50 or 50 zoom

[Morgan_Moore]

Basically I am poor*.

I really want a HC 50 for my blad but for an extra $500 I can have the 50-110 zoom

The second lens appeals because I think I could go superlight and do some trips/jobs with just the one lens - and maybe a the zoom means less faffing and more concentration on the subject

But would I be better off having the 50 and saving for the 110 2.2 considering I love narrow DOF for portrait

Incidentally th 50 fits in my water housing as will the 110 - the zoom is too long

I have 35 80 the converter and macro rings

Do zoom owners use it or does it just weight thier bag down as they always reach for the appropriate prime

I am strong(ish) and not overly concerned with LPI, Abberations etc - all the lenses are 'good enough'

Just some comments please mainly on how the lenses affect the ergonomics of shooting and interaction with the subject

Ta

SMM

* actually more tight than poor and anticipating the D3 and where that will put my blad

[Dustbak]

I am kind of in the same situation. I have opted to get the separate primes because I find the 50-110 too heavy. I have not yet bought them though, I currently own the 80 & 35.

I fear that when I buy the 50-110 I will not use it very often because of that. Some people consider the zoom better than some of the primes.

I too am thinking about getting the D3 (as well as a new generator and lights, FO setup for small stuff, Expanding my studio, other HC & CF lenses, the 14-24, 24-70 & the 200-400, Continuous light setup, new reflection screens, etc.. etc.. etc..) It sometimes appears there is no end

[rsmphoto]

Let me qualify this - I'm not a portrait shooter. I carry a 28 and a 35 with me as well, but I have used the zoom for the last 3 years consistantly (currently on an H3D-39) - for 90% of my shots, but always on a tripod. It is a superb lens, and the zoom allows me to fine-tune my composition effortlessly. My one complaint is it makes the camera front heavy when mounted, and could use the addition of a ring for a tripod mount.

BUT since you shoot people (hand-held?), have a UW housing it won't fit, plus you like the narrower depth of field the 110 affords, this may likely not be the lens for you. There's no getting around the fact that it is heavy. I'd rent one (if you haven't already) and see how you like it.

Richard

[Morgan_Moore]

this may likely not be the lens for you[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=144357\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks for your opinion

You are probably right

For UK I need the speed

The zoom would be great for a forign to somewhere sunny where travel weight is at a premium - but that would be last in the line up

Packhorse approach is proably best

Also I find a zoom can create inconsistency of flow between images in sets

The best set of images you would tape up the focus and aperture !

I have done this before

What do people think is the ultimate portrait lens

There is the 100 nice - and fast - and the 120 super close focus

none of them actually flow for me not even th 80 which im always chuking the extionsion ring on and off - enough that I have considered the purchase of a second 80 !!!!

What they need to make is a 5mm extension ring to give the 100 and 80 a little kick at the close end at the loss of infinity

S

[Morgan_Moore]

double

[paulhu]

Go for the HC 2.2/100 mm lens.  It is excellent for portrait, and it's the fastest lens among HC lenses.

[Bernd B.]

Is the 50-110 really good at all focal lenght with aperture open, or does it keep up only when stopped down?

[godtfred]

There is the 100 nice - and fast - and the 120 super close focus
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=144360\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have and use both for portraits, that is to say I started out using them both for portraits, now I only use the 100mm, as the combination of narrow DOF, fast AF, easy handling and general likeability makes it a winner in my stable.

Wanting both a 50 for 2 person shots in my small'is studio on paper backgrounds, and a 150 for general "I think I need it" reasons  

-axel

[Jason F]

I don't own an H system, but I work as a digital tech and frequently use it on large advertising jobs- everything from available light portraits, to landscapes, to studio setups.

After all I've seen and done using both the fixed and the zoom 50 lenses- I'd say get the fixed. The 110 is a beautiful lens, the 120 is even better.

However, I find the 50-110 to be:
1. very heavy after not too long (after about 30min of use, most people abandon the lens or have to move to a tripod)
2. Not as sharp. I've seen weird things, but on average I notice that the zoom is considerably sharper in the center than the corners (even if it's only a P30 back, so it's a cropped frame)- but it's still not as sharp as the fixed 50.


If it were me buying, I'd buy the seperate fixed lenses. It's VERY nice to have the zoom and not have to mess with changing, but I've just not seen enough good stuff from that huge hunk of cash to warrant a purchase if I was in the market myself. (and I might be soon- I love my Contax, but I might move to an H system for my own use soon)

[Morgan_Moore]

The 110 is a beautiful lens, the 120 is even better.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=144498\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I am leaning to wards primes and the later zoom if I get rich

110 do you mean 100 2.2? and if so why is the 120 F4 better ??

I woule have thought bigger aperture every time...

but then I do have an 80 and will have a 50 so maybe slightly longer is better  third choice esp with the close focus

S

[paulhu]

'Not as sharp' ?  Yes, it is big and heavy, and I use it handheld most of the time (not all the time), but 'Not as sharp', I disagree.  It is sharp enough for me and my clients, that's what counts.  Here is the proof of the 50-110mm:


[attachment=3504:attachment]

[TechTalk]

The 50-110mm HC zoom is a very fine lens. You can download performance charts on all of the "H" lenses here... "H" Lens Specs Link The charts provide MTF curves wide open and stopped down, vignetting and distortion performance.

You'll find the 50-110mm zoom is marginally better than the 50mm at f/3.5 and they are equal at f/8.

50mm PDF Link

50-110mm PDF Link

[Bernd B.]

The HC 120mm is also a heavy beast. Any experiences?

About the CF 120mm I heard it would not be tack sharp at infinity and f/4. How about the HC here?

[TechTalk]

The HC 120mm is also a heavy beast. Any experiences?

About the CF 120mm I heard it would not be tack sharp at infinity and f/4. How about the HC here?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Another link to a PDF showing image performance for the 120mm HC lens at infinity and 1/2 life-size.  [a href=\"http://www.hasselbladusa.com/media/6432/hc_macro_120.pdf]120mm Macro Link[/url] An extremely sharp lens from center to corner and through the entire focusing range.

If the MTF charts aren't convincing, it might be worth renting the lenses that you're considering buying. A great way to literaly see for yourself.

[Morgan_Moore]

If the MTF charts aren't convincing, it might be worth renting the lenses that you're considering buying. A great way to literaly see for yourself.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=144553\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Disscussion of MTF is OT for this thread

- the first post reads 'not overly concerned with LPI, Abberations etc - all the lenses are 'good enough' '

-As hassy is a closed system there is no competition so you get what you are given

Any way my thought so far..

the 100 is not worth the difference from an 80 - they problem for me with an 80 is close focus, 100 does not sort this

The 120 is too slow for unlit use in the UK - so not worth it

Which brings me back to the zoom or the 50

They are both 50s of the widest aperture available in an H1 mount

But the second one has disadvantage of weight but the obvious advantage of zoom

I am very happy handholding a nikon and a 300 2.8

I can have found them both for  'the same price' and it seems a bit nuts to buy the 50 even though thats what I think my heart tells me to do

ps that posted image the trees look orrible

Anyone care to comment on the (and I hate to use the word) bokeh

S

[TechTalk]

Disscussion of MTF is OT for this thread

- the first post reads 'not overly concerned with LPI, Abberations etc - all the lenses are 'good enough' '

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=144554\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

There were other posts in addition to the first post. I was replying to later ones.

If threads here rigidly stick to questions posed by the original post, I apologize.

[TechTalk]

-As hassy is a closed system there is no competition so you get what you are given
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=144554\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

What is this in reference to?

[stewarthemley]

I am very happy handholding a nikon and a 300 2.8

ps that posted image the trees look orrible

Anyone care to comment on the (and I hate to use the word) bokeh

S
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=144554\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks for this thread. I'm hovering on getting the H3D system (I'm also poor/tight but more stupid) and one area I still need to check is the bokeh (hate the word too). People seem happy with it for Contax lenses; don't know about Mamiya but there was a thread about some awful, strongly defined 5 sided highlights on older Hass lenses. Are the new (Fujis) ok? I'll check it for myself but it's still good to hear what others think.

Incredibly, I did a demo of the H3D but didn't set up any shots to test the bokeh. But that's another story. I did use the zoom and loved it. I'm not even "strongish", just average but after the 1DS2/70-200 combo it felt less painful than I expected. But most people find it too heavy so if you're roaming you should check it first.

[Morgan_Moore]

-As hassy is a closed system there is no competition so you get what you are given

What is this in reference to?

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=144561\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I mean with a nikon you could get a nikkor 85 or a zeiz 85, with contax you can ram old blad lenses on them

With the H1 there is no choice - not that this is a complaint - the optics are good - but disscussion of the micro quality of those optics is IMO of little value - It could have value were ther is choice like for nikon

No need to appologise I just hate the word MTF and all that I see it as standing for - I am really interested in shooting experiecnes

there is of course regluar topic drift on this board - no bad thing on occasion

SMM

[TechTalk]

I mean with a nikon you could get a nikkor 85 or a zeiz 85, with contax you can ram old blad lenses on them

With the H1 there is no choice - not that this is a complaint - the optics are good - but disscussion of the micro quality of those optics is IMO of little value - It could have value were ther is choice like for nikon

No need to appologise I just hate the word MTF and all that I see it as standing for - I am really interested in shooting experiecnes

there is of course regluar topic drift on this board - no bad thing on occasion

SMM
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=144581\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You can mount old "V" lenses on the entire "H" line of cameras as well. The Hasselblad "H" cameras aren't any more closed regarding lenses than any other line of medium-format cameras.

Given the range of opinion I've seen regarding hand holding the zoom, getting a loaner or rental to try is probably your best bet. I don't mind shooting with it hand held for limited periods of time. It is heavy but well balanced. It's heavy enough though, I don't feel a need to go to the gym after some time spent hand holding it.