[HUG ] Re: Odious Comparison

  • From: Mark Rabiner <mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 01:39:30 -0400

> Dear friends,
>                  I have been staring hard at the light box and even harder at
> the prints. I have a question about Hasselblad lenses that is bugging me and I
> need various opinions.
>                 I purchased a 150mm Sonnar F ­ the 2,8 version for the
> 200-2000 series cameras. It sits on my 201F and seems to function perfectly.
> Therein lies my query. Up to now I have done bellydance shots in the studio
> using a 120mm Makro Planar as it allowed me to get a decent sized image and
> preserve as much of the paper-roll backdrop area as possible behind the
> dancer. In many cases with ME dance things swirl out to a great distance and I
> try to get all the veils and swords within the confines of the backdrop.
>                 This is indeed even more possible with the new Sonnar though
> the slightly longer focal length means I have to step further back in the
> camera room. All good ­ the 1/90 second exposure demanded by the 201F is still
> fine for movement as most shots are taken with flash.
>                  The problem is I have been looking at the new prints and am
> starting to wonder if they are significantly sharper than the ones taken with
> the 120 ­ and whether this means that I have a beauty of a new lens ­ HOORAY ­
> or if the dear old Makro Planar is having problems ­ SNIF....
>                 Any ratings on the relative sharpness of these two Zeiss
> lenses? I have never questioned it before and indeed the Makro Planar delivers
> superb results with flat art copy od close-ups. Is it time for a service or is
> it all correct or is it just me?
> Uncle Dick

To me I¹d be surprised if there was a difference that noticeable between
these two or any two Zeiss for Hasselblad optics.
All things being equal other than sync speeds and strobe settings I¹d think
that the 2.8 lens would be easier to nail focus with than the macro. Did you
have a 5.6?

I do think you have to shoot the same swirl with both lenses to really see
if there's a difference or not.
Do a test. Boring as that is.  You don¹t get to do that when you trade one
thing for the other.
Otherwise there are just to many variables belly dancers and their costumes
and they way they swirl being what that are.

I¹d think the 90th sync would introduce issues to make that lens come out

Unless you over compensated.

Which is what I really think happened.

Mark William Rabiner

Other related posts: