Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 76,370   Posts: 1,682,943   Online: 613
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 33
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    3,675
    I use long lenses more often than not, but once things get too long, you get plane of focus issues with anything even remotely toward the
    foreground, and the only way to handle that is with tilt control on a view camera, so that's my normal equipment. But the other day I was out with my 300mm Pentax 6x7 telephoto, since the day started out a bit too windy for view camera use. We still have a bit of haze in the air, so dealing with distant subjects required some strong filters to cut thru that. It's a nice lens for wildlife or quick bad weather shots from the highway. Another reason I took along the 6x7 is that I was also shooting inside a hillside train tunnels the same day, which is still in use,
    so I wanted to ability to get out fast once the rails get a bit of buzz to them. There is actually spare room to stand against a wall, but
    prefer a bit more distance between me and a hundred stacked cargo containers whizzing by.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    1,359
    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.

  3. #23
    alex gard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Tasmania
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    82
    Images
    25
    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?

  4. #24
    Slixtiesix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    906
    Images
    21
    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...

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    1,359
    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!

  6. #26
    alex gard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Tasmania
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    82
    Images
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by pgomena View Post

    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 :P

  7. #27
    Mick Fagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,973
    Images
    29
    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.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    1,359
    My apologies, gentlemen. I don't even use my 35mm gear anymore. I should know better!

  9. #29
    aoresteen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Newnan, GA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    317
    Quote Originally Posted by bdial View Post
    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!
    Tony
    Newnan, GA

    Cambo 23SF, Hasselblad, Mamiya M645, Rolleiflex 2.8C
    Rollei 4x4 Grey
    Leica M4-P M3 IIIf RD Contax IIa Nikon SP
    Olympus OM-1 OM-2

    http://www.oresteen.com/ROLLEI4X4.htm

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    florida
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,268
    Images
    2
    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/

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin