Hasselblad HC 100mm vs 150mm

[leicashot]

Hey guys, trying to decide on a portrait style lens for my H4D-40. I like the idea of the 2.2 aperture on the 100mm but more concerned with focal length feel/perspective and sharpness for portraits (only), including head shots.

My other lens will be a 35-90 so thinking that maybe I should go for the 150mm, but have no experience with shooting these on Medium Format.

I'd love some insight from those who have used either lens, and preferably, used both lenses.

Many thanks!

Kristian

 

[Professional]

What lens do you have now?

In fact i don't have any that recommended portrait lens for my Hasselblad, but i have that 80mm and 120 Macro, both gave me amazing results even i should go with 100/150 or one of the zooms lenses, my next lens will be definitely 35-90, but the price of that 100 is nice but i really didn't feel i will use that HC 100 over HC 80mm much because i don't have that serious portraits, also my 120 even it is a bit long but i can imagine that 150 will be longer if used for portraits, but that 120 is sharper than 150, maybe 100 is the sharpest lens but i can never tell against say 120 maybe.

 

[Professional]

I forgot that 100 is fast and lightweight, so i think maybe these are the reasons of this lens to be highly recommended for portraits.

 

[rem]

Hi Kristian, I tried the 100, the 120er and the 150er... Because I also have the 80mm I forget in the moment the 100mm. Between the 150 and 120 was a hard decision, because the 150er is faster then the 120er... Anyway, I ordered long time ago the new 120er VII, because its more versatile and very sharp! And you now Marco Grob? He makes nearly all head-shots/portraits with the 120er and for him its the best lens ever...;-)
rem

 

[leicashot]

Also, want to add that I'm also interested in the 120mm macro for non macro use but read it's focus is very slow. Is this indeed true and if so, how much so?

 

[leicashot]

What lens do you have now?

In fact i don't have any that recommended portrait lens for my Hasselblad, but i have that 80mm and 120 Macro, both gave me amazing results even i should go with 100/150 or one of the zooms lenses, my next lens will be definitely 35-90, but the price of that 100 is nice but i really didn't feel i will use that HC 100 over HC 80mm much because i don't have that serious portraits, also my 120 even it is a bit long but i can imagine that 150 will be longer if used for portraits, but that 120 is sharper than 150, maybe 100 is the sharpest lens but i can never tell against say 120 maybe.

I'm about to pickup the 35-90mm lens, which will be my only lens.

 

[aldo]

Somebody post this on another thread, it's really interesting how from 100mm to 350mm the lens distortion on the face doesn't change that much.

I don't have the 150mm but I can talk about the 100mm, and the 210 f/4. The 100mm it's an incredible lens, it feels really small on the H4D, but balance really well with the camera. The DOF at 2.2 its amazingly thin. I shoot a lot with natural light and I probably use it 80% of the time. I really feel the lens its amazingly sharp at f/2.2 on the focus plane.

Contrarily the 210mm f/4 weights a lot, and it's really hard to shoot with available light and for a long period of time.

I also have heard the 120mm it's incredibly sharp for portraits, but you pay the price with the autofocus speed and weight (1,410g vs 780g of the 100mm)

 

[Hikari]

Somebody post this on another thread, it's really interesting how from 100mm to 350mm the lens distortion on the face doesn't change that much.

Interesting link, although I am really surprised by how much the change is. The 350mm image looks really flat and the sides of her face look very strange. I have known about the change going down in focal length, I am amazed at the change going up.

 

[leicashot]

Interesting link, although I am really surprised by how much the change is. The 350mm image looks really flat and the sides of her face look very strange. I have known about the change going down in focal length, I am amazed at the change going up.

Unfortunately these were shot on 35mm and I already understand the focal length/perspective on 35mm. Its obviously different on MF. I guess the question is....can I shoot a headshot with minimal distortion with the 100mm which is a lens I'd love to have - but i doubt it.

 

[jlm]

hasselblad kind of stuck a fork in your eye by making two of their very best lenses, the 35-90 and the 100 so close in range!!!

 

[docmoore]

Unfortunately these were shot on 35mm and I already understand the focal length/perspective on 35mm. Its obviously different on MF. I guess the question is....can I shoot a headshot with minimal distortion with the 100mm which is a lens I'd love to have - but i doubt it.

13mm extension tube......

Bob

 

[mark1958]

I have to say that I had the older HC 150 and compared it to the 100 with and without the 1.7x TC. The 100 + TC was as good if not better than the 150. SO i suggest the 100 and if you need greater focal length get the 1.7x TC.

 

[Jeffg53]

I have both. The general consensus is that the 100 is a stellar lense. Looking at your website, focusing speed could well be an issue. It would be a good idea to try before you buy. I think the 100 is faster. I have found the i50 to be a gentler lense up close with the extra length, but either will have you diving for some softening plugin in PS.

 

[aldo]

hasselblad kind of stuck a fork in your eye by making two of their very best lenses, the 35-90 and the 100 so close in range!!!

The 35-90mm at 90mm is f/5.6 plus a lot heavier, and to be honest I just love to shoot the 100mm wide open.

Unfortunately these were shot on 35mm and I already understand the focal length/perspective on 35mm. Its obviously different on MF. I guess the question is....can I shoot a headshot with minimal distortion with the 100mm which is a lens I'd love to have - but i doubt it.

In MFD I feel the 80mm its the most natural to the human eye perspective for a head shot, below 80mm you see barrel distortion and above pincushion distortion, so it depends of how much compression you like.

When you buy MFD gear If you make a tiny mistake you end up losing a lot of $. I have the HC 210 f/4 with just 400 actuations in a year because I didn't try it before. So I guess the safer thing to do its to rent the lenses and see which one suits you better.

Lensrentals.com has the 100mm f/2.2 for $91 for 4 days.

 

[Professional]

What lens do you have now? Did you find an issue with it so you want to get another lens? I use 80mm on headshots almost 100% until i got 100 then it became around 80-90%, i don't think i will use 100 more than 80, even if i will do i feel that my 80 was a great lens and did the job, so if you have 80 and you didn't like i can understand, but if you don't have it then i may tell you go with 100, but i use that 80 on general photography as well and not just portraits, so i feel that 80mm can serve me more over 100, if i will shoot portraits outdoors i will go with 80mm because that FL is a bit wider so it may give me more room for another elements, and i may add 100 later, but for now i feel if i didn't have 100 i will not be missing anything, i may miss 80mm if i have 100 only and i tested 80 sometimes, i prefer wider side than longer even when shooting portraits, on my 35mm [Canon] i use my 24-70 more over 70-200.

 

[fotografz]

The 100/2.2 is my most used lens for general people shooting. The 80 just sat there collecting dust, so I sold it ... which was a mistake since it is very useful on the HTS/1.5 (making it a 120mm). The f/2.2 max aperture is great even when using the lens stopped down because the viewfinder is as bright as you can get with an H AF lens and the AF always likes more light than less. The DOF of this lens is not unlike the Leica M75/1.4 when shot up close.

Second most used lens is the 120/4 Macro ... for most everything except general people shooting. It seems slow due to the huge throw from 1:1 to infinity ... but if you manually get it in the zone first, it is fine ... except in low light where the f/4 max aperture slows down the AF and makes it more difficult to manually focus because the viewfinder is dimmer than with the 100/2.2. I find it to big and bulky for spontaneous people work, and the type of sharpness it produces is great for product work but to ruthlessly biting for most people shooting. Like most Macros it is optimized for close focusing.

If looking at the 150, look for the 150N ... it was improved over the 150, and is better than the 100/2.2 with the 1.7X ... although not by much, and the 100/2.2 + 1.7X is more versatile.

I have all the prime lenses from 28mm to 300mm + 1.7X, except the 35 and 80 which I sold after getting the 35-90mm. Which lens I choose for a portrait or headshot depends on the persons facial structure. Some people shooters prefer the 50-110 for this type of work for that reason.

-Marc

 

[PeterA]

Can't speak as a curent owner user as I have sold out of Hasselblad and into the S2 - for no compelling reason mind you..teh 4D gves you the focus benefit and I wouldnt be surprise dif I bought back in one day..

The only thing I can add to all the above is that the 100 and 150 are light enough to hand hold the 120 is a lot heavier. At close distances ( as pointed out by Marc) the 110 has the same kind of OOF renditioning as a nice Leica - but the 150 mm is no slouch either.

If you are going to be shooting from a distance ( say 5 meters ) and strobes for location beauty and headshot work - the 300mm is a lens you might consider - heavy though and of course you will need lighting.

I agree the 1.7X is a very useful and high quality extender.

Pete

 

[sflxn]

I hear the 100mm is very sharp; however, I believe the last time I looked at the MTF chart for the 100mm and 80mm, the 80mm was supposed to be sharper. Having never used the 100mm, I don't really know. Either that lens or a much longer lens is at the top of my buy list

 

[leicashot]

I guess the question now is whether the 100mm is good for head/shoulders portraits?

 

[leicashot]

Thanks Peter, I really want to like the 100mm but the converter is really expensive for what it is, unless it really is 'that' good. I guess I should really try these out to test for focus. I guess the 120mm would be the perfect tweener in focal length but the weight and slow speed is off putting.

Right now i'm leaning towards a 100mm and a used converter at some stage...

Can't speak as a curent owner user as I have sold out of Hasselblad and into the S2 - for no compelling reason mind you..teh 4D gves you the focus benefit and I wouldnt be surprise dif I bought back in one day..

The only thing I can add to all the above is that the 100 and 150 are light enough to hand hold the 120 is a lot heavier. At close distances ( as pointed out by Marc) the 110 has the same kind of OOF renditioning as a nice Leica - but the 150 mm is no slouch either.

If you are going to be shooting from a distance ( say 5 meters ) and strobes for location beauty and headshot work - the 300mm is a lens you might consider - heavy though and of course you will need lighting.

I agree the 1.7X is a very useful and high quality extender.

Pete