The Makro Planar CF was the first lens I purchased for my Hasselblad in 1992 for $2700. In 2024 it's still my most used lens even though I now have a full range of focal lengths from 40mm - 180mm.
yes, I have this to, as well as the 80 and 180 I mainly shoot urban landscapes, so use the 180 for detailed closeups, but the 120 is also a great gap filler between the standard 80 and the 180 in focal length. PS from the documentation and charts the 120 is NOT a macro Until the tubes go on; just its compatible with them, aka the subject to lens distance is right, not too close for comfort.
I do like the 180 for what you mentioned very much. My only gripe is the limited view on the top of the image. Not a huge problem but annoying when shooting.
I picked up the black 5.6, C T* excellent pluse with caps,hood and Hasselblad soft filter for $275 out the door. The self timer works just like a new one, and the good part is that a person can find lots of Hasselblad economical bay50 filters. Your review is spot on. Take care. 72 years old and benn shooting 1964.. Tulsa, Oklahoma
When I bought my Hasselblad 500CM a couple years ago the 120MM CFi was the first lens I got for it. I just love that lens and use it for at least 80% of my photography. I agree with you about the "Macro" range of the lens. When I want to get close to my subject, I use a variety of extension tubes as well as the Proxar closeup filters. I thought about purchasing a Hasselblad extension bellows for it but those are overpriced on eBay imho. Maybe in the future... Hasselblad did make a CB version of the 120MM Macro that was sold in Asia. The CB lens has the equivalent glass of the 120MM CF with the CB look and design (source: Hasselblad Compendium). All in all, a great lens!
Hasselblad did design some in the 1990´s after buying a cheap computer program to calculate Lenses, so Hasselblad intended to make their own Lenses, but new investors shut it down, they was more interested in money than in innovation !
I have this lens and really like it. I never shoot actual Macro but I do have three very nice extension tubes. I also have the 150mm which is a focal length I never use and should sell. Especially since I lost my loved 50mm in a lake. I might use the 120 in a couple weeks for a street shooting when I am in Seattle for a day. I love the 55mm Micro Nikon for this so it would work.
I’m interested in getting this lens for portraits and still life. Is eBay the best place to buy one? I have the Hasselblad 500c and the 80 lens. Just recently have gone back to b + w film. Trying to relearn everything after 25 years of using digital. Your videos have been fantastic for relearning the process. Thanks.
I really don't know where some of these ' reviewers ' come up with such stupid statements like a 120 Macro-Planar is not sharp edge to edge. I wonder if they actually own and use these lenses or just letting off hot air. I have two of the C versions, They are a little slower @ F5.6 but blisteringly sharp. As an added note, you reallu should try the 100mm F3.5 Planar. This lens is nothing but outstanding in every respect.
@@Distphoto The design of the 100 was commissioned due to a special case of needing a lens of absolutely first class optical performance. If my memeory serves me right it had something to do with aerial photograhy or survey or espionage. They are not easy to come by in good shape, and they are still quite pricey.
Cool to see you talk about this gem. I have a C version, and just love it. People always refer to this as a macro lens, but my understanding is it was designed as a flat-field lens for copywork. It really is cut-yourself sharp. I love it for portraits, but I've had folks react with some shock because you can see every pore. Great lens. I might get a CF, 'cause 5.6 is pretty darn slow. Love it with the tubes.
Macro is not actually a lens ' design ', but a stage of magnification @ 1:1. You can reach macro using a bug standard 50mm lens but is the field flat or the lens aberrations controlled at such close distances. Macro Planars were designed for close focus with a flat field and with using an extension tube can reach 1:1 or beyond.
I have the 180 as well but not the 150. biggest diffence is going to be the closer focus distance of the 120 which I love. The 150 is known to be a spectaculat lens and with extention tubes you can shoot close up, just a little less convenient.
I used the Hasselblad Zeiss Macro Planar 120mm 4.0 from when it was announced in 1983, it is a superb Lens ! But many times I wished it had a larger aperture, so one day I swapped (no money involved !) it for a Hasselblad Zeiss Planar 110mm 2.0 which together with 5x Waist Level Finder and the Hasselblad Acute Matte Focusing Screen lightninged up the viewfinder many times ! Together with the Zeiss Mutar 2x I could still do Macro photo, but now I could use the 110mm much easier for any kind of photography than with the 120mm 4.0 ! The 110mm + 2x also meant that I did not need the Tele-Tessar 250 4.0 any more, so that I swapped for a Leica Minilux. So my full set was the Hasselblad 2000 FC which was full customized at the old Hasselblad in Sweden, the Hasselblad Zeiss Distagon 50mm 2.8 Hasselblad Zeiss Planar 110m 2.0, Hasselblad Zeiss Tele-Tessar 350mm 4.0 and the Hasselblad Zeiss Mutar 2x, five Hasselblad A12 magazines. Now I only do digital photography, much easier and much more fun !!! I do no like all the polluting chemicals involved for analog photography !!!
When buying these lenses new, from the first version: S-Planar f5.6, Hasselblad provided the Zeiss engineers' recommendations. For S-Planar and Macro-Planar, both 120 and 135mm versions, Optimum results are achieved at f11 and a reproduction ratio of 1:10 At these settings there is cornor to corner maximum resolution with zero distortion. I new this before I bought mine. And I bought it for the highest quality reproduction of artwork. Yes, it's fine as a general purpose lens, and your slightly perceived fall-off of sharpness is because you were not using it for its designed purpose.
Thank you for rthe awesome info! I would say any loss of sharpness using this for other purposes other than what you mentioned is very minor, in fact might even be more in ones head if this is known. I have some pretty tack sharp edge to edge prints made from over 20 feet away, but not its intended use as you say!
Bold statement, dude! 😲 Personally, I'd pick my CF 100/3.5 Planar--a half-stop faster, arguably sharper for infinity subjects like landscapes, and, though it doesn't focus quite as close as the 120 Makro, we're talking only about 4" difference. Regardless, IMO all the Zeiss glass for Hasselblad is top-notch!
Never had the chance to shoot the 100mm but have been hearing a lot about it's sharpness. Would. love to try one out. Though having an 80, 100 & 120 might be a bit much 🤔
I actually bought the lens the day after watching your video. I started film photography not so long ago and I'm dying to take some portraits with this one. Thanks for the videos :)
This honestly just made me feel a little bad for the medium format user's, when on full-frame, for around the same price, you can get the Samyang 135mm F1.8 lens, which even has auto-focus.
@@Distphoto Fair enough. I don't mean to be rude, as to photography is about eliciting an aesthetic which inevitably results purely from taste. They are also totally different base systems, so my comment is only applicable to those who haven't yet jumped into the Hasselblad ecosystem. I just tend to prefer those tools that allow for the widest range of expression. To give a somewhat different example, there's absolutely a place for shooting exclusively in jpg and baking in film presets. I do this all the time for ease of use and to enable a certain look straight away, but I tend to prefer the flexibility of the best sharpness out of camera, then tweaking in post. It could also result from my own bias, as I tend to think of Hasselblad as the camera's to go for when you want the widest possible range of alteration after the fact, so it just surprised me here.
@@Distphoto Also, a video titled "MUST BUY" which goes on to implore your listeners to purchase the lens comes with a bit of baggage in the form of expectations about proving the lens is the best option. I think comparing it to a lens at a similar price point, but vastly superior in terms of sheer image quality, if that's what someone is looking for, is a warranted comparison, even if only applicable to those viewers who haven't yet purchased a Hasselblad camera.
@@Michael-Hammerschmidt All valid points and you did not come off as rude and no offense taken. What I perceive as the best often has little to do with sharpness (though this one happens to be very sharp) in fact I feel most modern lenses are too sharp and tend to lack character at times. So when I shoot medium format with this lens it gives me an image I love. That’s it. For me it is a must buy over almost every other lens I have. Large format, medium, digital… all of them.
@@Distphoto That's definitely a good point and it's the reason I sometimes use my little Konica Hexanon 40mm f/1.8 adapted onto my Sony. Modern lenses can come off as rather clinical. Also, of course, at the end of the day what motivates you to have your camera by your side is what matters.
The Makro Planar CF was the first lens I purchased for my Hasselblad in 1992 for $2700. In 2024 it's still my most used lens even though I now have a full range of focal lengths from 40mm - 180mm.
yes, I have this to, as well as the 80 and 180 I mainly shoot urban landscapes, so use the 180 for detailed closeups, but the 120 is also a great gap filler between the standard 80 and the 180 in focal length. PS from the documentation and charts the 120 is NOT a macro Until the tubes go on; just its compatible with them, aka the subject to lens distance is right, not too close for comfort.
I do like the 180 for what you mentioned very much. My only gripe is the limited view on the top of the image. Not a huge problem but annoying when shooting.
I picked up the black 5.6, C T* excellent pluse with caps,hood and Hasselblad soft filter for $275 out the door. The self timer works just like a new one, and the good part is that a person can find lots of Hasselblad economical bay50 filters. Your review is spot on.
Take care.
72 years old and benn shooting 1964..
Tulsa, Oklahoma
So cool. Great hook up, Happy shooting from Green Bay, WI
When I bought my Hasselblad 500CM a couple years ago the 120MM CFi was the first lens I got for it. I just love that lens and use it for at least 80% of my photography. I agree with you about the "Macro" range of the lens. When I want to get close to my subject, I use a variety of extension tubes as well as the Proxar closeup filters. I thought about purchasing a Hasselblad extension bellows for it but those are overpriced on eBay imho. Maybe in the future... Hasselblad did make a CB version of the 120MM Macro that was sold in Asia. The CB lens has the equivalent glass of the 120MM CF with the CB look and design (source: Hasselblad Compendium). All in all, a great lens!
Now I know why your pics are so sharp 😃
Hasselblad never made lenses , it’s a Zeiss lens. They made lenses for many different manufacturers.
Don’t think I said they did… If I did I did not mean to and apologize.
It is in the title, isn't it? In the video itself you said it was made by Carl Zeiss, but the title might be confusing.
@@vovka667 Oh crap…. Will change the title.thanks
Hasselblad did design some in the 1990´s after buying a cheap computer program to calculate Lenses, so Hasselblad intended to make their own Lenses, but new investors shut it down, they was more interested in money than in innovation !
I have this lens and really like it. I never shoot actual Macro but I do have three very nice extension tubes. I also have the 150mm which is a focal length I never use and should sell. Especially since I lost my loved 50mm in a lake. I might use the 120 in a couple weeks for a street shooting when I am in Seattle for a day. I love the 55mm Micro Nikon for this so it would work.
Really sorry for your loss. That sucks. I tried street shooting with my Blad…. Ended up in multiple conversations about the camera 🤷🏻♂️
@@Distphoto I just ordered the 50mm CF FLE T✻ from KEH. I will take it out this week as soon as it arrives. Excited :)
@@terrywbreedlove Awesome, it is a fun and excellent lens! Have fun!
I’m interested in getting this lens for portraits and still life. Is eBay the best place to buy one? I have the Hasselblad 500c and the 80 lens. Just recently have gone back to b + w film. Trying to relearn everything after 25 years of using digital. Your videos have been fantastic for relearning the process. Thanks.
@@LisaHaskins-v9f Thanks, appreciate that! KHE or EBay is where I would look.
@@Distphoto Thanks!
Is this lens the best for portaits?
@@LawsonPhotos It is my favorite for most portraits. Best might be subjective and there are some other VERY good portrait lenses
@Distphoto Thank you, as I got the body, but I want to figure out which lens I should get first as I mainly do portraits and fashion.
@@LawsonPhotos This would be a great choice for that!
I really don't know where some of these ' reviewers ' come up with such stupid statements like a 120 Macro-Planar is not sharp edge to edge. I wonder if they actually own and use these lenses or just letting off hot air. I have two of the C versions, They are a little slower @ F5.6 but blisteringly sharp. As an added note, you reallu should try the 100mm F3.5 Planar. This lens is nothing but outstanding in every respect.
@@lensman5762 would love to get my hands on the 100 3.5. Having the 120 and 80. Not sure if I can justify buying, but have heard it is quite nice 👍
@@Distphoto The design of the 100 was commissioned due to a special case of needing a lens of absolutely first class optical performance. If my memeory serves me right it had something to do with aerial photograhy or survey or espionage. They are not easy to come by in good shape, and they are still quite pricey.
@@lensman5762 Well now I am even more intrigued. Love a good back story. Thanks for the info 👍
Absolutely the best lens that i have used so far 👍
Cool to see you talk about this gem. I have a C version, and just love it. People always refer to this as a macro lens, but my understanding is it was designed as a flat-field lens for copywork. It really is cut-yourself sharp. I love it for portraits, but I've had folks react with some shock because you can see every pore. Great lens. I might get a CF, 'cause 5.6 is pretty darn slow. Love it with the tubes.
I believe you are correct and not sure why Hasselblad gives it this degnation but for closer up stuff has no equal in my opinion!
Macro is not actually a lens ' design ', but a stage of magnification @ 1:1. You can reach macro using a bug standard 50mm lens but is the field flat or the lens aberrations controlled at such close distances. Macro Planars were designed for close focus with a flat field and with using an extension tube can reach 1:1 or beyond.
Hasselblad of Sweden 😁
Never gonna live that down 😂
Thanks for this awesome video. I've got 150mm in the viewfinder. Is there any big difference from 120mm?
I have the 180 as well but not the 150. biggest diffence is going to be the closer focus distance of the 120 which I love. The 150 is known to be a spectaculat lens and with extention tubes you can shoot close up, just a little less convenient.
@@Distphoto thanks a lot ❤
There are no short comings , it is the best lens for everything ! The 100mm lens was the sharpest lens .
Agreed 👍 never used the 100 but that is what I have read / heard.
I used the Hasselblad Zeiss Macro Planar 120mm 4.0 from when it was announced in 1983, it is a superb Lens ! But many times I wished it had a larger aperture, so one day I swapped (no money involved !) it for a Hasselblad Zeiss Planar 110mm 2.0 which together with 5x Waist Level Finder and the Hasselblad Acute Matte Focusing Screen lightninged up the viewfinder many times ! Together with the Zeiss Mutar 2x I could still do Macro photo, but now I could use the 110mm much easier for any kind of photography than with the 120mm 4.0 ! The 110mm + 2x also meant that I did not need the Tele-Tessar 250 4.0 any more, so that I swapped for a Leica Minilux. So my full set was the Hasselblad 2000 FC which was full customized at the old Hasselblad in Sweden, the Hasselblad Zeiss Distagon 50mm 2.8 Hasselblad Zeiss Planar 110m 2.0, Hasselblad Zeiss Tele-Tessar 350mm 4.0 and the Hasselblad Zeiss Mutar 2x, five Hasselblad A12 magazines. Now I only do digital photography, much easier and much more fun !!! I do no like all the polluting chemicals involved for analog photography !!!
Sounds like you had a sweet setup👍🏻
When buying these lenses new, from the first version: S-Planar f5.6, Hasselblad provided the Zeiss engineers' recommendations.
For S-Planar and Macro-Planar, both 120 and 135mm versions, Optimum results are achieved at f11 and a reproduction ratio of 1:10
At these settings there is cornor to corner maximum resolution with zero distortion.
I new this before I bought mine.
And I bought it for the highest quality reproduction of artwork.
Yes, it's fine as a general purpose lens, and your slightly perceived fall-off of sharpness is because you were not using it for its designed purpose.
Thank you for rthe awesome info! I would say any loss of sharpness using this for other purposes other than what you mentioned is very minor, in fact might even be more in ones head if this is known. I have some pretty tack sharp edge to edge prints made from over 20 feet away, but not its intended use as you say!
Bold statement, dude! 😲 Personally, I'd pick my CF 100/3.5 Planar--a half-stop faster, arguably sharper for infinity subjects like landscapes, and, though it doesn't focus quite as close as the 120 Makro, we're talking only about 4" difference. Regardless, IMO all the Zeiss glass for Hasselblad is top-notch!
Never had the chance to shoot the 100mm but have been hearing a lot about it's sharpness. Would. love to try one out. Though having an 80, 100 & 120 might be a bit much 🤔
I actually bought the lens the day after watching your video. I started film photography not so long ago and I'm dying to take some portraits with this one. Thanks for the videos :)
Hope you are having a blast with this one!
Ah Ah, I see that you finally made a difference between chocolate (Switzerland) and Hasselblad (Sweden) ! Great.
Indeed I did 😊
@@Distphoto By the way, congratulation for your videos, it's very interesting.
Sweden is also good for cars (Saab) and washing machines (Asko).
Will tris workshop on the 500c?
Yes 👍
I love my 150mm, but I’ll have to check this out.
It is a special lens 👍. Though the 150 is lovey as well!
I paid over £500 for my first 150mm in 1978, to supplement my 80mm, and those two lenses helped me earn a decent living for decades.
Thanks!
You’re welcome, thank you Steve!
This honestly just made me feel a little bad for the medium format user's, when on full-frame, for around the same price, you can get the Samyang 135mm F1.8 lens, which even has auto-focus.
Kinda two completely different things.
@@Distphoto Fair enough. I don't mean to be rude, as to photography is about eliciting an aesthetic which inevitably results purely from taste. They are also totally different base systems, so my comment is only applicable to those who haven't yet jumped into the Hasselblad ecosystem. I just tend to prefer those tools that allow for the widest range of expression. To give a somewhat different example, there's absolutely a place for shooting exclusively in jpg and baking in film presets. I do this all the time for ease of use and to enable a certain look straight away, but I tend to prefer the flexibility of the best sharpness out of camera, then tweaking in post.
It could also result from my own bias, as I tend to think of Hasselblad as the camera's to go for when you want the widest possible range of alteration after the fact, so it just surprised me here.
@@Distphoto Also, a video titled "MUST BUY" which goes on to implore your listeners to purchase the lens comes with a bit of baggage in the form of expectations about proving the lens is the best option.
I think comparing it to a lens at a similar price point, but vastly superior in terms of sheer image quality, if that's what someone is looking for, is a warranted comparison, even if only applicable to those viewers who haven't yet purchased a Hasselblad camera.
@@Michael-Hammerschmidt All valid points and you did not come off as rude and no offense taken. What I perceive as the best often has little to do with sharpness (though this one happens to be very sharp) in fact I feel most modern lenses are too sharp and tend to lack character at times.
So when I shoot medium format with this lens it gives me an image I love. That’s it. For me it is a must buy over almost every other lens I have. Large format, medium, digital… all of them.
@@Distphoto That's definitely a good point and it's the reason I sometimes use my little Konica Hexanon 40mm f/1.8 adapted onto my Sony. Modern lenses can come off as rather clinical. Also, of course, at the end of the day what motivates you to have your camera by your side is what matters.