Discussing telephoto lenses for landscape photography

Sirius Glass · Dec 19, 2013

I use the Hasselblad 903 SWC and the Hasselblad 503 CX with the 50mm and 80mm lenses the most for landscape and architecture photography. I prefer to move in close to eliminate extraneous things and use a wide angle lens. The fact the the SWC is rectilinearly correct is very useful.

pgomena · Dec 20, 2013

I almost never hand-hold my Hasselblad, so the size and weight of the 250mm for such is irrelevant to me. I will on occasion hand-hold the 80mm or 50mm, but it's the odd grab shot. Now that the OP mentions that he's shooting Antarctic icebergs from a ship, the 350mm doesn't seem unreasonable. It's a big, heavy lens, and I've handled but never used one. I've never seen a Hasselblad 500mm, but I'd imagine they're not common. The 350mm shows up on KEH's site once in a while.

Sirius Glass · Dec 20, 2013

pgomena said:
I've never seen a Hasselblad 500mm, but I'd imagine they're not common. The 350mm shows up on KEH's site once in a while.

Kinda like hand holding a howitzer.

alex gard · Dec 21, 2013

just looking over the prices on the bay... the price is pretty much the same for 350 or 500mm... seeing as there is a considerable difference in the focal length, would it be a safer option just to jump straight on the 500mm? It is a pretty big lens though!

also, I'm assuming that with a 350mm and longer you're going to need to have the tripod mounted on the lens rather than the body, how does the camera/lens hold up with that weight where they join? has it been known to damage the locking mechanism at all?

Sirius Glass · Dec 21, 2013

This landscape was taken with a 250mm lens at f/11 at 1/250 second with Ektachrome.

Slixtiesix · Dec 21, 2013

I´m a fan of using longer focal lengths (especially in the 120mm - 250mm range) for landscapes and architecture as well. However, having a 150mm, 180mm and 250mm I would not recommend getting all of them (Please don´t ask me now why then it is the case with me ;-) ) In my view it would be sensible to have either the 150mm and 250mm or only the 180mm (maybe paired with a 100mm or 120mm then). I have no use for all of these lenses and I think I might sell some of them next year...

pgomena · Dec 21, 2013

KEH has both the 350 and 500 in stock. Consider the size of filters you might need . . .

I'd imagine that yes, the 350 and 500 have tripod mounts. The Hasselblad bodies are so light and relatively fragile that I can't imagine another configuration. There's a lot of metal in the big lenses.

Have you thought that 35mm might be a better option for your needs? Faster lenses, less bulk and bother, 36 exposures to a roll, etc.

Yes, I know bigger is better, but shooting from the deck of a moving ship with a huge f/5.6 or f/8 lens begins to make me wonder. You could pick up a bunch of used Nikon or Canon gear and some nice lenses for the equivalent expenditure, including backups!

Sirius Glass · Dec 21, 2013

pgomena said:
Have you thought that 35mm might be a better option for your needs? Faster lenses, less bulk and bother, 36 exposures to a roll, etc.

TREASON! Go from a Hasselblad to 35mm! Are you daft?? Go wash your mouth out with mouthwash and stand in the corner for a month!

After composing on a large viewfinder, how could one pick out the subject on a 35mm postage stamp size viewfinder?

Lose the ability to change film mid roll? Oh the insanity of it all!

alex gard · Dec 21, 2013

pgomena said:
Have you thought that 35mm might be a better option for your needs?

Are you sick in the head?

Ha, but no. I don't think I'd have much a problem with an f/8 lens if I got some 400 or 800 speed film. Especially down here where it's so bright. The 150 is a nice lens but it really doesn't have the reach I want, I wouldn't get a 180mm unless I was actually trading up the 150. The next step would be 350 or 500 I think, I don't think 250 would quite cut it, but again what would I know

Mick Fagan · Dec 22, 2013

Possibly the best accessory on a ship with a Hasselblad and a heavy lens between Tassie and Antartica, would be a Miller Fluid Head atop a decent tripod; with the tripod strapped to something of course.

Mick.

pgomena · Dec 22, 2013

My apologies, gentlemen. I don't even use my 35mm gear anymore. I should know better!

aoresteen · Dec 22, 2013

bdial said:
I use my 150 on the Hasselblad quite a lot, both for landscapes and other kinds of things. If your vision works in a "less is more" sort of way, it's a good way to go. If you want to be very selective in your compositions, a 250 might be a better choice as an addition to your 150, rather than the 180. Aside from a converter, another good way to find out might be to rent one or both.

+1 My thoughts exactly. I use my 250 as much as I use my 150. Get a 250 as they are cheap!

jeffreyg · Dec 23, 2013

Alex,

Have you considered the Mutar 2x to go with the 150? You would have a 150 and 300 that way. I have the 50, 80, 150, 250 and 350. When I travel I take the 50, 150 and 2x. Mine is super sharp and since I predominately use a tripod the 2 stops are not a big deal (I don't use the 2x with the 50). The 350 is a big lens and a hefty tripod is best. As I mentioned on another page I recently used the 2x with the 350 and the subject was a landscape about a half mile across a bay. Even in a scanned negative 7 inch print as a proof the details are there.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

jovo · Dec 23, 2013

When you consider that mf lenses translate to roughly half of 35mm lenses' angle of view, a 250mm lens would be 125mm in 35. That's not much in the way of telephoto even though it's a lot of lens in size and weight. I use a 300mm for my P67, and don't think of it as a really long lens. The only ones bigger for that system are 400 and 800...HUGE lenses, but just 200 and 400 mm's in pulling power compared to 35mm. Get the 250!

Sirius Glass · Dec 23, 2013

No the 250mm for a Hasselblad translates to approximately 150mm in 35mm. One has to compare the horizontal dimension since the shape is different the diagonal comparison does not apply.

alex gard · Dec 24, 2013

The 150mm has been practically living on my camera the last 3 days. I also really like how it renders a scene through the viewfinder (of course, will have to see how they turn out on print) I almost prefer how it makes a landscape look over the 80mm, but I could just be seeing through rose coloured glasses (or a red25). I think I've found my new favourite way of shooting scenery

PKM-25 · Dec 25, 2013

I shoot mostly landscapes with my Hasselblad system which consists of all CF lenses.

50mm FLE
60mm
80mm
100mm
120mm
180mm
1.4XE

I think the 180mm is *perfect*, not very expensive at $600-4800 used and works fantastic as a 250mm 5.6 with the 1.4XE converter.

Discussing telephoto lenses for landscape photography

Membership Council

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency