Yep, it's big, heavy, clunky, and a little noisy. However, it does the job of good bokeh and sharp resolution. No, it's not going to the track or a football game. Instead, it will live in the garden and the studio.
One of my observations of Hasselblad XCD lenses is the absence of bokeh, meaningful bokeh. The 80mm F/1.9 breaks that mold. Of course, I right away tested it and then put it on the shelf. It's not something I would use until I need it; then I use it.
For me, it's not a walk around lens. However, every time I need to separate any still life object from the background, this is the lens to use. It's the fastest lens Hasselblad offers, so its king of the bokeh for now.
And I know the photographer who designed this lens (XCD 80mm f/1.9) for Hasselblad and made it what it is. He told me personally that he designed this lens to be the Hasselblad equivalent of Zeiss Otus 85mm f/1.4. I can see that it takes some babying and special handling, and it has a slow autofocus, yet I'm glad to have the lens. I consider the Hasselblad system much like I consider my large-format systems. Slow and deliberate photography is what it is good for, IMO.
Of course, some of the XCD lenses can be used as walkaround lenses. I have not done too much of that so far, other than walk around and shoot static shots, essentially still life. If I can keep the shutter fast enough to capture images in a walk around, I see no reason why they can't do that very well.
To repeat, I would not use this as a walk-around lens for all the above reasons, yet it is perfect in the studio or on a tripod because I will (one has to) take the time to use it properly.
Ted Forbes mentions using X1D or X2D (with the 90V or the 80) for dance photography, prefocusing a zone where there was a probability his subject would be. It is not made with that (professional) usecase scenario in mind I guess but I think this is precisely where is the fun with our tools: trying to challenge ourselves. In this case, using this absolute gorgeous piece of glass to shoot something hard to catch, because the result will be astonishing and literally extraordinary. I keep on trying and exercising shooting my very young and fast moving kid with that lense. I have some good shots, not perfect (and that would be - to my eye - the closest to perfect composition, light, colors, focus, sharpness, scene and expression), but that is fun, and I look regularly these shots. Thinking, planning and sometimes, not thinking at all and obtaining descent (again to my eye) results.
I also use the 65 mm, which is clearly faster to autofocus, very sharp and has also this ability to separate, maybe in more organic way I think.
Quote from: niviblad on August 21, 2024, 07:57:38 PMTed Forbes mentions using X1D or X2D (with the 90V or the 80) for dance photography, prefocusing a zone where there was a probability his subject would be. It is not made with that (professional) usecase scenario in mind I guess but I think this is precisely where is the fun with our tools: trying to challenge ourselves. In this case, using this absolute gorgeous piece of glass to shoot something hard to catch, because the result will be astonishing and literally extraordinary. I keep on trying and exercising shooting my very young and fast moving kid with that lense. I have some good shots, not perfect (and that would be - to my eye - the closest to perfect composition, light, colors, focus, sharpness, scene and expression), but that is fun, and I look regularly these shots. Thinking, planning and sometimes, not thinking at all and obtaining descent (again to my eye) results.
I also use the 65 mm, which is clearly faster to autofocus, very sharp and has also this ability to separate, maybe in more organic way I think.
I've been going back and forth between the 65 and 80 for some time. I always thought the 65 focused faster too, but when I put the 80 on 2.8 they seem right on par. not sure if i ever really need the 1.9, but having it on hand is nice.
Quote from: niviblad on August 21, 2024, 07:57:38 PMTed Forbes mentions using X1D or X2D (with the 90V or the 80) for dance photography, prefocusing a zone where there was a probability his subject would be. It is not made with that (professional) usecase scenario in mind I guess but I think this is precisely where is the fun with our tools: trying to challenge ourselves. In this case, using this absolute gorgeous piece of glass to shoot something hard to catch, because the result will be astonishing and literally extraordinary. I keep on trying and exercising shooting my very young and fast moving kid with that lense. I have some good shots, not perfect (and that would be - to my eye - the closest to perfect composition, light, colors, focus, sharpness, scene and expression), but that is fun, and I look regularly these shots. Thinking, planning and sometimes, not thinking at all and obtaining descent (again to my eye) results.
I also use the 65 mm, which is clearly faster to autofocus, very sharp and has also this ability to separate, maybe in more organic way I think.
It's how sports were shot before AF existed.
Quote from: Kiwimac on September 19, 2024, 03:39:13 PMQuote from: niviblad on August 21, 2024, 07:57:38 PMTed Forbes mentions using X1D or X2D (with the 90V or the 80) for dance photography, prefocusing a zone where there was a probability his subject would be. It is not made with that (professional) usecase scenario in mind I guess but I think this is precisely where is the fun with our tools: trying to challenge ourselves. In this case, using this absolute gorgeous piece of glass to shoot something hard to catch, because the result will be astonishing and literally extraordinary. I keep on trying and exercising shooting my very young and fast moving kid with that lense. I have some good shots, not perfect (and that would be - to my eye - the closest to perfect composition, light, colors, focus, sharpness, scene and expression), but that is fun, and I look regularly these shots. Thinking, planning and sometimes, not thinking at all and obtaining descent (again to my eye) results.
I also use the 65 mm, which is clearly faster to autofocus, very sharp and has also this ability to separate, maybe in more organic way I think.
It's how sports were shot before AF existed.
At that time, photographing the action required skills. Today, camera buyers expect to nail images (subject detection, tracking) without acquiring skills. That said, skilled photographers can also benefit from AF, tracking, and subject detection.
I've yet to see a copy of the 80 IRL here in NZ. Lots of 30, 65, 45P, the odd 90 and 135 but not this one yet.
The 120 Macro popped up recently - first of those I've seen.
Quote from: SrMi on September 20, 2024, 03:57:42 AMQuote from: Kiwimac on September 19, 2024, 03:39:13 PMQuote from: niviblad on August 21, 2024, 07:57:38 PMTed Forbes mentions using X1D or X2D (with the 90V or the 80) for dance photography, prefocusing a zone where there was a probability his subject would be. It is not made with that (professional) usecase scenario in mind I guess but I think this is precisely where is the fun with our tools: trying to challenge ourselves. In this case, using this absolute gorgeous piece of glass to shoot something hard to catch, because the result will be astonishing and literally extraordinary. I keep on trying and exercising shooting my very young and fast moving kid with that lense. I have some good shots, not perfect (and that would be - to my eye - the closest to perfect composition, light, colors, focus, sharpness, scene and expression), but that is fun, and I look regularly these shots. Thinking, planning and sometimes, not thinking at all and obtaining descent (again to my eye) results.
I also use the 65 mm, which is clearly faster to autofocus, very sharp and has also this ability to separate, maybe in more organic way I think.
It's how sports were shot before AF existed.
At that time, photographing the action required skills. Today, camera buyers expect to nail images (subject detection, tracking) without acquiring skills. That said, skilled photographers can also benefit from AF, tracking, and subject detection.
Honestly, there is a ratio of nailed/missed shots which makes this lens frustrating if you intend to use it out of the studio, at least in the circumstances under which I use it.
If the focus ring was closer to the feel of a mechanical one, maybe I'd keep on exercising.
Now I'm struggling with myself because of its optical majesty, and because I don't know if nor when I would have the money to buy it back if I sell it. But until now, my best portraits have been taken with the 65... And the multishot pushes me to buy the X2D.
Among the users who once owned that lens and sold it, how many do regret it with a broken heart? How did you use that lens? Why did you sell it? Are you considering buying it back at some point?
I will likely never sell mine, I hardly use it but when I do it's beautiful. The 90V would go close for many as a replacement but not for me. I'll need something faster than f2 with the V focus motor first.
Gordon
I love my 80 f1.9 and will never sell it. such a great lens, autofocus is good enough for catching stags and walking round. and shooting the Otago rally in nz.
very nice next to the Zeiss Contax 85 f1.2
I've owned the lens in the past. It's a lovely lens, but suffers from challenging AF and fly by wire manual focus. I have a loaner at the moment (while I wait for the return of my 38v).
One of the reasons I sold out of the X system was the focusing. I took my 80/1.8 and 135/2.8 to my niece's wedding and got a very poor hit rate. AF simply wasn't good enough and manual focus nowhere near what it should have been. No chance of getting anything spontaneous - even capturing the bride walking down through the trees on my brother's arm was too much for it (dappled light).
While I love the images from the 80/1.9 I won't be re-purchasing it. The v series lenses are so much more usable with the improved manual focusing, and the AF with all that heavy glass in the 80/1.9 makes it problematic in fast evolving situations.
I agree with that. It's a fantastic lens for slow pace shooting or still subjects. It's not for every one. You can definitely make awesome spontaneous shots with it, but it is so hard and rare that it becomes frustrating if that's what you do most of the time... so it's not for me, I understand it now.
I was considering keeping it for reproduction work, as distortion is also pretty low on that lens and, obviously, sharpness pretty high if not the highest edge to edge in the XCD line.
But I'm not sure I'm ready to sell the 65. It's less money to take back, and I am not sure the 75P would replace the 65 in my heart...
Thank you all for your feedback. I welcome others to chime in as it's a difficult decision... time generally helps. I once wanted to buy another Leica Q just out of nostalgia. One month later I knew it wouldn't be a good idea. It's more difficult in this case but, at least, I understand clearly what this lens can do for me and what it cannot. But to let go such a good if not perfect optical design is not easy.
The XCD 80mm f/1.9 Lens is still my most favorite portrait lens for the X2D-100C. If/When the X2D gets continuous autofocus this may change.
After around one month, someone is interested by my XCD 80, for a price I now think is a bit ridiculous for such a lens. 2500 €. And after around one month, I'm starting feeling nostalgia about that lens. Maybe it was a great move to leave it to the shop.
I mean, I'm not sure I'm still interested in selling it. My revenue seems promising for the 3 months coming. It's a wonderful lens, and 2500 € is nearly half the price of a new one.
So I'm still trying to decide whether to keep it or not.
Is the XCD 80 a bit quicker and more efficient with the X2D and face detect AF?
I've finally sold it. But I'm sure to buy it back at some point.
The buyer showed me how fast it was with the X2D, contrast+phase detection and face detect AF, and it was rather impressive... at least in the condition he did the test, because in other case, it might be less efficient.
It was certainly not as fast as the 75p. But fast enough.
80E is not far away.
Incredible objective
Perfect for Portrait pictures
Maybe slow with X1DII but all the gear is slow. Not for sports and so on
I work slowly, with manual focus mode
Quote from: Orokaj on January 13, 2025, 09:51:16 AM80E is not far away.
What might be its maximum aperture?
The 80mm was my dream lens when I decided to buy into the X System. So I got it together with the X1D, pre-owned copy with 65 clicks only at MPB. Yes, difficult to focus, many misses, but dream results when the focus nails (manual focus on the X1DS never worked for me).
Sadly, the 80/1.9 was also the first mechanical failure I had in my entirely photography life.
Only a few months after purchasing it, I had to return it with a stuck shutter, and the dealer offered me a refund, which I took, because repair would take a few months. I didn't get an 80mm back, and I most likely won't.
I added an XCD 2.8/135 to my lineup, the next lens on my list; it plays well with my now X2D. Now, I am thinking of buying a pre-owned XCD 3.2/90 to close the gap between my 35-75 and 135.
How you like the 135 in comparison to the 80?
Quote from: paratom on February 27, 2025, 01:51:28 AMHow you like the 135 in comparison to the 80?
The most crucial difference is the focal length and, thus, the required space to shoot more than just a close portrait, like a half body shot inside or on location. With the XCD 135, I have to back up further, but other than that, both lenses create beautiful results.
I didn't buy the 135 as a replacement for the 80mm, it was a planned addition. However, I will not replace the XCD 80 with another 80, if available, but with a 90mm/3.2 most likely.
For me, the XCD 80mm is a lens worth getting into the X system for.
It is not perfect, especially considering modern lens designs that focus on correcting flaws and delivering perfection.
However, the 80mm has its own unique vibe, creating a natural sense of depth. Its colors appear more organic and less digital, while out-of-focus areas have a more retro look.
If you're looking for a lens that will take you on an artistic journey, the 80mm is a better choice—even over the 90V.
Quote from: Orokaj on January 13, 2025, 09:51:16 AM80E is not far away.
So... it was far away. Will they propose a kit with the new X2D...?