Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 75,695   Posts: 1,669,638   Online: 1096
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 50
  1. #21
    André E.C.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Finland
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,520
    Images
    12
    Well, as others, I do have the classic 50/80/150 CF set and I think I don´t need nothing else.
    Maybe one day, I will sell the 80 and get the 100 I think.



    Cheers



    André

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Suffolk, England
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    360
    Images
    37
    I too have the 50/80/150. The 150 gets used least of all by a long way. Might all be a mute point as I'll probably have to sell it all to fund my 7x17 desires... :-(

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    977
    Before going to 4 X 5 for landscape I used to take a 50 and 120 with me. Later I swapped the 50 for a 40 and added a 2 X converter

  4. #24
    lns
    lns is offline

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    434
    The 80 was my first lens, and my only lens for a long time. I still use it almost exclusively, and I could certainly get by with just that. I wouldn't think you'd need to start with anything else.

    I recently added a 150 for portraits because it was at a bargain price, and now I have more than enough. For wide, I do have an old SWC, which is fantastic, and which actually gets more use than my 501cw. I've used the 60, 120 and 180 lenses, and they are excellent, but I wanted to keep it simple, lighter and cheaper. In any event, you can't go wrong with any lens you choose. Compared to a Leica, they all seem heavy (other than the SWC), and I use them primarily on a tripod.

    I'm in Glencoe by the way, if I can be of any help. Haven't used a Hasselblad for months, it's just been too cold and gray and icy and grim. But I'm sure spring will come eventually. -Laura

  5. #25
    Antje's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Near Erlangen, Germany
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    478
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Sirius Glass View Post
    I am in the same place but the price of the SWCs go up faster than I can save the money! :o

    Steve
    Yeah, they're pretty save from me and will be for a long time, I guess. I tell myself I don't *really* want one. We all know it's not true. But maybe I can hold my GAS at bay by getting some more cheap rangefinders or so.

    Well, sure...

    Antje

  6. #26
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,879
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    437
    For years I shot with a Hassy system, and the longest lens I had was a 120. When used for its intended purpose (macro, general purpose landscape) it is a fine lens. It works as a portrait lens in the studio when you have a short studio to work in. If your goal for a longer lens is portraiture, though, I would go for the 150 or the 180 instead. The 120 can be harsh and unforgiving, and in natural light, at large apertures, the 5-bladed aperture creates some really unpleasant-looking out of focus areas.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    1,357
    So much gear, so little time and money.

    I think lens selection varies by how you see. I've always favored a "normal" lens. I have a good friend who loves a wider lens.

    On 6x6, I find an 80mm lens feels a bit wide, about like a 35mm lens on 35mm. I have a 50/80/120 kit, and often find myself using the 120 because the 80 is just too wide. If I was to rebuild my kit, I might go 50/100/150. Of course, the 180 is a very nice lens and then there's the 40 or superwide, and how about a 250 for those odd moments when you need a bigger club? AAARGH!

    The best advice I've seen in this thread so far is to get the 80 and use it for a while. Get used to the feel, see how it works for the images you like to make. Save your money for the next purchases. The lenses are darned expensive and each has its own merits. Good luck!

    Peter Gomena

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    1,357
    Flying Camera's comment on "harshness" with the 120 echoes experiences I've had with mine. It is darned sharp, but there is a certain harshness to it. Its versatility is wonderful, but if I was to start making a lot of studio portraits, I'd get a 150 or 180, which have a much "rounder" feel to them. My problem with the 150 is that it doesn't focus closely enough for a tight portrait unless you use an extension tube. Different designs for different purposes.

    Peter Gomena

  9. #29
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,879
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    437
    Well, with the 150 and tubes, it doesn't take much of a tube to get the closeness you want- a 16mm tube is more than sufficient. Might even be able to get away with an 8mm. At that point it doesn't even really affect the exposure.

  10. #30
    Mark Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Chicago
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,653
    Images
    152
    Thanks for all the help (!) I'm going to order a set up with an 80mm from David Odess. I bought a Leica set up with 3 lenses and ended up not liking it all that much (blasphemy). I suspect I'll get a 50 and 150 from ebay when/if I bond with the camera.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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