Which Hasselblad HC lenses

[ptomsu]

If you have the 28 and 100, then the 120 does not make any sense, only exception if you want and need Macro.

The 50 and 35 are not so great choices in my opinion. I would go for the 35-90 instead.

On the long side the 150 should be the best solution - together with the TC1.7. Or also the 210.

Just my 5c ....

 

[fotografz]

If you have the 28 and 100, then the 120 does not make any sense, only exception if you want and need Macro.

The 50 and 35 are not so great choices in my opinion. I would go for the 35-90 instead.

On the long side the 150 should be the best solution - together with the TC1.7. Or also the 210.

Just my 5c ....

Just curious, is that direct experience concerning the 50 mm being "not so great" ... or internet hearsay? Don't know about others, but my 50 is pretty darned good ... it's much smaller, more compact and a faster max aperture than the zoom. Stopped down to the same as the max aperture of the zoom, I wonder how it would fare then? Plus, thinking ahead, the zoom cannot be used on the HC T/S 1.5, and is a slight crop on the 60 meg sensor ... where the 50 works on the HC T/S 1.5 and fully covers the 60 meg sensor.

For longer I'd go for the 210 over the 150 with 1.7X ... mostly because I prefer f/4 to f/6 max aperture. Gotta keep in mind these ISOs aren't Canon and Nikon levels. With the 1.7X on the 100/2.2 you cover the midrange with a 170/3.75 and with the 210/4 you get a 357/6.8 that still auto focuses.

Just my 10¢ worth

 

[mark1958]

I agree with what Marc says except there was a long discussion on LL about a year or ago and there was a pretty strong consensus that the 50mm was not as sharp as 50mm focal length on the 50-110mm zoom. That was my experience as well. Until the HTS, there was no need for me to keep that prime lens.

 

[BlueLemon]

I don´t know if it is too much to ask for, or even possible in this forum.

I would like to see some pictures taken with the HC 100 wideopen and also the HC 120 wide open - wedding pictures ect ....

I have maybe changed my mind about the 120, and will opt for a 100 instead - but will like to see some examples from that lens. I would then go for the 150 afterwards.

I am a pictorial lens kindda guy - and still working with analogue on large format cameraes, I work with Heliars, Jamin Darlot, Lerebours et Secretan and two other darlings : Verito og Kodak Soft Portrait.... these all go on 4x5 and 5x7 and even 8x10

So I am most keen on the 100/2.2 if it does what I think it does best - outstanding bokeh

But could I ask for pictures or links to pictures taken with the 100/2.2 - and also the 120 makro

Appreciate it guys

Claus

 

[jecxz]

Has anyone tried the 300 f/4.5? I just ordered one. With the 1.7 teleconverter one has a whopping 510mm of reach, though not particularly fast. I gather the lens is tack sharp though loses just a bit at the edges with the converter.

Here, 300mm + 1.7x:

Kind regards,
Derek Jecxz
http://www.jecxz.com

 

[jecxz]

Now I have my eyes on the HC 120 and the HC 210 since i have decided to have only one digital system - not both Canon + Hasselblad

Would these two HC lenses fullfill my needs - i primarely do weddings, portraits and landscape/interieur

Claus

You will be frustrated if you need to wait for the focus on the 120mm to cycle through completely since it has a very wide focus range (including macro). you could certainly miss a shot waiting for the autofocus.

Otherwise, it's a fantastic lens - but for wedding, get the 100mm and step a bit closer to your subject.

Kind regards,
Derek Jecxz
http://www.jecxz.com

 

[jecxz]

Just curious, is that direct experience concerning the 50 mm being "not so great" ... or internet hearsay? Don't know about others, but my 50 is pretty darned good

Internet hearsay. Like yours, mine is "darned good."

Kind regards,
Derek Jecxz
http://www.jecxz.com

 

[BlueLemon]

Does any of you with the HC 100, have pictures on your websites or know of any who does - I would really like to see.

Don´t have a local Hasselblad dealer nearby that could lend or hire me one

Claus Stensgaard

 

[jecxz]

Does any of you with the HC 100, have pictures on your websites or know of any who does - I would really like to see.

Don´t have a local Hasselblad dealer nearby that could lend or hire me one

Claus Stensgaard

You're welcome for my advice.

Check out http://www.hasselbladdigitalforum.com - there are more Hasselblad users there who my have wedding photographs for you to examine.

Don't know if it has been mentioned, but the 100mm is much nicer wide open, it's Bokeh is incredible; look it up if you don't know what that is.

Kind regards,
Derek

 

[BlueLemon]

Hi Derek

Just registered on that site, but not many photo´s up - and I did not find any wedding shots as you mentioned. Can you send me a specific link ?

Claus

 

[Professional]

I have same your hasseblad camera [Hasselblad H3DII-39] and also both lenses [28mm and 80mm], and the lenses i wish to add for this collection are: 120mm, 50-110, maybe 35-90

 

[Professional]

Tomorrow i hope i will go to a local Hasselblad dealer and i tested 120 there so that i want to buy it, i tested 50-110 which is great zoom and 28mm which i bought it, so i will see what i can test there.
The lucky thing is that this dealer is also of Profoto lights dealer, he has really top end items to be a dealer for, i am looking for a Profoto light sooner or later.

 

[ptomsu]

Just curious, is that direct experience concerning the 50 mm being "not so great" ... or internet hearsay? Don't know about others, but my 50 is pretty darned good ... it's much smaller, more compact and a faster max aperture than the zoom. Stopped down to the same as the max aperture of the zoom, I wonder how it would fare then? Plus, thinking ahead, the zoom cannot be used on the HC T/S 1.5, and is a slight crop on the 60 meg sensor ... where the 50 works on the HC T/S 1.5 and fully covers the 60 meg sensor.

For longer I'd go for the 210 over the 150 with 1.7X ... mostly because I prefer f/4 to f/6 max aperture. Gotta keep in mind these ISOs aren't Canon and Nikon levels. With the 1.7X on the 100/2.2 you cover the midrange with a 170/3.75 and with the 210/4 you get a 357/6.8 that still auto focuses.

Just my 10¢ worth

The 35 is definitely not as good as the 28 WRT IQ, this is what I found out as well as what I was told from Hasselblad photographers who changed from the 35 to the 28, the 50 is not what I really want in terms of focal length - no experience about IQ of the 50.

The 35-90 is a great lens IQ wise as well covering the zoom range I would need for lot of my shooting work.

 

[jecxz]

Hi Derek

Just registered on that site, but not many photo´s up - and I did not find any wedding shots as you mentioned. Can you send me a specific link ?

Claus

Claus,

I just did a search and could not immediately locate wedding shots made with the 100mm. Perhaps put a post there and do so at LL - I'm sure there are wedding shooters who use the 100mm. I'm surprised no one has posted any for you. I only do landscape with the 100mm, so mine won't help, sorry.

You can be very creative with the 100mm.

Kind regards,
Derek

 

[fotografz]

Claus,

I just did a search and could not immediately locate wedding shots made with the 100mm. Perhaps put a post there and do so at LL - I'm sure there are wedding shooters who use the 100mm. I'm surprised no one has posted any for you. I only do landscape with the 100mm, so mine won't help, sorry.

You can be very creative with the 100mm.

Kind regards,
Derek

Okay, here are a couple of HC 100/2.2 wedding shots. I grabbed them off a low res promo file I use to answer e-mail inquiries (The real files are buried in a storage HD).

The B&W one was shot at f/4.3 in very harsh noon sun, and the color one at f/2.8 (the color one has a wee bit of camera motion due to a slow shutter speed in available light, but it printed fine for the album).

Marc

 

[fotografz]

Here's a quick shot I just did of my Christmas tree with the HC 100/2.2 to show the Bokeh of this lens (with a extension tube and aperture set to f/3.2).

-Marc

 

[jecxz]

Here's a quick shot I just did of my Christmas tree with the HC 100/2.2 to show the Bokeh of this lens (with a extension tube and aperture set to f/3.2).

-Marc

To support Marc's good example, here's another example of bokeh - just imagine these cows are the bride and her bride's maids, if you can.

Made with an HC 100mm f2.2 @f2.2

Kind regards,
Derek

 

[doc4x5]

I find it interesting that people request web images to help make decisions on high end lenses for MF digital cameras. Am I missing something or do web images show something I cannot see. On my calibrated decent screen I am usually unable to tell the difference between images made with a point and shoot and those made with a MFDB unless highly magnified.

Eric

 

[jecxz]

I find it interesting that people request web images to help make decisions on high end lenses for MF digital cameras. Am I missing something or do web images show something I cannot see. On my calibrated decent screen I am usually unable to tell the difference between images made with a point and shoot and those made with a MFDB unless highly magnified.

Eric

In the context of this discussion, the images posted demonstrate lens bokeh. This affect is visible in a JPG image. I also posted an image showing the sharpness of the 300mm + 1.7x (the fox).

I certainly agree with your statement regarding an image's color quality.

Kind regards,
Derek