50mm CF vs CF FLE

[bill_k]

Has anyone really noticed a big difference between the CF and CF FLE versions as far as optical quality? I have used both and I have not, but it could be me. Most of what I shoot is in the 10ft to infinity range. I am back to owning Hasselblads again after a slight leave of absence

The original CF's are much cheaper than the FLE's.

Bill K

 

[ajs]

Hey, i too am interested in finding out the actual difference the fle has on the final image. Not to hijack you thread, but is the 50mm fle not alot more difficult to handhold with its two focusing rings? And if you dont set them both does the image not end up out of focus?

Cheers
Adam

 

[bill_k]

I have used both and I can't tell. I know I have forgot to set the send focus ring (or whatever it is called) and didn't seem to notice anything wrong with the focus. So is it an edge sharpness thing or ??? Anybody do more exacting tests?

Bill K

 

[bill_k]

Adam,

When I have used both I have not noticed a difference hand holding. There is just one more ring on ther front of the barrel to remember to set.

Bill K

 

[jacksav]

My next purchase is one of these two lenses, so i went back to resurrect this thread from 2006. Could anyone else sahre what differences there are in these two lenses? How is the FLE and improvement? Are both f32? Any help would be, well, helpful.

Thanks.

Jack

 

[polypal]

The floating elements version gives improved quality, contrast and resolution when focusing at close range.
To focus the following procedure should be followed:
First estimate the distance or focus with the focusing ring, than set the floating elements to the correct distance range and lastly correct the main focus.

Since many photographers do not bother to adjust the floating lensgroup and refocus after that the new CZ 50 mm from the classic series does not have floating elements any more.

The non FLE version is optically similar to the early "C" type lenses.