which lenses can be adapted to Hasselblad 500/2xx bodies ?

[menos]

I am new to Hasselblad, currently deciding on a first body.

I use Leica M 35mm cameras and prefer especially certain older lenses to the modern, contrasty and sharp optics.

For Leica M, there are many options, to have classic lenses modified (optical cells remounted in Leica compatible focus mounts, remounting of lens flanges, adding of rangefinder couplings, etc …), to be used on the M camera.

Is there such options and a lively market of lenses for the Hasselblad 500 and 2xx bodies as well?

 

[wbulte]

Please keep in mind that the 500-series does not have a shutter in the body, that makes non-HB lenses on it a bit of a no-no.

To be honest, I see little reason to put non-HB lenses on a HB. And if you want to do it anyway, make sure you have a 200-series body so with a body-mounted shutter.

 

[menos]

Please keep in mind that the 500-series does not have a shutter in the body, that makes non-HB lenses on it a bit of a no-no.

To be honest, I see little reason to put non-HB lenses on a HB. And if you want to do it anyway, make sure you have a 200-series body so with a body-mounted shutter.

Yes, the lack of internal shutter with most V body models is clear to me (I am actually eying a nice looking second hand 205TCC at the moment).

With many camera systems, there is an active market for legacy lenses (mind you, these are not modified out of cost savings or a like reason, but out of the pure desire, to use certain optics on a convenient, modern camera system).

I do feel, like the Hasselblad V can be a camera system, I would like to use handheld - I like the 6x6 negative, I love that waist level finder, I like, that it is relatively light and compact (apart from using long or very fast lenses of course).

I was wondering, if there is such a market and certain lenses are better than others for modifying.

On my search for a nice starter kit, I saw several modified lenses to Hasselblad (without shutter) and also modified other cameras, to take CZ Hasselblad lenses, which I am less interested though.

 

[wbulte]

Note that *all* 500-series come without a body shutter. The auxiliary shutter of course does not count

Tricky is the mechanism Hasselblad uses to 'cock' the in-lens shutters.
I do not think it would be easy (that is, for sensible cost) to adapt non-HB lenses to the 500-series bodies.

There are folks who have adapted Arsat (Kiev) lenses to 200-series bodies. I do not see the point unless you have a special lens that is not available (or not available for a sensible price) as an original HB lens. HB lenses have gone down in price in the last couple of years so..

 

[menos]

Note that *all* 500-series come without a body shutter. The auxiliary shutter of course does not count

Tricky is the mechanism Hasselblad uses to 'cock' the in-lens shutters.
I do not think it would be easy (that is, for sensible cost) to adapt non-HB lenses to the 500-series bodies.

There are folks who have adapted Arsat (Kiev) lenses to 200-series bodies. I do not see the point unless you have a special lens that is not available (or not available for a sensible price) as an original HB lens. HB lenses have gone down in price in the last couple of years so..

I am fully aware of the technical aspects. My post is aimed at finding out about what is available and usually made.
As I have written, I have handled two modified non HB lenses, which were remounted for HB and used by the previous owner of the 205, one of them being a 500mm f8 mirror lens.

Let's not discuss reasons, to adapt and remount lenses - this get's quickly philosophical. Let me only state, that main reason, to do so is clearly not cost saving as of rather affordable prices of Hasselblad glass.

My main interest lies in different characters of lenses. I am not a collector, but I do have more than 5 different 35mm primes for Leica M and a similar count with 50mm lenses.

Why would you do that? Every single one of them has a certain character, I like and could not live without them.

Well with Hasselblad, you have around my preferred field of view the 80 f2.8, the 80 f2.8 and the 80 f2.8.

Well, you have certainly different builds of it with change in coatings, major change in handling due to different barrel constructions and even changes in optical formulas. But there must be more, right?

Let's not limit lenses to complicated conversions with working central shutter, as I am quite determined, that a 200 series body with focal plane shutter will be it.

So … all options for remounted lenses are open.

My favorite designs for normal lenses in 35mm format are the Leica, Noctilux f1, Collapsible 5cm Summicron (+ the Leitz Summitar for it's beautiful background rendering). The Nikon Noct-Nikkor 58 f1.2 is another of my favorite lenses, unfortunately forced to be used on a camera system, that is more and more alien to me.
There are many others, I do like a lot, but these are some of my favorites.

I really like, what I see from the Planar 80 f2.8, but it can't be the only option, to shoot on a Hasselblad V body!

 

[pronvit]

What answer are you expecting to receive? I think you already know the simple one - flange focal distance of the lens you want to remount must be longer than on Hasselblad mount. (Actually sometimes it will be possible even if it's slightly shorter.) There's nice list of mounts in Wikipedia along with their flange focal distances, so you can check if lenses from various systems could be remounted.

 

[polarcircle]

Hi,

I did some adaption in my early days when I couldnt afford another Hasselblad lens. In terms of image quality, clarity, contrast, haze, etc, Hasselblad always win. I had though some nice experiences with Pentacon 500 f5.6 lenses, which has one advantage over similar Hasselblad focal lengths, whic is the 5.6 opening. When used on MF resolution become not too poor either. A rather nice birdlens which can be used handheld. Actually due to its weight its not so shaky as a lighter lens. Balance is very good on a Hasselblad body.

If one simply want different pictures, scanned you can make all the changes you want later on, alternatively from a digital back.

As for the Hasselblad 80 mm's. The only real difference is the slightly higher contrast of later T* lenses. In terms of operation the F lenses are really great. You can get down to 60 cm compared to corresponding C/CF which goes only to 90 cm.

ANother aspect of conversions is that they are simply fun, if not always so useful anymore as to the Cheap Hasselblad gear.

There is though one high quality part of the conversion lenses - this is macro. many macro lenses (particularly in the short focal ranges), e.g., leica, has been used on Hasseblads, 200x caemras with very good results. Dont forget the Zork close focus system

Also the Arsat 30mm fisheyes are reputed to give a very good IW for the price.

There is of course of plethora of lenses for the Rollei 6x6 SLRs. If there is anything there thats interesting and money and lens allows an adaption could be really interesting. Particularly f yu dont wnat to lug around one more camera system. Otherwise, just buy a Rollei body

IF soft focus wnated there was a rodenstock soft focus lens that used to float around specially adapted to 200x cameras that some years ago could be had for a song. I think they though have become rare on the market.