Hasselblad - Holy Trinity or 60-100-180?

[etn]

On my recent week long trip to San Francisco, I took my 30mm Fisheye and the 903 SWC only for walking around the city. After a while the Fisheye got to be really HEAVY.

Very true.
Kudos on your lenses choice by the way, both at one extreme of the "focal length rainbow." The 30mm and SWC are so different indeed, it makes a lot of sense.

I find that the SWC is a perfect "one camera kit" for travel. I like to take mine on trips, particularly in cities.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Very true.
Kudos on your lenses choice by the way, both at one extreme of the "focal length rainbow." The 30mm and SWC are so different indeed, it makes a lot of sense.

I find that the SWC is a perfect "one camera kit" for travel. I like to take mine on trips, particularly in cities.

One of the major numerous advantages of the SWC, besides the superior optical system, is the small, light and easy to handle mirrorless (so avant-garde) concept.
It allows handheld shooting, full open aperture, at very low exposure speeds in poor ambient lightning conditions with lots of atmosphere...

 

[Sirius Glass]

One of the major numerous advantages of the SWC, besides the superior optical system, is the small, light and easy to handle mirrorless (so avant-garde) concept.
It allows handheld shooting, full open aperture, at very low exposure speeds in poor ambient lightning conditions with lots of atmosphere...

Also it allows one to eliminate unnecessary distractions like telephone and light poles, cars, people, signs as well as work for narrow streets in old villages and cities. Unlike fisheyes, one does not need to be so concerned about avoiding taking photographs with the tops of their shoes in the frame.

 

[Michael Mutmansky]

I now have the 60mm lens and it looks to be a keeper. I'll be working with it to decide that I'm going to go with it instead of the 50mm, but since I'll definitely be bringing the SWC/M, I think the 60mm will fit better in the kit.

I now just need to figure out the long lens to go along for the city shooting.

 

[etn]

I now have the 60mm lens and it looks to be a keeper. I'll be working with it to decide that I'm going to go with it instead of the 50mm, but since I'll definitely be bringing the SWC/M, I think the 60mm will fit better in the kit.

I now just need to figure out the long lens to go along for the city shooting.

Congratulations. You will love it I am sure. Please let us know what you think about it. Some say "it's neither fish nor meat", not wide enough for a wide and too wide for a standard. I disagree with this statement- to me it is a very versatile focal length on the Hasselblad. And the lens is quite small (much smaller than my 50mm CFi in any case!) So I, for one, am interested to hear what you think of it

Plus, it is the perfect standard lens if you ever decide to complement your Hassy kit with a d*g*t*l back. (I know, the D word is forbidden here )

 

[rulnacco]

Plus, it is the perfect standard lens if you ever decide to complement your Hassy kit with a d*g*t*l back. (I know, the D word is forbidden here )

It's Photrio nowadays--so yeah, let's throw digital out there! I *love* using a digital back on my Hasselblads (an ancient Sinarback 54M--only in the studio as you have to shoot it tethered). But I had a friend who used to shoot events (music festivals, fashion shows, club nights) digital with his 553ELX--a PhaseOne P45+, if I remember correctly. The images were *amazing*. He pretty much used a 50mm as his standard, but personally I'd probably prefer that 60mm, it's just a bit more compact while not becoming too "long" on digital.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I now have the 60mm lens and it looks to be a keeper. I'll be working with it to decide that I'm going to go with it instead of the 50mm, but since I'll definitely be bringing the SWC/M, I think the 60mm will fit better in the kit.

I now just need to figure out the long lens to go along for the city shooting.

I have the 150mm, the 250mm and the 500mm lenses. Since I do not shoot portraits, I rarely use the 150mm lens and will almost always use the 250mm lens when I need a telephoto lens. It is a personal choice and only your choice counts.

 

[etn]

were *amazing*. He pretty much used a 50mm as his standard, but personally I'd probably prefer that 60mm, it's just a bit more compact while not becoming too "long" on digital.

Yes, the 60mm works very well with a digi back and offers a great, versatile field of view on a crop-factor sensor such as the 33x44mm used in the recent backs. Also, Hasselblad's idea of standard lenses for X1D/X2D are the 65mm and the newly introduced 55mm. 60mm is right in the middle!

This has been done with the 60mm CF, CFV 50c ii back and very little post processing, mainly a bit of cropping and reducing the dynamic range to push the background into black like a slide film would. The most difficult part was to hold the camera vertically...

 

[GLS]

Here's a similar idea, but shot on Provia 100F with the 180. It demonstrates the close focus capability of that lens; the 150 or 250 would have needed extension tubes to achieve this framing.

Incandescence by atomstitcher, on Flickr

 

[GLS]

Same situation here. The 180 pretty much at its MFD, on Ektachrome E100.

Bark Study No. 3 by atomstitcher, on Flickr

 

[Arthurwg]

I now have the 60mm lens and it looks to be a keeper. I'll be working with it to decide that I'm going to go with it instead of the 50mm, but since I'll definitely be bringing the SWC/M, I think the 60mm will fit better in the kit.

I now just need to figure out the long lens to go along for the city shooting.

120 will do the trick. Very versatile.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Yes, the 60mm works very well with a digi back and offers a great, versatile field of view on a crop-factor sensor such as the 33x44mm used in the recent backs. Also, Hasselblad's idea of standard lenses for X1D/X2D are the 65mm and the newly introduced 55mm. 60mm is right in the middle!

This has been done with the 60mm CF, CFV 50c ii back and very little post processing, mainly a bit of cropping and reducing the dynamic range to push the background into black like a slide film would. The most difficult part was to hold the camera vertically...

View attachment 330234

If you shot 6x6 instead of 645 you would not have to roll the camera over to shoot vertically. Shoot square.

 

[Photomultiplier]

All this talk about 60/100/180 made me think about it too.

I already have the 180 which is great, it usually replaces the 150 and 250.
The 100mm Planar is certainly something i long for, but i decided against it at the moment as i would need a 200 series body for the kind of stuff i want to do with it.

So the 60 Distagon moved into my focus. I have the old C 50 Distagon and CF 80 Planar.
For photo trips in the mountains, i would love to carry only two lenses, but a wide angle will be needed. 50 + 180 is a bit too far spaced for me and the C 50 is a heavy beast.
With the additional 80 in between, the kit becomes too heavy.

That's why i decided to get the 60 CF Distagon.

Advantages for me:
- It is lighter than the 50
- has B60 filter mount instead of VII series like the C50, so i can use the same filters on everything
- wide angle but not too much, so i can use it instead of the 80
- far more movements on the Flexbody than the 50

We will see how i fare with the 60+180 combination. Has not arrived yet, but i will try it as soon as possible.

Now i have 50, 60, 80, 120, 150, 180, 250 (all CF except the 50)
Life was easier with no choice

 

[RalphLambrecht]

You have come to the right place. I own the 30mm Fisheye, 38mm 903 SWC, 50mm, 80mm, 100mm, 150mm, 250mm and 500mm lenses and the 2XE extender. I have heard that the 180mm is somewhat better than the 150mm. The 500mm lens is a tripod only shooting lens.

I recommend:

• 50mm, 80mm and 250mm the 80mm to 150mm is not enough of a change OR
• 60mm, 100mm and 250mm

I have found little use a long lens on a vacation, especially in Europe. For travelling I would talk the 50mm and 80mm lenses OR SWC, 50mm and 80mm lenses. <=== that is what I used for Paris, Normandy and the Loire Valley. For me I think the 100mm is a bit long.

good advise! take he 50 and 80 andbe done with it! You won't miss much.

 

[etn]

Now i have 50, 60, 80, 120, 150, 180, 250 (all CF except the 50)
Life was easier with no choice

My friend, only 5 more to go - 30, 38, (40 is not needed if you have a 38), 100, 135, 350.
Life is more beautiful with more choices
Enjoy your Hasselblads!

EDIT: After writing the above, I needed to fish out this picture by a famous Californian photographer.
This will make your life more beautiful AND easier at the same time!

 

[etn]

good advise! take he 50 and 80 andbe done with it! You won't miss much.

Agree, this will work well. If you decide for your SWC you can probably leave the 50 at home.

But if it all was about traveling light, we would only take pictures with our cell phones anyway!

Enjoy your trip and post pictures when you are back!!!

 

[Alex Varas]

All this talk about 60/100/180 made me think about it too.

I already have the 180 which is great, it usually replaces the 150 and 250.
The 100mm Planar is certainly something i long for, but i decided against it at the moment as i would need a 200 series body for the kind of stuff i want to do with it.

So the 60 Distagon moved into my focus. I have the old C 50 Distagon and CF 80 Planar.
For photo trips in the mountains, i would love to carry only two lenses, but a wide angle will be needed. 50 + 180 is a bit too far spaced for me and the C 50 is a heavy beast.
With the additional 80 in between, the kit becomes too heavy.

That's why i decided to get the 60 CF Distagon.

Advantages for me:
- It is lighter than the 50
- has B60 filter mount instead of VII series like the C50, so i can use the same filters on everything
- wide angle but not too much, so i can use it instead of the 80
- far more movements on the Flexbody than the 50

We will see how i fare with the 60+180 combination. Has not arrived yet, but i will try it as soon as possible.

Now i have 50, 60, 80, 120, 150, 180, 250 (all CF except the 50)
Life was easier with no choice

I had the 60 and on a trip to the mountains I took that one and the only long lens I have, 160mm Tessar and the combo went really nice, I had only one photo I wish I had the 50, in other situations the 60mm did the job of the 50mm and the 80mm.

Now I'm after a 60mm again, I saw one C version for 450€ because I can't afford a CF version, at least I can't find any for my budget.

 

[Photomultiplier]

@etn: funny enough, i usually have a companion who is able to carry excess gear if necessary, altough he doesn't look as donkey-ish as the one on your picture


The 350mm Superachromat is the lens i want to buy in case i win the lottery. I like depth-compression.

Just for information, as i do not want to divert the thread: Ladislav Kamarad also used this Lens, but he said that the film flatness of non-vacuum backs is
not enough in every case and he explained his view in an blog entry on his page. https://www.horolezec.cz/blog-photography/hasselblad-vacuum-backs-magazines-for-roll-films-220

@Alex Varas: This is what i also expect. There will be a situation someteimes where i wish i had the 50mm at hand but being able to travel lightweight and fast is of higher importance to me.
The most difficult settings will be the ones that do not require much hiking, but offer a lot of geological structures as this stuff calls for the Flexbody and ideally the 120 Makro Planar, so i have to
carry even more stuff.


The 100mm Planar will have to wait until i have to funds to also get a 200 F body.

 

[GLS]

@etn: funny enough, i usually have a companion who is able to carry excess gear if necessary, altough he doesn't look as donkey-ish as the one on your picture


The 350mm Superachromat is the lens i want to buy in case i win the lottery. I like depth-compression.

Just for information, as i do not want to divert the thread: Ladislav Kamarad also used this Lens, but he said that the film flatness of non-vacuum backs is
not enough in every case and he explained his view in an blog entry on his page. https://www.horolezec.cz/blog-photography/hasselblad-vacuum-backs-magazines-for-roll-films-220

@Alex Varas: This is what i also expect. There will be a situation someteimes where i wish i had the 50mm at hand but being able to travel lightweight and fast is of higher importance to me.
The most difficult settings will be the ones that do not require much hiking, but offer a lot of geological structures as this stuff calls for the Flexbody and ideally the 120 Makro Planar, so i have to
carry even more stuff.


The 100mm Planar will have to wait until i have to funds to also get a 200 F body.

That link doesn't work for me.

Also, any reason why you need an F series for the 100? Just for the higher shutter speed?

 

[rulnacco]

This has been done with the 60mm CF, CFV 50c ii back and very little post processing, mainly a bit of cropping and reducing the dynamic range to push the background into black like a slide film would. The most difficult part was to hold the camera vertically...

Ahhh. Nice shot, but you've pointed out one of the reasons I'll probably never buy a Hasselblad digital back--you can't rotate the back itself to get vertical shots. With my Sinarback and with Phase One backs, you can just take the back off and rotate it to do that. It's not as convenient as an RB or RZ, but it certainly works better than flipping a Hasselblad V series 90 degrees, whether handheld or on a tripod.

If you shot 6x6 instead of 645 you would not have to roll the camera over to shoot vertically. Shoot square.

Alas, if someone made a square digital back, particularly a full 6x6, I'm sure he--and I certainly--would be very happy to use one, assuming we could afford it. Unfortunately, digital back manufacturers have settled on the 3x4 ratio for their medium format sensors. For good enough reason, really. I suppose you could just crop the image to the square--but why do that and throw away the extra, perfectly good pixels?

Let us know when someone comes out with a square sensor digital back (which even Hasselblad hasn't done for the backs designed for use on V series cameras). Until then we'll have to kludge it whenever shooting digital with a Hasselblad V series camera. And there's no reason not to do that--digital is just as fun and spectacular on a 'Blad as film is.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Ahhh. Nice shot, but you've pointed out one of the reasons I'll probably never buy a Hasselblad digital back--you can't rotate the back itself to get vertical shots. With my Sinarback and with Phase One backs, you can just take the back off and rotate it to do that. It's not as convenient as an RB or RZ, but it certainly works better than flipping a Hasselblad V series 90 degrees, whether handheld or on a tripod.



Alas, if someone made a square digital back, particularly a full 6x6, I'm sure he--and I certainly--would be very happy to use one, assuming we could afford it. Unfortunately, digital back manufacturers have settled on the 3x4 ratio for their medium format sensors. For good enough reason, really. I suppose you could just crop the image to the square--but why do that and throw away the extra, perfectly good pixels?

Let us know when someone comes out with a square sensor digital back (which even Hasselblad hasn't done for the backs designed for use on V series cameras). Until then we'll have to kludge it whenever shooting digital with a Hasselblad V series camera. And there's no reason not to do that--digital is just as fun and spectacular on a 'Blad as film is.

My number 5 reason for not getting a digital back.

 

[Michael Mutmansky]

I'm perfectly happy to have the conversation drift. These things help me understand how others view and use their own systems and their lens choices...

For me, I will go heavier than just two lenses, but for most of the daily travels, I will want to be pretty light and not be carrying my full compliment with me. So that means that I COULD bring the 250 and I COULD bring the 80 (or 100, which I don't have at the moment), in addition to a 60 and 150/180, which I suspect will be my daily two walking lenses. (plus the SWC/M). Most will stay in the hotel or in the car except when I'm going to be close by.

 

[Michael Mutmansky]

I have a Fuji GFX system, so I'm familiar with the 4:3 format and like it a lot. But I'd LOVE a square format sensor for use on a Hasselblad camera (or possibly smaller designed to use the Fuji GFX lenses and the 55mm IC diameter. Give me a squre format sensor and I'll buy it as rapidly as I can (presuming it is affordable to me).

If the digital technology had advanced faster so that they could make a big 6x6 sensor in a cost effective manner before all the old film bodies disappeared, it may have happened, because there was a market of existing bodies that it could have been employed on easily, but now, I don't see it happening.

 

[Hassasin]

And after all that there is still the CB 160, wonderful Tessar, a bit of an ugly little brother to the rest of them, as such rather rare, and no less expensive than most mentioned.

 

[Hassasin]

If the digital technology had advanced faster so that they could make a big 6x6 sensor in a cost effective manner before all the old film bodies disappeared, it may have happened, because there was a market of existing bodies that it could have been employed on easily, but now, I don't see it happening

First they need to figure how to align sensor plane with that of film, or so I hear (when looking into putting current digital back on 503CW), too scary to try given several reports of sharpness isuues.