Topic: Hasselblad HC Lenses (Read 22502 times)

klane · « **Reply #20 on:** January 05, 2008, 11:28:56 pm »

Quote

If you go to somewhere like BHphotovideo you can quickly see what the 35mm equivalents are for the HC lenses...On my phase P30+ chip the crop factor is 1.3, now lets look at the 80mm. Looking at the specs from BH they state that the 80mm hassie lens is a 45mm lens in 35mm equivalent. So multiply it by 1.3 for the chip and I get 58.5mm lens on a 35mm camera. But really you are cropping the distortion of a 45mm lens...It wouldn't really be a very flattering portrait using a 80mm and a extension tube. The face wold draw out too much. The 120 is a 73mm in 35mm equivalent and on the P30+ is acts like a 95mm lens. 73mm is getting closer to a flattering focal length, too bad that you have to back up like it is a 95mm lens...Sometimes that can be a good thing for the lighting or the subject's confidence (huge camera, HELP!!). Since we are talking about 3000-3500 lenses it makes sense to ask around here and try them for yourself if you can. Best of luck.

Ken
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164976\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Actually I think the bh site is referencing 6x6 fov comparisons. The crop of 1.3x would make an 80mm= 104mm, so about 65mm in 35mm. A 120mm would be like 156mm=97.5 in 35mm. Some one please correct me if im wrong.

BJNY · « **Reply #21 on:** January 05, 2008, 11:47:29 pm »

MarkKay,
I look forward to your findings Re: 28mm + micro-lensed sensor.
Thank you in advance.
Billy

Quote

It is recommended.. at least by hasselblad and I have heard it is a good combo. Will know soon
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=165286\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

alexsar · « **Reply #22 on:** January 11, 2008, 01:16:32 pm »

does anyone have experience with the 50?
it seems to me to be useful if using the camera in travels as it is the 35mm equivalent of30-35(?)
also
I have read in a thread (possibly in this forum)some extremely negative comments regarding the H lens family bokeh
would anyone care to comment?
many thanks
alex

MarkKay · « **Reply #23 on:** January 11, 2008, 01:46:58 pm »

THe 50 and 300 are the only two HC lenses i have not used at all. I see the same comments about bokeh and I find the bokeh with the 100 and 120 to be excellent. I once compared the canon 85 1.2 with the 100mm HC lens and shot wide open with both. They both gave nice bokeh-- slightly different but I could not say one was better than the other. The zeiss 110/2 is supposed to be the killer lens for bokeh but since i have never used I cannot make any comment.

I have considered the 50mm at times but to be honest, the 50-110 is such an great zoom it would be redundant except for the fact that for handholding, the 50mm lens would be a much better option. Historically I have rarely used my H2 without a tripod but with the H3D-31 and outstanding high iso, may want to use for more without a tripod

Quote

does anyone have experience with the 50?
it seems to me to be useful if using the camera in travels as it is the 35mm equivalent of30-35(?)
also
I have read in a thread (possibly in this forum)some extremely negative comments regarding the H lens family bokeh
would anyone care to comment?
many thanks
alex
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=166547\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

alexsar · « **Reply #24 on:** January 11, 2008, 02:03:20 pm »

I have used the 100 for a weekend and was decidedly impressed by both sharpness and bokeh; I was using a H3dII 39 and was comparing to a nikon d2x with 17-35 and 70-200 which for nikon are considered superb zooms
maybe I have not seen the top but the 100 impressed me
would anyone have pics to post with what they consider excellent and bad bokeh?

regarding the 50 there seems to be a dearth of comments on the internet; I wonder why...

robert zimmerman · « **Reply #25 on:** January 11, 2008, 03:58:20 pm »

this is somehing i was wondering as well. info on the 50mm is so rare it's like no one has eve used it. would be interesting to hear about it and how it compares to the zoom at 50mm.

jecxz · « **Reply #26 on:** January 11, 2008, 09:24:43 pm »

robert zimmerman · « **Reply #27 on:** January 12, 2008, 03:52:00 am »

Quote

I use the 50mm quite a bit, what do you want to know?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=166630\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

hi, how is it wide open, how is sharpness and how is distortion? have you used the zoom and how would you compare them, besides the obvious. thanks.

jecxz · « **Reply #28 on:** January 12, 2008, 09:21:35 am »

Morgan_Moore · « **Reply #29 on:** January 12, 2008, 12:45:03 pm »

I have the 50 - I tried picking up the zoom and it was a no no - way too heavy for handholding IMO - I also think the zoom is too slow to just operate with no primes which would be a dream - one lens - so the zoom doesn replace a longer prime

I like the focal lenght of the 50 for 'environmental portraits' only using the 35 for interiors or big group shots where I dont have space to back off

in terms of the look - neutral I would say

And neutral is what I want - that lets the subject matter shine (or not)

S

Author Topic: Hasselblad HC Lenses (Read 22502 times)