Iīm 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 donīt 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...
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!
Are you sick in the head?
Originally Posted by pgomena
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
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.
My apologies, gentlemen. I don't even use my 35mm gear anymore. I should know better!
+1 My thoughts exactly. I use my 250 as much as I use my 150. Get a 250 as they are cheap!
Originally Posted by bdial
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.
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!