Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Hasselblad 50-110 vs 80mm normal  (Read 5764 times)
phildog33
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 89


« on: January 06, 2007, 11:43:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Can users of both lenses/owners of both lenses... let us know their opinions on the two lenses.

I have only the 80mm normal currently, and would like to put together a full range lens kit.

What is everyones recommendations for me....

35mm, 50-110, (sell the 85 ?) , and something in the 120-150 range ?

also.. has HAsselblad officially stated that the 28mm WA will not work on our H2s and H1s?

-phillip
Logged
MarkKay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 587


WWW
« Reply #1 on: January 07, 2007, 12:43:30 AM »
ReplyReply

I have both these lenses -- I recently got the 80mm and have not scientifically compared it to the 50-110 yet but can do that.  The 50-110 is the most outstanding zoom lens in terms of optics I have ever used.  It is tack sharp wide open.  Very nice focal range as well.  The only downside is the size and weight... it is a big lens. THe 80 is small and it is fast at f2.8.  

I started with the 35mm and 50-110.  I added the 120mm macro, 210mm and 1.7x, and recently the 80.  I use the 35 and 50-110 95% of the time except when shooting some macro images.  I also have the extension tubes. You can use the extension tubes with the zoom and it makes a very good macro.  

Yes -- you are correct, the 28mm will not work on any camera except the closed H3D.





Quote
Can users of both lenses/owners of both lenses... let us know their opinions on the two lenses.

I have only the 80mm normal currently, and would like to put together a full range lens kit.

What is everyones recommendations for me....

35mm, 50-110, (sell the 85 ?) , and something in the 120-150 range ?

also.. has HAsselblad officially stated that the 28mm WA will not work on our H2s and H1s?

-phillip
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94260\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
phildog33
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 89


« Reply #2 on: January 07, 2007, 12:46:57 AM »
ReplyReply

hey thanks Mark for replying.

so it seems that the 35 and 50-110 combo is a good one.

120 macro for special reasons.. but tubes on the 50-110 gets you some sort of macro shooting

how often do you use the 210 and the 1.7x? im interested in both of them.

-phillip
Logged
ericstaud
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 384


WWW
« Reply #3 on: January 07, 2007, 02:23:43 AM »
ReplyReply

FWIW I have used two 50-110 rental lenses which would not give sharp results at anything more open than F/8.  At F/11 the lens has always been exceptional for me.

I would buy this lens from a good dealer and do thorough testing with it before any serious work.  From what others have said here I don't doubt that you might get a really nice one that focuses wide open at all focal lengths, but buying one on your way out of town to shoot a big job is probably not the way to go.
Logged
MarkKay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 587


WWW
« Reply #4 on: January 07, 2007, 02:45:59 AM »
ReplyReply

I just got a 1.7x a few weeks ago and other than testing, I have not used it for real shooting. I do not use the 210 that often.  

Quote
hey thanks Mark for replying.

so it seems that the 35 and 50-110 combo is a good one.

120 macro for special reasons.. but tubes on the 50-110 gets you some sort of macro shooting

how often do you use the 210 and the 1.7x? im interested in both of them.

-phillip
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94265\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
MarkKay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 587


WWW
« Reply #5 on: January 07, 2007, 02:48:00 AM »
ReplyReply

wow.. that goes against what I know others have experienced.  I know some of the earlier lenses had some problems with the front elements falling out.


Quote
FWIW I have used two 50-110 rental lenses which would not give sharp results at anything more open than F/8.  At F/11 the lens has always been exceptional for me.

I would buy this lens from a good dealer and do thorough testing with it before any serious work.  From what others have said here I don't doubt that you might get a really nice one that focuses wide open at all focal lengths, but buying one on your way out of town to shoot a big job is probably not the way to go.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94269\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
ericstaud
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 384


WWW
« Reply #6 on: January 07, 2007, 03:02:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
wow.. that goes against what I know others have experienced.  I know some of the earlier lenses had some problems with the front elements falling out.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94272\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Yup, I rented one of those "Special Edition" exploding versions as well.  Lucky the rental house was close.  They had a replacement over in 30 minutes.

Hopefully my shallow focus experience with this lens will be drowned out by others with better results.  There are already enough average lenses in the world.
Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4915



« Reply #7 on: January 07, 2007, 06:24:17 AM »
ReplyReply

When we produced the Measuring Megabytes report and video Bill Atkinson reported that the 50-110 zoom was actually sharper than his Macro, and the 120 Macro as we know is one of the most highly regarded MF lenses around.

Other than the front element falling off while I was on a shoot in Namibia last year, I have found this to be an exceptional lens. I agree about the size and weight, but I'm willing to live with this in return for the versatility and image quality. (My replacement lens is mechanically perfect).

Michael
Logged
jecxz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 377


WWW
« Reply #8 on: January 07, 2007, 06:31:07 AM »
ReplyReply

I would first ask what you are shooting. I have all the H lenses except the 100mm. I recently started shooting with the 50-110 zoom so I don't know comparitive results yet.

Regarding the 1.7x: I have used it on the 120mm, 210mm and 300mm and it is tack sharp and produces outstanding results. On the 300mm it's manual focus, but on the 210mm auto-focus works. I have been using it for about one year.

I use my 35mm quite a bit but sometimes the distortion bothers me, but that is something personal. The edges are sharp regardless of what some say.

Going for the 35mm and the 50-110 zoom would be a great first step. When conditions are favorable I prefer the primes; in terrible weather I'll grab the zoom.

Good luck.
Logged

MarkKay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 587


WWW
« Reply #9 on: January 07, 2007, 11:45:48 AM »
ReplyReply

I should have stated above that although I have just gotten the 1.7x, I did some testing with it on the 210mm HC lens and I was extremely impressed. There was not loss of image quality.  the only thing I cannot say for sure is how the edges might be affected since I am using a cropped Aptus 65 sensor.  However, I know with the canon DSLR there is some loss of detail when using their 1.4x and especially their 2x  extenders.

One thing I have wondered is how the 150mm compares in image quality to the 100mm.  Mark

Quote
I would first ask what you are shooting. I have all the H lenses except the 100mm. I recently started shooting with the 50-110 zoom so I don't know comparitive results yet.

Regarding the 1.7x: I have used it on the 120mm, 210mm and 300mm and it is tack sharp and produces outstanding results. On the 300mm it's manual focus, but on the 210mm auto-focus works. I have been using it for about one year.

I use my 35mm quite a bit but sometimes the distortion bothers me, but that is something personal. The edges are sharp regardless of what some say.

Going for the 35mm and the 50-110 zoom would be a great first step. When conditions are favorable I prefer the primes; in terrible weather I'll grab the zoom.

Good luck.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94284\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
jecxz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 377


WWW
« Reply #10 on: January 07, 2007, 06:57:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
...the only thing I cannot say for sure is how the edges might be affected since I am using a cropped Aptus 65 sensor.  However, I know with the canon DSLR there is some loss of detail when using their 1.4x and especially their 2x  extenders.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94332\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Image quality with the 1.7x is sharp on the edges with film too. I have the Canon 1.4x and 2x entenders and the Hasselblad 1.7x is far superior, having extesively used all three.
Logged

phildog33
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 89


« Reply #11 on: January 07, 2007, 07:47:39 PM »
ReplyReply

hey guys, thanks for all the helpful responses.

can we get any sample images posted of the different lenses. I am using with a PhaseOne P25 and H2.

I am trying to decide if the 50-110 will replace my 85 normal lens.

With Canon system the 24-70 has taken care of most primes except the 85mm 1.2L.

In the Hassy world.. it seems that the 35 and 50-110 will do the job.. with a longer telephoto and 1.7x needed for certain apps. Rent the 120 Macro and thats it??

p.s. any news from Hasselblad when the waist level viewfinder will become available??
Logged
wham1000
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


WWW
« Reply #12 on: January 13, 2007, 12:09:14 PM »
ReplyReply

New member. For what it is worth. During my first shoot for a mag cover I was surprised by the difference in overall quality on my tethered Macpro screen between the 80 and the zoom. I immeadiately sold the zoom.
Logged
phildog33
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 89


« Reply #13 on: January 13, 2007, 12:11:04 PM »
ReplyReply

wow..

Can you elaborate a little further or point us to some sample pictures.
I am on the fence how to round out the Hasselblad lens lineup.

To get a 35, 80 and 120 macro? is that the consensus?
and skip the zoom

-p
Logged
wham1000
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


WWW
« Reply #14 on: January 13, 2007, 12:25:07 PM »
ReplyReply

I mostly use my H1/P30 for studio work. Therefore there is no incentive to combine lenses in a zoom. Whatever they say out there a fix lens will always be better than its equivalent zoom. Question of physics. With your line up you can't go wrong. I've added the 210mm.

Some pics at miguel@miguelc.com.
Logged
MarkKay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 587


WWW
« Reply #15 on: January 13, 2007, 05:55:23 PM »
ReplyReply

I finally got around to doing some comparisons. I compared the 80mm HC, 100mm HC, 50-110 HC and 100mm 3.5 CFI on the aptus 65mm back.  I primarily looked at center image against a distant background to get an idea of bokeh.

Here are my conclusions to date.

Anyone who states the zoom is optically inferior must have a bad copy. While the primes might be a tad better-- the differences are not that significant in my mind.  The 100mm HC at f2.2 gave a very nice bokeh.  the center sharpness was a tad bit better at f2.8.  In my opinion the 80 and 100mm are very similar at f2.8.

Therefore the zoom is optically very good. The primes have two major advantages, they are faster and give a more pleasing bokeh and narrower DOF.  Moreover, the primes are much smaller and lighter.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad