What's new
Medium Format Forum

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

H3D-31 plus 50-110mm TOO good?

S

sperera

Member
H3D-31 plus 50-110mm TOO good, Hasselblad autofocus too bad?

I currently shoot with a Nikon D300 + 24-70mm lens as my main lens for fashion and portrait shots...you can see our stuff on www.ulookfierce.com.
My colleague claims I would be spending my life trying to smooth out skin if I bought a H3D-31 with a 50-110mm lens as I have the opportunity to (ex-demo so NOT at new price)....he claims it will be too sharp and clinical and I'll lose that softness he claims I get with the Nikon in comparison....I normally print up to 20 x 30cm so im looking at printing larger with the H3D....so my question is what do you guys think?????
 
Natural skin reproduction is the privilege of MF cameras.
As against your colleague I would say you can spend the rest of your life making skin tones anywhere near the original with 35 mm based DSLR cameras.

Try to get the demo set in your studio and compare images made with both systems.
If the 50-110 zoom turns out to give to much detail use a softar or even two.

Please report what your findings are if you can do a comparison.
 
the problem is i cant test it as its in the UK and I'm in Gibraltar and there's no Hasselblad dealer here anymore.......i've seen images from the camera and the lens combo but i haven't tested it myself....so hence the 'up in the air, you'll find out if you get the camera and now you're stuck with more hours post-processing' scenario......Im not convinced by my friend's argument either....I mean, a Nikon with a 50mm prime is razor sharp albeit not at the enlargements possible with the Hasselblad.....

as for the skin tones argument I have no issues whatsoever with Nikon RAW images on a good raw convertor...and Im not talking about Photoshop or Lightroom which render, in my opinion BAD colour in comparison.....do you think this will be the case if i got into Hasselblad again....i.e. wow, I didnt know good skin tones til now that im using Hasselblad etc?
 
There is just no absolute truth in these matters.
To a certain extend it is a personal matter.
Some like high contrast portraits that show every imperfection of the person photographed.
Others like a more forgiving image that flatters the subject and more or less hides these imperfections.

To quote the words of a well respected member of this community:
"You will have problems with any female over the age of twelve when using the 180 mm lens for portraits."

A general rule not to use lenses designed for macro over an object distance of about 2 m still stands.
For both the V and the H system the 100 mm lens is a better option.
 
do you have a view on using said combination for fashion/portraits....the H3D-31 plus 50-110mm....any views more than welcome and appreciated, very appreciated.....
 
Why not take a budget flight to London and look what this lens does for you with your camera.
I am sure Hasselblad UK will be delighted to show you a lens and maybe even let you use it a couple of hours.

More than relying on the judgement of others I would prefer to have the lens mounted on a body in my hands.
Your opinion is what counts most for the use and results of this lens.

If you need an introduction to one of the most helpful Hasselblad imports just let me know.

Paul
 
I don't want to sound rude, but please, how can you doubt if a Hasselblad H will give you better results than a poor nikon dx camera?

If your photos turn out worst, it will be your fault, not the camera's

!

too sharp? my god that is like saying that large format (5x4/10x8) cameras should never be used for portraits!

if you have the money, go for it!
 
cs_foto said:
too sharp? my god that is like saying that large format (5x4/10x8) cameras should never be used for portraits!
Click to expand...

Use the 180CF/E/i lens for a portrait of any female and watch the comment.
That is when you will also realise that the best lenses are not always the best option for portraits.
Ever used a Softar or similar device?
 
cs_foto said:
I don't want to sound rude, but please, how can you doubt if a Hasselblad H will give you better results than a poor nikon dx camera?
If your photos turn out worst, it will be your fault, not the camera's!
too sharp? my god that is like saying that large format (5x4/10x8) cameras should never be used for portraits!
if you have the money, go for it!
Click to expand...
I know exactly what you're saying....but I'm not talking about the photos being worse.......the sharpness issue IS an issue when you get a woman in front of a lens....trust me....shoot anyone up to 25 years of age and you're fine....anything over and you're a few hours on your computer....that's been my experience so far.....not to mention spots and stuff!!!!
 
polypal said:
Why not take a budget flight to London and look what this lens does for you with your camera.
I am sure Hasselblad UK will be delighted to show you a lens and maybe even let you use it a couple of hours.

More than relying on the judgement of others I would prefer to have the lens mounted on a body in my hands.
Your opinion is what counts most for the use and results of this lens.

If you need an introduction to one of the most helpful Hasselblad imports just let me know.

Paul
Click to expand...
Thats the best option of course and one I have thought about but with the money for the flight and overnight stay etc I can get radio triggers so i cant justify it......I'm dealing with Nicky West at Pro Centre in London...great girl and excellent to deal with....I've put a deposit down on a H3D-31 ex-demo and 2nd hand 50-110mm but I still have to convince myself 100% and be 100% objective.....that and the H3D-31 is a bit over what i expected it to be....they quoted me a price then realized it had less shots done that they thought so they've upped the price and that doesnt sit very well with me at the moment but still.....when it comes to the crunch we'll talk i guess.....

so the big decision is either the Nikon D3x with all the lenses i have or move to hasselblad with this one lens....many will think its a stupid decision and stick to Nikon cos with 24mp im there but my heart tells me go back to hasselblad.....

The main thing Im worried about to be honest is the prehistoric centre area autofocusing as compared to Nikon 51-point 3-D tracking autofocus.....they way i use that is I set up a composition and if I want to focus on an eye for example thats off centre i move the focus point on its grid....hence exposure etc remains....now with the Hasselblad Id have to move the camera, focus, move back to position.....anyone got any views on this?
 
sperera said:
The main thing Im worried about to be honest is the prehistoric centre area autofocusing as compared to Nikon 51-point 3-D tracking autofocus.....they way i use that is I set up a composition and if I want to focus on an eye for example thats off centre i move the focus point on its grid....hence exposure etc remains....now with the Hasselblad Id have to move the camera, focus, move back to position.....anyone got any views on this?
Click to expand...

It is nice feature to be able to move the focus point.
There is only one point that can be the reference for focus of course.............
Maybe think some more what consequences a change of hardware has for the way you operate.
 
exactly.....I used to have a 503CW with only an 80mm lens and had no issues.....and that was manual focusing!!!! so perhaps Im over-thinking things.....

tell me about the focusing on a H3D then....basically focuses in the centre area.....no-one i know has a digital Hasselblad so i cant ask anyone but you guys here

....thank you so much for all your help EVERYONE
 
I can tell you about the autofocus on the H2, it is horrible, almost useless. But manual focusing with that HUGE viewfinder/sensor-size just makes you forget about autofocus once and for all (same as m.format film)

still I wouldn't compare the quality of the nikon 24mp to any good resolution Medium format, even a 16mp Digital back will outperform the nikon, plus you have different back makers, each with its own "look"

the future for professional photography is medium format as much as it is today a full frame camera on 35mm digital.
 
In fact i did test with my Medium format H3D 39 and my Canon 1Ds MakIII, the colors and sharpness with H3D surpass that from 21mp Canon, so if i want the best results for studio portraits and fashion then definitely i will use H3D
 
thanks for the continued feedback I'm really thankful.....keep em coming please.....i think this question I posed is particularly relevant with Nikon's D3x challenging the medium format....well, thats what they claim as we all know....I'm sure there are tons of people out there questioning as I am....
 
MF gap?

Just see what MF digital can do and try to get the same results from any of the 35 mm based DSLRs.
Your attempts will be in vain.

No matter what marketing people say these cameras will never perform like a MF digital set.
 
polypal said:
Just see what MF digital can do and try to get the same results from any of the 35 mm based DSLRs.
Your attempts will be in vain.

No matter what marketing people say these cameras will never perform like a MF digital set.
Click to expand...

Exactly, because if those 35mm digital based can perform like medium format then they should become medium format not 35mm DSLRs, there are levels in cameras starting with large formats going down to compacts or even pinhole, so if i want a DSLR then i know what i get, if i want medium format then i know what i can get, and even the best DSLR still not much closer to lowest MF, so imagine what the best medium fomrat can perform against any 35mm DSLR.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top