Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Longer lens or teleconverter for Hasselblad H  (Read 4082 times)
Alex MacPherson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 292



WWW
« on: January 13, 2009, 12:30:26 AM »
ReplyReply

I am investigating getting another lens for my H. I do people photography. In the 35mm world, a longer lens gives a more flattering image
due to less distortion.

I am wondering how teleconverters work in that regard. I know that the 1.7x converter will give me longer reach but how is it for image distortion?
Will it give me the compression of the lens it used on (ie. 80mm) or will it give me the compression of the new focal length (at 1.7x)?

A teleconverter is much cheaper than a new lens.

I searched google and the Hasselblad website and didn't find what I was looking for. Sorry.  
Logged

Alex MacPherson

Visit My Website
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2368


« Reply #1 on: January 13, 2009, 12:54:41 AM »
ReplyReply

IMO, it will give you the compression of the new focal length. Compression is a result of perspective. Wether you have a 150 or 1.7+80 you will end up at approximatily the same distance for the same kind of shot, eg. same perspective and compression.

I have almost every HC lens there is but not the 1.7. I know people that have it and apparently it is an excellent piece of equipment. Naturally it makes your glass slower, you will suffer from a bit more CA, not sure about distortion and how it affects autofocus.

The HC150 is a relatively cheap lens, meaning it is one the lenses that is often offered second hand and gets the lowest prices (after the 80 of course). It is a good lens that suffers a bit from CA. If autofocus is important to you the 150 is one of the fastest focussing lenses (of the HC serie).

The HC210 is really nice but, you have to get back pretty far (even for a headshot but maybe I am so used to get upclose and personal ), the AF is also slow...
Logged
Jonathan H
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 115



WWW
« Reply #2 on: January 13, 2009, 02:08:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Just to add a bit of clarification, distortion isn't a function of focal length at all.  Distortion is directly correlated to your lens-to-subject distance.  It's just that when shooting with a wide angle lens, you tend to come in much closer to your subject, causing distortion.  Likewise, with a telephoto, you're usually further back, thereby "compressing" the image.

Seeing as you've got resolution to spare, just back up an extra 5-10 feet, then crop as necessary to get the framing you desire.  No more distortion:)
Logged

Long walks on the beach, nights by the fireplace, and sushi.
jecxz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 377


WWW
« Reply #3 on: January 13, 2009, 10:48:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Dolce Moda Photography
I am investigating getting another lens for my H. I do people photography. In the 35mm world, a longer lens gives a more flattering image
due to less distortion.

I am wondering how teleconverters work in that regard. I know that the 1.7x converter will give me longer reach but how is it for image distortion?
Will it give me the compression of the lens it used on (ie. 80mm) or will it give me the compression of the new focal length (at 1.7x)?

A teleconverter is much cheaper than a new lens.

I searched google and the Hasselblad website and didn't find what I was looking for. Sorry.  
Check out www.hasselbladdigitalforum.com for some insight into these types of questions as this has been discussed there and there are some samples recently posted.

As for an answer to your question: the 1.7x is a fantastic extender and I've used it for 3+ years with all of the HC lenses that I own and I have not noticed ANY issues, distortion or aberrations (or apparitions for that matter) of any kind.

Kind regards,
Derek
Logged

Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2217


WWW
« Reply #4 on: January 13, 2009, 11:36:21 AM »
ReplyReply

No 'perfect'  lens distorts an image it just sometimes shows it from an unusual position - do you hang out 6 inches from your friends faces with one eye closed ?

Anyway - I have been using the 1.7 + 80mm converter  for years

It is a great combo for the money especially if the 80mm came with the camera for 'free'

If I were a money no object person I would have the 100 2.2 tele lens

S

Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
nikf
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 31


« Reply #5 on: January 13, 2009, 04:57:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Some months ago I tried the 1.7x converter on my HC100/2.2 and HC210/4 (with H3DII-31) and I was not satisfied with the results. The degradation in sharpness outside of the
center was not acceptable for me. I wouldn't compromise the sharpness I like so much with these lenses. With mostly in center subjects and no large printing it may
acceptable to many. The converter is just not for me.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2009, 04:58:28 PM by nikf » Logged
MarkKay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 587


WWW
« Reply #6 on: January 14, 2009, 03:40:24 PM »
ReplyReply

I have used the 1.7x on my 210 and 100mm lenses with the H3DII-31 and was quite pleased with the results.  I cannot comment what one might get on the edges with full frame film or with the less cropped H3D-39 sensor but in my opinion the converter was better than any I have used with 35mm.  I thought there was very little image degradation in terms of sharpness. Perhaps you have a bad copy.  Nonetheless, one problem I did find was that with the 210mm mounted on a tripod it was a bit more tricky to get camera shake free images. The 210mm is a long narrow lens and there is no lens tripod ring. So with the adapter it gets even longer and more subject to vibration.  Thus even with mirror lockup, I find you need to be very careful to avoid any movement.  Thus my percent of perfectly focused shots is a bit reduced.  As long as I use a  tripod and mirror lockup, I found the 100mm +1.7x to be as good as the 150mm HC lens in terms of sharpness and image quality. Of course the 300mm, and 300mm +1.7x gives even more reach. I am not using the 300mm very often so going to sell it. Nonetheless, I find the adapter works quite well and very pleased with the results.

I used to keep some example comparisons but finally deleted them. I could redo a few this weekend.

Quote from: nikf
Some months ago I tried the 1.7x converter on my HC100/2.2 and HC210/4 (with H3DII-31) and I was not satisfied with the results. The degradation in sharpness outside of the
center was not acceptable for me. I wouldn't compromise the sharpness I like so much with these lenses. With mostly in center subjects and no large printing it may
acceptable to many. The converter is just not for me.
Logged
nikf
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 31


« Reply #7 on: January 15, 2009, 07:43:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MarkKay
I have used the 1.7x on my 210 and 100mm lenses with the H3DII-31 and was quite pleased with the results.  I cannot comment what one might get on the edges with full frame film or with the less cropped H3D-39 sensor but in my opinion the converter was better than any I have used with 35mm.  I thought there was very little image degradation in terms of sharpness. Perhaps you have a bad copy.  Nonetheless, one problem I did find was that with the 210mm mounted on a tripod it was a bit more tricky to get camera shake free images. The 210mm is a long narrow lens and there is no lens tripod ring. So with the adapter it gets even longer and more subject to vibration.  Thus even with mirror lockup, I find you need to be very careful to avoid any movement.  Thus my percent of perfectly focused shots is a bit reduced.  As long as I use a  tripod and mirror lockup, I found the 100mm +1.7x to be as good as the 150mm HC lens in terms of sharpness and image quality. Of course the 300mm, and 300mm +1.7x gives even more reach. I am not using the 300mm very often so going to sell it. Nonetheless, I find the adapter works quite well and very pleased with the results.

I used to keep some example comparisons but finally deleted them. I could redo a few this weekend.

It seems you did a more careful testing than I did. Nevertheless I found the center sharp with the 1.7x but to the borders of the frame (on H3DII-31) it started to get a softness I was not used to see
with my Hasselblad lenses and I decided against the 1.7x. I did the shooting  hand holding but leaning on a wall. It was a bright day and the speed was in the safe range for me. The -31 was choosen
over the -39 nearly solely because of it's one stop higher ISO, making it better for hand holding shots.
Maybe I have to work on my sharpness perception but I had very good experiences with shooting the H3DII on a tripod. I have a Gitzo carbon fiber tripod and Arca Swiss ballhead and exposed even until the maximum of 32 seconds and got sharp photos. Of course I use a longer shutter delay than default or mirror lock up.
Logged
orc73
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 92


« Reply #8 on: March 03, 2014, 11:47:16 PM »
ReplyReply

How is the depth of field with the teleconverter? if I have a 80mm and put the x1.7 do I still have the depth of field of the 80 or will it get more shallow?
I assume the first as this will probably rely on lense design.
Logged
Joe Towner
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 106


« Reply #9 on: March 05, 2014, 12:25:17 PM »
ReplyReply

In chatting with my rep, his testing between the 210 + 1.7 and the 300 is that the combo with the TC is better.

I just wish more lenses had a mount on them - or I just need a 12" Arca plate and an adjustable lens support.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad