hood solution, that the Tessar's front element is comparatively deeply recessed into the barrel - more than any other 135 of MF lens I have used.

Maybe that design feature of the Tessar helps to explain the rarity of hoods for them.

Re Nordin's book which I value, I did notice that while a Tessar features in a photo, there is no real information detail provided for this wonderful lens. Like Jurgen said, I recall that the comments were limited to the Ektar.

And gentlemen I invite you to post some sample 1600F/1000F images here. :)
Dear Gentlemen,
I happen to have both hoods. The one made for the 60 and 80 mm lenses (permanently attached to my 60 mm Distagon) and the sort for the 135 and 250 mm lenses. These are hard to find and in one case I bought a complete lens because of the hood that came with it and sold the lens without the hood.

I would be happy to supply the hood to Paul so that copies can be made.

Most of you are aware that there are two types of 80 mm Tessar lenses. The older version with the long barrel where the front lens sits recessed and the later version with a shorter barrel (sort of pancake lens).

I guess that there is nobody here who could supply me with the correct hood for my 80 mm Ektar lenses?

Best Regards

Thanks for posting . You must be a happy man to have at least two original hoods . I have none , not even seen or had one in my hands .
I would be very pleased , if you could post the diameter and the length of the 60-80 HASSELBLAD hood .

Regarding the EKTAR 2,8/80 , I think it must be a serie VII hood .
There is a dealer in Germany , who offers a 2,8/80 Ekter , with "original hood" . But this is wrong . It is a serie VIII slip on hood . And his prices are far too high .

Looking forward to your answer
Hello Jürgen,
yes, the Ektar hoods are series VII screw-in. But my Ektars came without a hood, at least the filter retaining rings were still there (one is dent however). I will post the dimensions when I am back home. I have not been lucky in purchasing cheap Ektar 80mm lenses. And they always came with a camera attached...

Hello all hood hunters,

Remanufacture of the lens hood for the Tessar lens is no problem.
I hope to be able to get them at a decent price.

If the Ektar hood has different dimensions I will also have a few of those made.
I have an 80 mm Ektar with the 1600F and Ulrik has one or even two Ektars, I lost count.

With a little help to get dimensions for the Ektar hood and a sample for the Tessar hood it can be done.
Not only for the 80 mm but for the 135 mm Sonnar and Ektar lenses as well.

Thanks Paul for your efforts. I guess I have to prepare a parcel again. Counting my Ektars is not too difficult, the number is 2. I have to admit it gets more complicated with ubiquitous items like 1000F cameras.

Hello Ulrik,

Thanks for a fast answer.
As soon as the sample gets here I will ask what a small series of hoods will cost.
I suppose most of those interested would like them as near as original as possible meaning
they will only be painted inside with anti gloss paint and bare metal outside.


Thank you for your efforts to get a hood produced .
I believe , to produce a hood as shown on page 67 of RICK NORDIN's compendium , out of one piece of aluminium , will be rather time consuming and expensive . But I do of course not want to disencourage you .

I have found an interim solution , which does not look as nice as the original , but works fine . Unfortunately , it is all in black . Inside (good) outside , not as nice . But it looks good with the SONNAR 3,5/135mm lens and also with the DISTAGON 5,6/60mm , because these lens barrels are black as well .
It is : a stepup ring M54 > M55 , stepup ring M55 > M72 , cylindric hood M72 , all together 30mm long . The hood is available in different lengths and I could shorten the one for the DISTAGON .
The parts are all from HELIOPAN .
Now , of course , I could remove the black outside coating , but the hood is aluminium and the stepup rings are of brass . That gives you a bicolor hood , which does not look very nice . I have tried that about two years ago .
I am looking forward to see the measurements Ulrik will post .

Reagards Jürgen
Hallo Jürgen,

The shades from Ulrik will arrive shortly.
Do not get your hopes up to high but a decent copy of the original shades should be available
for the same price as a mass produced plastic one from Hasselblad for modern lenses.
The copy will be an aluminum one, finished like the original.


That sounds great . Put me on the list for 1 shade for the CZ TESSAR 2,8/80 lens .

Paul and Ulrik,
This is sounding like it will be possible to make up a metal hood for the Tessar 80mm f2.8.

And like Jurgen has posted, I too will be happy to contribute towards the cost and time for the replica hoods - put me down for one please :)

But I must also "pull my weight" (a OZ expression for making a contribution to a team effort) and must help you with whatever costs are involved plus, of course, whatever shipping costs are involved. Please email me off-line to let me know how I do that.

Ulrik - I never had any idea of the lenses' "filter retaining rings" until Jurgen explained it to me when I asked what this "strange removable ring" on the front of the Tessar was for.

Two questions for all of you who use the Tessar 80mm. Like Paul I feel the Tessar has little tendency to flare, which may be due to how deeply recessed the front element is. It strikes me as being quite unusually deeply recessed - like 135 format macro lenses (I once had a Zuiko 50mm f3.5 macro lens and the front element was very deeply recessed unlike my F1.8 and f1.4 non-macro versions).

1. Do you think the very deeply recessed front element of the Tessar is due to optical design giving it such a VERY SHORT closest focusing distance of 0.5metre??

2. I am very disinclined to add a UV protection filter to the Tessar because in addition to the extra glass, there will be a huge amount of air between the front element and the filter - this might degrade the excellent image quality of the Tessar. Do you agree??

Of course I see the benefit of a hood being both protection as well as optimal flare protection.

By the way, my first impressions essay is nearly complete. :)
Hello Simon,
I have not seen a negative effect of using an UV-filter on the Tessar regarding flare yet. But for sure it will exist under certain conditions (had a nasty flare yesterday in my filter equipped Biogon). If you send me your adress I can send you a series 7 filter (choose between UV or Skylight) so you can test it yourself.

I have not measured the dimensions of the hoods but they go directly to Paul today.

Best Regards

The MOD possible with the Tessar is largely due to the fact that the lens does not have a built in shutter.

There are more lenses from that era that have a recessed front element.
An excellent example is the Makro Kilfitt lens with a MOD of only 0.3 m.
That is even without using the macro range from the focusing mount.

I seldom use UV filters unless I need the filter effect of course.
Not so much because of purist approach just because I am to lazy to look for them.
I do like B+W filters though.
If you feel more comfortable with or even need a UV filter I think it will not be not a problem to use one.
Of course the proof of the pudding is in the eating!