Hasselblad portrait and short tele lenses

[AndyH]

Okay, I finally had a Hasselblad GAS attack this weekend. I was out shooting with my 500C and felt the urge to have a lens somewhere between my 80mm Planar and 250 Sonnar (I also have a Distagon 50mm). They are all the older, aluminum finished lenses, without the full multi-coating of the later T* models, and I like the vintage look of that period of glass for my particular shooting style. I shoot the 250 more or less the same way as I'd use a 135 in 35mm terms, the 80 as normal, and in between I'm most likely to shoot the 80mm and later enlarge and crop.

There are a myriad (well, maybe a half-myriad) of choices between that 250 and the 80mm, and I'm wondering which would be most useful and which have a particular quality that some of the APUG shooters favor. I shoot a lot of architectural, street, and landscape elements, as well as some environmental portraiture. A "traditional" portrait FOV length would start at about 120, and splitting the difference between the 80 and 250 would be about 165.

I'd favor a slightly faster lens, even if I had to save up for it, and I'm willing to stalk the used gear sites (and eBay) until I find exactly what's right for me. ​

Does anyone have particular favorites that fit this category, and any reasoning behind their choices? Advantages of close focusing distance, higher speed, or a particular look?

Thanks in advance,
Andy

 

[film_man]

When I owned a Hassy, I had at various times the 150CT & CF, 160CB (also had the 80 and 250). They were both great and you're splitting hairs. I'd say the 150 was probably a bit nicer, it is a tiny bit faster and there was something about the 160 that made it a bit harsh as a look. The 160 though was nicer to handle, a bit lighter and I much prefer the new style barrels vs the old ones with the cheese grater focus ring. However, if I was ever going to get back into the Hassy system I'd get a 120 just so that I can get a bit closer.

 

[mike c]

I will use the 150mm when walking around as it is less cumbersome than the 250mm and less worry about getting blurry negs, and also is perhaps the lest expensive of all Hassy used lens. The 120mm would be nice also.

 

[ParkerSmithPhoto]

The 120mm on the Hasselblad (or the 127mm on the Mamiya RZ) is just about the perfect lens for portraits. You can get in close without distortion and also make beautiful mid length portraits (or even full length) with the background nicely out of focus. I had a friend over last week and we were looking at prints and literally every single one of his favorites was made with the 120mm. I tend to think of it as a long normal.

If you go to my site and check out the RODEO series, those were all 127mm on the RZ.

 

[MattKing]

I would hazard a guess that there were more 150mm lenses made and sold for the 6x6 Hasselblads than any other focal length in that range, because the 150mm lens was the closest to being a "standard" short telephoto for the wedding photography crowd.
For that reason, it is probably easier and cheaper to find them.

 

[AndyH]

The 120mm on the Hasselblad (or the 127mm on the Mamiya RZ) is just about the perfect lens for portraits. You can get in close without distortion and also make beautiful mid length portraits (or even full length) with the background nicely out of focus. I had a friend over last week and we were looking at prints and literally every single one of his favorites was made with the 120mm. I tend to think of it as a long normal.

If you go to my site and check out the RODEO series, those were all 127mm on the RZ.

Those images are outstanding. I really like your work, and I'm happy to see yet another photographer shooting film who is not a member of my Boomer/Medicare generation. Good advice.

I would hazard a guess that there were more 150mm lenses made and sold for the 6x6 Hasselblads than any other focal length in that range, because the 150mm lens was the closest to being a "standard" short telephoto for the wedding photography crowd.
For that reason, it is probably easier and cheaper to find them.

Excellent point - and one I hadn't thought of. I believe the shooter at at least one of my weddings used this very lens, and I had noticed that they seemed cheaper than the 120s on the 'Bay.

Decisions, decisions!

Andy

 

[Sirius Glass]

The 150mm, 160mm, and 180mm lenses are all great, but I recommend the 180mm lens for portraits.

 

[AndyH]

The 150mm, 160mm, and 180mm lenses are all great, but I recommend the 180mm lens for portraits.

I’m more of a photographer of things than people, but I will give this one a look.

I really appreciate the thoughtful responses. I fell in love with the Hassy the very first time I heard the shutter, and nothing since has done anything but increase that.

Andy

 

[mshchem]

im more of a photographer of things than people, but I will give this one a look.

I really appreciate the thoughtful responses. I fell in love with the Hassy the very first time I heard the shutter, and nothing since has done anything but increase that.

Andy

Don't start listening to Leicas!

 

[AndyH]

Don't start listening to Leicas!

Too late...

My Leica III models are quite addictive.

Andy

 

[rulnacco]

I don't own the 120--that's the next one on my list--but I do have the 150 CF and the 180 CFi. The 150 is great as a carry-around lens, as it's relatively small/light and is quite sharp. But when I'm shooting portraits of someone interesting in the studio, I almost invariably turn to the 180. It's not magnitudes better than the 150, but it's really got an extra special something that I really like. And with a 10mm or 21mm extension tube, you can really get in close without losing too much in terms of exposure.

Here's a head shot I did this past weekend, on an ancient Sinarback 54M 22 megapixel digital back with the 180 mm, no extension tube:

http://www.presquevu.com/x1232.jpg

That's been cropped slightly and sharpened a bit with the Nik Collection plugin, but it illustrates what's there.

 

[etn]

The 120, 150 and 180 are all great. I think the important is to find one which works for you.
In my experience,
- 120 is great for walk around, portraits, "things", even limited macro without extension rings. (Of course, it also shines with extension rings)
- 180 makes wonders in nature/landscape photography
- 150 is somewhere in between. To me the focal length "does not work as well" as the 120 and 180 do. Nothing bad with the lens, I for some reason just do not feel as comfortable with the field of view. But that's just me and my highly personal impression (and probably utter BS ha ha!) - Rulnacco in his post above finds the 150 is the best walk around lens to him. This illustrates how personal all this is!

I'd say, chose a 120 if you want to double with making close-ups, or chose a 180 if you want to double with shooting "far away" such as landscapes. Chose a 150 if you're on a budget or if you can't decide between 120 and 180!

120 is probably my most used lens, followed by the 180. I also have a 150, but I rarely use it.

 

[etn]

I don't own the 120--that's the next one on my list--

I have a 120 CF for sale (after "upgrading" to a CFi) if you are interested. PM me for details.

 

[GLS]

I own both the 120mm Makro-Planar and the 180mm Sonnar. Both are superlative portrait lenses, and each have their use depending on the look (i.e. framing and compression) you are going for. The 150mm was/is very commonly used as a portrait lens, but optically it is not as good as the other two, and will not focus closely enough to achieve tight head shots without using extension tubes or close-up filters.

Quite apart from the issue of portrait use, the Makro-Planar is worth owning anyway as a general lens simply due to its versatility.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Don't start listening to Leicas!

One cannot listen to Leicas because no one can hear them.

 

[mshchem]

One cannot listen to Leicas because no one can hear them.

Oh but they whisper to you, the satisfing calunk of a Hassleblad is replaced with a tiny cricket, click, amazing stuff .

 

[etn]

Oh but they whisper to you, the satisfing calunk of a Hassleblad is replaced with a tiny cricket, click, amazing stuff .

The noise of a Hassy is mainly made by the mirror. The shutter itself is not much louder than a Leica.

 

[mshchem]

The noise of a Hassy is mainly made by the mirror. The shutter itself is not much louder than a Leica.

Maybe a bit quieter.