p.3 #2 · Hasselblad XCD 35-100mm vs 90mm vs Sony 50-150mm GM
pmeheut wrote:
Many, many years ago, I compared a 6 Mpix digital Nikon with their 80-200 zoom vs my Leica R9 + 180mm/2.8 Apo, Sensia 100 scanned on a LS4000.
On film, the Leica was better than the Nikon and it was obvious.
But the 6 Mpix DSLR had more resolution and better colors.
On a print, the difference was still there but a good picture is a good picture, even if shot on film.
Since then, we use better lenses, sensors with 24 to 60mp in FF and we still talk about resolution? Thread after thread after thread?
And we never talk about prints? Never show a picture?
Something is very, very strange. In fact, there is something rotten in the kingdom of Fred Miranda (all due respect to Fred, just a bad pun).
Digital photography--for better or worse--is the convergence of the artists and nerds (i use "nerd" as a term of endearment and not an insult..after all i am one) and talking about the resolution can never be avoided. I personally don't think it's strange at all. It is touching on technology and for a lot us, advancement is interesting in itself.
it's a great time to be alive where resolution, color bit-depth, high ISO, and any camera/sensor breakthroughs are relatively affordable and plateaued to an extent that any incremental advancement doesn't affect the artistic outcome. But they will be talked about nonetheless...maybe not for the artists, but for the nerds... and i'm here for it.
but yeah to your point, it would be great that if we talk about it, show a picture...everyone loves a picture to show what you think evokes the artist in you. word salad is boring.
p.3 #3 · Hasselblad XCD 35-100mm vs 90mm vs Sony 50-150mm GM
pmeheut wrote:
Something is very, very strange. In fact, there is something rotten in the kingdom of Fred Miranda (all due respect to Fred, just a bad pun).
I like these forums, but they're obviously disproportionately filled with mature, technically inclined, relatively well-to-do men who like to photograph wildlife and enjoy superb technology, to the point that other aspects of photography can be overlooked.
On top of that, Hasselblad and Leica are doing a great social media marketing effort with especially Hasselblad converting many YouTubers into fanboys by giving them free cameras instead of paying for ad time. On YouTube, it's a reason I'm moving more and more away from YouTube photographers, even the non-gear ones, toward content about 'real' classic photographers.
I'm also trying to see more real work. Went to see Platon and the opening of his new Vienna exhibit and next week will attend a talk with Don McCullin. Time to focus on what matters.
p.3 #4 · Hasselblad XCD 35-100mm vs 90mm vs Sony 50-150mm GM
These lenses are too similar. They lack individuality, they're sharp, and they're technically high-quality. Yes, it was interesting to compare the detail, but perhaps not. The differences won't be dramatic. But the 50-150's autofocus speed is definitely much better. Sometimes that's the only thing that matters.
p.3 #5 · Hasselblad XCD 35-100mm vs 90mm vs Sony 50-150mm GM
johnvanr wrote:
I like these forums, but they're obviously disproportionately filled with mature, technically inclined, relatively well-to-do men who like to photograph wildlife and enjoy superb technology, to the point that other aspects of photography can be overlooked.
On top of that, Hasselblad and Leica are doing a great social media marketing effort with especially Hasselblad converting many YouTubers into fanboys by giving them free cameras instead of paying for ad time. On YouTube, it's a reason I'm moving more and more away from YouTube photographers, even the non-gear ones, toward content about 'real' classic photographers.
I'm also trying to see more real work. Went to see Platon and the opening of his new Vienna exhibit and next week will attend a talk with Don McCullin. Time to focus on what matters.
p.3 #6 · Hasselblad XCD 35-100mm vs 90mm vs Sony 50-150mm GM
johnvanr wrote:
I like these forums, but they're obviously disproportionately filled with mature, technically inclined, relatively well-to-do men who like to photograph wildlife and enjoy superb technology, to the point that other aspects of photography can be overlooked.
are you saying we should only talk about "just photography" and not the the technological aspects? that's some low-key gatekeeping and i don't subscribe to that thought. for crying out loud, this is a camera equipment forum, specifically the Leica & Alternative Gear forum? how do you expect people to avoid talking about actual gear?
I'm also trying to see more real work. Went to see Platon and the opening of his new Vienna exhibit and next week will attend a talk with Don McCullin. Time to focus on what matters.
cool. yes, you can do that.. but having to enjoy (real) photography and technology (relating to photography) aren't and shouldn't be mutually exclusive.
p.3 #7 · Hasselblad XCD 35-100mm vs 90mm vs Sony 50-150mm GM
dalegaspi wrote:
are you saying we should only talk about "just photography" and not the the technological aspects?
AFAIK he never said this and neither did I.
But talking mainly about resolution when it comes to technological aspects, i.e. the one thing we have plenty enough and never showing pictures to prove a point is the issue.
p.3 #8 · Hasselblad XCD 35-100mm vs 90mm vs Sony 50-150mm GM
Short of personal attacks, it is useful to hear others perspective and sometimes I will not agree, but it also possible that I just don’t get the point being made and it is to my advantage to eventually understand what is being said. It has been years since I worked with zooms, so these conversations are useful. I’m now trying to understand the pros and cons of using the A7R6 vertical battery grip with a bit larger lenses, like the 50-150mm. Years ago, when shooting field sports, I always had a vertical battery grip on my A1, but those zooms were even larger and heavier than the 50-150mm.
p.3 #9 · Hasselblad XCD 35-100mm vs 90mm vs Sony 50-150mm GM
pmeheut wrote:
AFAIK he never said this and neither did I.
But talking mainly about resolution when it comes to technological aspects, i.e. the one thing we have plenty enough and never showing pictures to prove a point is the issue.
yeah ok i guess my mistake and you have a point ..but this thread is literally talking about resolution.
p.3 #10 · Hasselblad XCD 35-100mm vs 90mm vs Sony 50-150mm GM
bwcolor wrote:
Short of personal attacks
I saw no personal attacks.
And BTW, I love photo gear, I bought plenty of them from all brands over the years and I still have far too much.
And I like testing them: I even did so for a website, etc.
But when I read something about MF vs FF, I would like to see pictures and more than resolution because each time I used one, I was more impressed by rendering.
That's all.
p.3 #11 · Hasselblad XCD 35-100mm vs 90mm vs Sony 50-150mm GM
johnvanr wrote:
I like these forums, but they're obviously disproportionately filled with mature, technically inclined, relatively well-to-do men who like to photograph wildlife and enjoy superb technology, to the point that other aspects of photography can be overlooked.
After seeing an M EV1 user on this forum shooting prop airplanes with ELECTRONIC SHUTTER MODE to the point where the propellers weren't even attached to the hub...I wouldn't be so generous.
p.3 #12 · Hasselblad XCD 35-100mm vs 90mm vs Sony 50-150mm GM
dalegaspi wrote:
are you saying we should only talk about "just photography" and not the the technological aspects? that's some low-key gatekeeping and i don't subscribe to that thought. for crying out loud, this is a camera equipment forum, specifically the Leica & Alternative Gear forum? how do you expect people to avoid talking about actual gear?
cool. yes, you can do that.. but having to enjoy (real) photography and technology (relating to photography) aren't and shouldn't be mutually exclusive.
You’re putting words in my mouth that I never used. And I surely don’t want to moderate or limit what goes on here. I’m just expressing my view. That’s it.
p.3 #13 · Hasselblad XCD 35-100mm vs 90mm vs Sony 50-150mm GM
pmeheut wrote:
I saw no personal attacks.
And BTW, I love photo gear, I bought plenty of them from all brands over the years and I still have far too much.
And I like testing them: I even did so for a website, etc.
But when I read something about MF vs FF, I would like to see pictures and more than resolution because each time I used one, I was more impressed by rendering.
That's all.
p.3 #14 · Hasselblad XCD 35-100mm vs 90mm vs Sony 50-150mm GM
?si=2DDlQ-2b5mz6gB_o
I think this video is more in line with what the OP posted as far as comparing the Hasselblad primes vs zooms. Albrecht Voss is a Hasselblad Master with years of experience using HB.
While Voss does some technical comparisons and discusses the ergonomic differences that may affect someone’s choice, he also details how your own usage could/should factor into whether you go prime or zoom.
Personally, I have the 25, 55 & 90V lenses and have been debating whether to fill the 35/38mm gap with either the 38V or one of either the 20-35 or 35-100 zooms. Ironically the zooms offer some versatility because of their focal range. But, I’m more deliberate with my shooting, and the size, weight and the focusing features of the V series means I’ll probably opt to go with the 38V.
p.3 #15 · Hasselblad XCD 35-100mm vs 90mm vs Sony 50-150mm GM
jtford9 wrote:
While Voss does some technical comparisons and discusses the ergonomic differences that may affect someone’s choice, he also details how your own usage could/should factor into whether you go prime or zoom.
Personally, I have the 25, 55 & 90V lenses and have been debating whether to fill the 35/38mm gap with either the 38V or one of either the 20-35 or 35-100 zooms. Ironically the zooms offer some versatility because of their focal range. But, I’m more deliberate with my shooting, and the size, weight and the focusing features of the V series means I’ll probably opt to go with the 38V....Show more →
I would say that there is probably room for both. I also have mostly primes but a zoom can still be useful in situations that require changing focal length a lot, in sandy/windy conditions, etc. I did a road trip recently and mostly I was fine with primes but there were 3-4 days that I really wished that I had access to a zoom as well. Obviously that means more weight as well...
p.3 #16 · Hasselblad XCD 35-100mm vs 90mm vs Sony 50-150mm GM
tsdevine wrote:
For a long time, I've generally gravitated to primes, generally smaller "f/2"'ish type lenses. The Sigma 28-45 f/1.8 intrigued me, so I bought one.
1. I looked through the photos on your Flickr page, and I really like some of the shots you took with the Sony 50-150mm F2 GM. Have you done much post-processing on your photos? I might have to get over the weight of this lens before I can seriously consider buying one.
2. I also noticed that you use a GFX system in addition to Sony cameras. Honestly, I couldn't really tell the difference in image quality attributable to the sensor size from your photos. I've been considering getting a medium-format camera myself, but the images I've seen online don't seem to show a significant enough difference to make me want to take the plunge.
3. I also noticed that, besides GM lenses, you use Loxia, Voigtländer APO, and Sigma lenses. Your albums happen to include some photos with similar compositions, like the examples below.
Since you've used so many different camera systems and lenses, have you noticed a significant difference between sensor formats, such as medium format and full frame? Do you also think that lenses from certain brands really have a kind of magic to them?
I'm more interested in differences in the overall look and feel of an image, rather than just sharpness or technical image quality. However, I don't really like the distinctive look of vintage lenses.
p.3 #17 · Hasselblad XCD 35-100mm vs 90mm vs Sony 50-150mm GM
This and other threads and a great deal of time spent caring for a very ill dog 24/7 for over a year left me alone with the B&H URL and these forums. I also had the vague thought of moving to zooms for travel given the advent of the X2D2, XCD 20-35mm & 35-100mm as well as the A7R6 70-150mm GM, 28-70mm GM and 16-35 GM ii. My friend passed and one month later I was in South Korea. All of my planning fell prey to my fear of carrying heavy zooms and I took the A7R6 + vertical power grip + 17mm f4.0, 24mm f1.4 GM, 35mm & 50mm APO Lanthar and 90mm f2.8 Sigma Contemporary. I usually shot the full day with one lens mounted and one in a belt pouch. The lenses were all superb. This was my first real use of the 17mm and I was shocked at how flexible this focal length could be. The manual focus lenses were a joy to use on the A7R6 and the small 90mm performance exceeded my expectations.
Last night, I finished my first edit. I looked back and compared this set of photos with my 2024 images taken at the same locations. This trip was my wife’s first visit to South Korea, so I just repeated the 2024 itenerary. 2024 was X2D and the 38v, which presented with a much more limited perspective, but the tonality and colors of the Hasselblad passed through Phocus Desktop was superior to the Sony. I think that, in part, this means that I need to improve my Sony editing skills. I also found the complexity of the Sony’s menu system to be a bit much. So, next air travel vacation will be the XCD zooms and a 13L MindShift sling bag.
p.3 #18 · Hasselblad XCD 35-100mm vs 90mm vs Sony 50-150mm GM
I too have been re-comparing the 28-70 against the HB35-100 and Leica 24-90, now the AR6 is here. IQ wise I’ve concluded any of them will be excellent at the sizes I print, which is A0. At the same time I can get a somewhat better IQ by switching to a prime, especially of the smaller formats where you’re pushing the file more. I have enough time with Sony’s files that I can get the colours I like but it’s wildly easier on the Hasselblad or Leica. Ultimately I get better tones and detail from the Hasselblad files, even though the Sony and Leica primes can be better. I still adore how the SL APO’s draw and the 24-90 too but the lack of EFCS is a real issue as it can decimate IQ. I try to use ES as much as possible. This isn’t an issue with the Sony or Hasselblad. I think we’re at a point now where handling and EFCS and IBIS and good technique are more important than the camera or lens. All the camera/lenses here are more than good enough. It’ll be sloppy technique that degrades IQ. When I look at a file and it’s a bit *off*, it’s almost always me, not the gear. And the bigger I print the more I have to get good.
The Hasselblad handles long exposures waaaaay better than the small format cameras. LENR isn’t even offered and the camera meters to 60 minutes. It’s not close. I prefer the menus and grip. I wish there was a tele zoom and a black and white preview. But it’s the best option for my landscapes. Also it has the best IBIS. I still use tripods but at a pinch I can do stuff with the blad that shouldn’t be possible.
All of the systems can be made larger or smaller depending on lens selection. Mostly I prefer zooms in new places and primes in old haunts. It all comes down to to handling and lens selections. It’s just easier to get a top quality telescope on the Sony/Leica so if I need a 200m+, there’s no option. If I’m shooting below 100mm I almost always prefer the Hasselblad. If I’m doing landscapes the long exposures of the ‘blad is important. Super teles, pre capture and blackout free shooting mean the Sony is an easy choice. If the weather is brutal the Leica wins easily.
What I really want is a system with Son’y tech and lens range, Leica’s build quality plus lens draw and Hasselblad’s handling and UI…..
p.3 #19 · Hasselblad XCD 35-100mm vs 90mm vs Sony 50-150mm GM
This whole thread and, in particular, these last two posts from @bwcolor and @flash, is really helpful. I’m in the process of deciding what camera to buy to replace my A7R iv for landscapes (not least in the mountains), architecture and travel, to complement my M11 and MP (I also have an A1 for BIF). I have narrowed it down to A7R vi + 28-70 (I already have MF primes I’m completely happy with) or X2D ii, probably with 35-100 and 25V or 28P (I really like the 21mm FF focal length).
The real answer is that, for my skill level and experience, both are more than adequate — as indeed is the A7R iv. But there’s nothing wrong with enjoying new (and different) kit.
Now, I strongly suspect that these cameras are at the point where dynamic range is not a deciding factor. On the other hand, although I don’t think that 10 stops is remotely credible, I’m quite prepared to believe (and what Gordon has frequently said reinforces this view) that the Hasselblad’s IBIS and colour consistency is superior. From my perspective, the Sony’s two main strengths are the lens range (coupled with the fact I already have several good ones) and the fact that I’d rather not use Phocus as well as Lightroom (which I will continue to use).
So I’d be very interested to hear any thoughts from any of you who have actually used both the Sony 28-70mm f/2 and the Hasselblad 35-100mm. I care more about the combination (i.e. the whole system) than the camera or lens in isolation.
And yes, it’s very much a first world problem. As for a couple of earlier posts, I freely admit to being a mature nerd (although I think I prefer the word ‘geek’) ….
Edit to add: I had been thinking that, if I do plump for the X2D, I would go with the 38V and 90V. But, given that my focus would be landscapes, I’ve switched to thinking that the zoom would be the better choice (probably with the 28P).
p.3 #20 · Hasselblad XCD 35-100mm vs 90mm vs Sony 50-150mm GM
@Andrew CD, I've shot with Hasselbald X camera since 2019 (X1D/X1D2/X2D/2). I think from the 1st generation XCD lens, the only lens I didn't have is the zoom, everything else is the primes (21/30/45/65/80/90Macro/135).
That said, I was off for a while from X and back with X2D2 recently paired with 35-100. From my perspective, the IQ is almost in par with my previous XCD lenses. I haven't had chance to compare with the current V primes yet (soon will be the 25). This set up for time being, will be my main carry 1 lens set up. I sacrifice the size for convenient of 1 lens without losing any IQ.
