Hasselblad xcd 55v lens

[Paratom]

Any first hand experiences with this lens?
Comparisons to 65mm?
How you get along with the focal length?
Do you use it side by side with 38mm or are they too close in focal length?
I have ordered one...because of size and AF and weight and f2.5 ...however I wish 38 and 55 were a little bit further "away"

 

[baudolino]

They work together very well, the 55 and the 38. They are like the equivalent of the the good old Pentax Ltd 43 and 31 focals. They are not too close for me, they are just the perfect spacing. Perfect for people shots and travel. In fact, the "somewhere between 35 and 50" (in FF equivalent) is my very favourite, for half body shots and even portraits (I like the sense of closeness this FL provides...ok, there is some perspective distortion and all that, but that's what Liquify is for if it bothers me). I like the 55 probably even more than the 38 in terms of IQ (does not vignette so much). No experience with the 65; I am new to the system. Here's an image shot on the 55 last Saturday.

.

 

[Paratom]

very cool image!
potraits with surrounding are one area are one area where I intend to use this lens. Thanks for sharing your experience

 

[Ai_Print]

I was waiting for both the 38V and 55V to be available at the same time to make the plunge as they would replace my 45P and 65XCD and would not be spaced out correctly if I could only do one at a time. So when B&H showed them both in stock last week, I took the plunge.

I have had them for a few days now and to be honest, I am kind of shocked at how poor the 55 looks compared to the 65. Regardless of wide open or down to F11, the 65 just crushes the 55 in the outer 1/3 of the image circle. It's so bad, I am wondering if I got a bum 55. I'll post samples in a moment but this just bums me out, it is not a good landscape lens at all if this is what an in-spec version of this lens looks like. Even the 45P blows the doors clean off in terms of resolution and image quality at the same apertures.

 

[tenmangu81]

I have the XCD65 and the XCD55V. Without any doubt, the XCD65 is better. Actually, it is one of the best "old" XCD series. But the 55V is not bad at all, I would even say it is good. No problem with sharpness in the edges (for my copy), and it is very light and fast when compared to the 65. It has the lens control ring (that I use as the sensitivity adjustment), and a very good manual focusing, not by wire (the 65 is by wire). And, to conclude, I like very much the 43mm equivalent FoV. I don't use the XCD65 any longer.

 

[jng]

I was waiting for both the 38V and 55V to be available at the same time to make the plunge as they would replace my 45P and 65XCD and would not be spaced out correctly if I could only do one at a time. So when B&H showed them both in stock last week, I took the plunge.

I have had them for a few days now and to be honest, I am kind of shocked at how poor the 55 looks compared to the 65. Regardless of wide open or down to F11, the 65 just crushes the 55 in the outer 1/3 of the image circle. It's so bad, I am wondering if I got a bum 55. I'll post samples in a moment but this just bums me out, it is not a good landscape lens at all if this is what an in-spec version of this lens looks like. Even the 45P blows the doors clean off in terms of resolution and image quality at the same apertures.

I don't own the XCD65 so have no basis for comparison. That said, I am quite happy with the XCD55V. Although I haven't used it extensively in the field, it seems to be quite sharp across the image field. I provide two examples, below (the first one shot at f/16 and the second one shot at f/11). Although I wouldn't consider this a stringent test by any means, neither would I call the lens deficient in any way. Perhaps you received a sub-optimal copy?

John

 

[Ai_Print]

OK, so I have had the lenses since Thursday, made various images with them and progressively felt more and more dissatisfied with the 55V. These are on landscape type images that had foreground subject matter anywhere from 40 feet away to infinity depending on the shot. The 38V is fine at all distances, cleans up great by F4 and is better than the 55 at every aperture.

So first we have the overall shot I did from an overlook today in which the focus point is about 1/3rd the way down from dead center. It was shot at 5.6 and the nearest trees were at least 500 feet away. Next will be the lower left and right corners as crops.



Lower Left:


Lower Right:

 

[Ai_Print]

Now I compare it to the 65mm in a more controlled test. This was on a tripod with no IBIS on, self timer, manually focused on the lower 1/4 of the center of the frame, 5.6. When it came to this test, even 2.8 on the 65 was much better than 5.6 on the 55. The ground is about 40 feet away and I cropped to the lower left corner at around 3500px, reduced to 2200px in order to fit the upload...

55V @5.6:


65XCD @5.6:




No matter how I use this lens, this is the story all around with the 55V I have received, so considering my primary use for this camera and lens setup are landscapes and aerial landscapes, this is just flat out not going to work. Either I have a really bunk 55 or it's design is causing this and I will then have to return both the 38V and 55V and just stick to my 45P and 65XCD.

On the plus side, I love the AF, design, size, weight, uniform 72mm filter and shade bayonet size of these new lenses, they pair perfectly with my 28P. But if the optical performance is not there, none of the aforementioned really matters to me.

I have uploaded a full res set and raw files to dropbox to share with Hasselblad and B&H. I'll see what they say and then decide from that point, but as it stands right now, I simply can not get usable images from this lens. I also have a friend locally who has the 55V and is willing to loan it to me to compare so I am going to do that tomorrow.

I hope others get better IQ out of this lens than what I am seeing here...

 

[Ai_Print]

Just got done comparing my 55V to my friend’s, they are basically the same so this is truly a bummer. This is not at all a good landscape lens for me and gets fully owned by the 65 2.8 optically speaking.

Regrettably I will be returning it with the 38 and sticking with my 45P and 65 2.8.

 

[alextsayun]

Thank you for comparison, I was thinking about replacing 65 to 55, but I guess I'll wait

 

[Ai_Print]

Thank you for comparison, I was thinking about replacing 65 to 55, but I guess I'll wait

Do what I thought about doing but did not do and that is rent it. It won’t take long to see the difference, it’s big. If IQ in the corners does not matter, it’s otherwise a really nice lens.

 

[Knorp]

Just got done comparing my 55V to my friend’s, they are basically the same so this is truly a bummer. This is not at all a good landscape lens for me and gets fully owned by the 65 2.8 optically speaking.

Regrettably I will be returning it with the 38 and sticking with my 45P and 65 2.8.

That's really too bad. Any reaction yet from Hasselblad and/or B&H ?

 

[Ai_Print]

That's really too bad. Any reaction yet from Hasselblad and/or B&H ?

Not yet, B&H is closed until the 9th, Hasselblad could reply tomorrow.

But to be honest, I have looked at raw samples from a friend's 55 overseas and also borrowed a local friend's this AM for side by side tests and it just does not hold up at all in the outer 1/4 to 1/3rd of the image circle at any of the non-diffraction working apertures and does not even up until F11. So that is three 55mm V lenses with the same result, I don't have a bunk lens, it is just a seriously compromised design. I did a bunch more tripod bound, IBIS off and self timer fired tests this evening but this time threw my 45P in there for good measure and the 45P put it to utter shame at every single aperture.

I think I am going to keep the 38V as it is a good option to the 45P and still sort of works between the 28P and 65. I have racked my brain to to try to find a reason to keep the 55V and I just can't, it's not for me.

 

[usm]

Not yet, B&H is closed until the 9th, Hasselblad could reply tomorrow.

But to be honest, I have looked at raw samples from a friend's 55 overseas and also borrowed a local friend's this AM for side by side tests and it just does not hold up at all in the outer 1/4 to 1/3rd of the image circle at any of the non-diffraction working apertures and does not even up until F11. So that is three 55mm V lenses with the same result, I don't have a bunk lens, it is just a seriously compromised design. I did a bunch more tripod bound, IBIS off and self timer fired tests this evening but this time threw my 45P in there for good measure and the 45P put it to utter shame at every single aperture.

I think I am going to keep the 38V as it is a good option to the 45P and still sort of works between the 28P and 65. I have racked my brain to to try to find a reason to keep the 55V and I just can't, it's not for me.

Could you provide some raws for us? Thanks.

 

[Ai_Print]

Could you provide some raws for us? Thanks.

Normally I don't do that but considering the fuss I have made here, I think I owe it to the community to see for themselves. I'll get an upload organized on dropbox, try to keep it tight because as we all know, these are big files.

 

[nazdravanul]

I am soo glad I decided to go ahead with the 65 instead of the 55, a few months ago. Hasselblad’s own MTF data were clearly indicative that the 65 woukd be the better landscape lens, but the few internet owners of the 55 at that time (a few montgs ago) kept saying there is no discernible IQ difference, just weight, size, physical lens look , cost & handling.
To the OP: I’n glad you didn’t reject your 38 based solely on your 55 experience, the 38 looks like a much more competent landscape lens - I’ve been using it extensively in the last few months.

 

[SrMphoto]

If one subscribes to diglloyd.com, one can learn that 55v has field curvature that may cause a lack of sharpness in the edges. You can see in diglloyd.com examples that the 55v sharpness is excellent at f/8.
In the examples above, I would have shot at least with f/8 or f/11 as a large DOF is desired in that type of landscape shot.

 

[nazdravanul]

If one subscribes to diglloyd.com, one can learn that 55v has field curvature that may cause a lack of sharpness in the edges. You can see in diglloyd.com examples that the 55v sharpness is excellent at f/8.
In the examples above, I would have shot at least with f/8 or f/11 as a large DOF is desired in that type of landscape shot.

If one subscribes to diglloyd, like I have (on and off) for 10+ years, one finds out all sorts of nonsense:
- that the X2d doesn’t have stopped down focusing - FAKE
- that the 38V is a messed up design, offering no more compelling results than a Fuji GF 35-70 - FAKE, again.
The 38 smokes everything Fuji has from 30 to 75, just like the XCD 65 smokes everything fuji has to offer between 45 to 80.
My own direct testing / experience.
Diglloyd is no longer on top of his game, like he used to be back in the Zeiss days. Now he can be all over the place with his reviews, unfortunately.
And if one has to stack 2 xcd 55 frames to get decent f8 sharpness, that can be obtained by just 1 xcd 65 shot then the 65 is clearly the better landscape option. Vignetting and especially distortion are also worse on the 55 compared to the 65, according to official Hasselblad data.
The 55 looks like a really nice documentary / travel / portrait lens, but for landscape it doesn’t look like the right option.

 

[Ai_Print]

If one subscribes to diglloyd.com, one can learn that 55v has field curvature that may cause a lack of sharpness in the edges. You can see in diglloyd.com examples that the 55v sharpness is excellent at f/8.
In the examples above, I would have shot at least with f/8 or f/11 as a large DOF is desired in that type of landscape shot.

I don't agree with what you cite from diglloyd at all.

The fact that the 55V has curvature of field was apparent within the first 5 minutes I used the lens. The problem is that it is in fact is not "excellent" in the corners by F8 and like I said before, it does not even up until F11. For a relatively flatter perspective distance shot like I posted above (read: no large DOF required) that has the closest object at around 450' to 500' feet, the fact it shows soft corners even at F8 is just a non-starter for landscapes. I'm willing to work within the limits of a given optical design to achieve what I want, but no matter what I do, I can not get this lens to deliver what I need from it in shooting landscapes and other lenses I own just flat out bury it.

I'm over it at this point, it is a great lens for portraits and reportage but not for landscapes, an unfortunate but not unreasonable outcome for a lens that was born out of significant compromise.

 

[Ai_Print]

Could you provide some raws for us? Thanks.

Comparison images from the 38V, 45P, 55V and 65 2.8 are uploaded. I only uploaded the set from F4 and F8. The focus point is the bottom 25% of the frame from center. There is a zip file if that works if better for you and the corresponding jpegs are included in each sub folder. Hopefully you can tell where the issues are, it's super obvious, especially in the case that the 45P wide open crushes the 55V at even F8.

HASSELBLAD 55V TESTS

Shared with Dropbox

www.dropbox.com