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.

Sonar 250mm f56 delight

Hey all :

I've been on the Hassy system now for close to six months when I bought my 503CW kit with the 80mm. Having done most commercial work on 35mm and 6x7 formats, the square format was like a breath of fresh air. A lot of my composition play kinda went out of the window and got me thinking afresh.

Thought I'd love a longer lens, I've been appriaching subjects that would normally be shot with a wider or longer lens on my 80mm and playing with composition and balance to see what I can make of it.

Here's something I shot in the Zanskar Valley (Ladakh) this november.

I love the possibilities that my hassie affords me!


P.S.: This scan is off my proof sheet. The 20x20 print knocked by boots off!

13861.jpg
 
I agree and that's a very nice shot - it would be quite dramatic (although the scan off the proof softens it) as a big print. B&W gave it a nice effect.

There is a definite characteristic within these Zeiss optics that is like a live orchestra - it is as if you can feel it.

Interestingly since I also use a Leica M with Leica optics and find them superb for 35mm; I have kept my LF lenses to Schneider and Rodenstock (thank God that market died a lot by the time I got interested). All these German lenses seem to have that tactile effect, of course to varying degrees. So I am pleased that my kits are like a family of optics.

But if I look at a good Fujinon, Nikon or other quality Japanese lens, I don't seem to get the same feeling - yep very sharp, great quality, but a little soul-less. Seems to be the way detail resolves and colour is reproduced by the optics.

So, in my mind this points to a couple of key strategic errors Hasselblad made with the H1: 1. they stepped aside from their major legacy in Zeiss optics, which dedicated faithful users came to trust until Hasselblad partnered with Fujinon. The images must have taken on a different character (interested in others' views on this).
2. Hasselblad must have caused confusion moving to 6x4.5 rather than staying with 6x6. For decades they argued one can easily crop to 6x4.5 from 6x6 but cannot do the reverse; or you could buy a 6x4.5 back - the option was there but taken away with the H1.

Added to those key elements, they had someone else make the body (I don think it is good enough to design and outsource manufacturing if you built a brand on supreme uncompromising manufacturing quality) and do so out of PLASTIC.

All of this was narrow manufacturing / product focus compromising the brand and its legacy. Gee and then they took so long to produce an adaptor enabling V series lenses to be used on the H1.

And then the XPan! More of the same! Thank God the V still lives on!
 
Simon,

The thing is that the market was moving away from the traditional 6x6 Hasselblads, Zeiss optics and all. Look at what new MF machines we have seen in the last 5 to 10 years. All 6x4.5, most AF.

And though it doesn't matter for the effect it has on people's buying decisions, the "Zeiss mystique" is mostly that. Really!
(Which was the first thing shooting through my mind when i read your opening "live orchestra", "feel it" line. ;-))

Zeiss optics are good, but so are those of most other MF manufacturers. And it is questionable that even the most devoted Zeiss fan will be able to point out the Zeiss-made images in a blind test.
No reason though not to love Zeiss lenses. ;-)


Oh, and one more thing: the rumour that Hasselblad does not make the H1 is brought into existance, and is perpetuated, by people apparently not knowing that Hasselblad does indeed make these things themselves.

Just like the rumour that the H1 body is made out of anything else but the stainless steel it is made out of...

;-)


So in short, the market is to blame, and i think Hasselblad responded in a most sensible way (beit in the good old "too little too late" fashion).

Let's hope that the H-system will be able to keep Hasselblad afloat, and will allow them to continue the unprofitable V-system, Zeiss lenses and all.

And, by the way, it looks like the X-Pan is doing very well. How is that harming Hasselblad?

Remember, times are bad in MF-land. Real bad.
It will not take much to bring Hasselblad to an end.
So hope for the best, but expect the worst.
Meanwhile we should be grateful that there are other things keeping our beloved V-system alive...
 
Qnu, I must agree that generally any new product initiative like the XPan that sells well is good for Hasselblad.

But, its the long term strategic direction that is critical to Hasselblad's survival and that requires a clear brand position. The recent Imacon merger is a great long term stretagic decision - positions Hasselblad as a leading MF/professional imaging company. As their own material has said "imaging, regardless of media type". This is where digi pundits get it wrong - the question is not about if digi is as good as film or vice versa, but the use of each media where it offers the needed benefits.

I know the H1 is a quality item and that while its outer casing is plastic, the chassis is metal and the overall camera is clearly a result of great design. But, some intrinsic brand attributes may have been overlooked. It would be interesting to see mearket research studies about customer defection / take-up rates and how the move to 6x4.5 and Fujinon optics affected these. But sadly most of these comapnies are not very good at detailed customer research.

Yes, it is said that the V series is a loss leader. But Hasselblad needs to examine why (reasons in addition to MF demand decline) it cannot economically make smaller numbers of V cameras when the design and development costs must have beeen recouped some decades ago.

Back to lenses, I did shoot my Sonar 180mm with a 32mm extender attached just before I bought the 250mm. I took a soft shot of a favourite flower hand held in B&W (Acros). The 32mm extender brought me in as close as I hoped. The detail especially in the leaf to the left was beautiful and the print 25"x25" was wonderful (thanks for the tip).

These Sonar lenses are something else!!
13866.jpg
 
Different lens signatures between the systems. Mamiya RZ/RB lenses are quite good for sure (no moving elements for focusing).

So it depends on what signature you like. I use both Zeiss and Mamiya 645 glass on a Contax 645. Different look to each.

But if you can't see a difference, then stick to the least expensive of the lot, and call it a day.
 
Dermont - you will see a difference between a corectly exposed, focused and weel scanned image from a sonar wide open at 5,6 and a Mamiya lens.
What result you would like the most is up to you but there will be a noticable difference due to the different characteristicas of the to optics.
 
Colin, I have a custom machined adapter Mamiya 645 to Contax 645 that focuses to infinity. Like with most adapted lenses, you have to stop down meter. But the Mamiya lenses I use don't need stopping down ...

I use a Mamiya 24mm f/4, 645 fisheye with it (lots of DOF even a f/4, and a very compact 500/8 Mamiya 645 Mirror lens (which is a fixed f stop). I may also get a Mamiya zoom eventually. This adapter simply expanded the focal lengths for the Contax beyond what is available from Contax.

I think such an adapter is now available from Zork as a special order.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top