Using a 645

[wang]

The advantage of joining C645 is that it has at least two fantastic lenses which are not found in the Hasselbald system. I did a bit of research and found that the macro-planar 120 4 from Contax is different from the one of Hassy. I believe Contax one could be better. The skin tone of this Contax lens should be amazing. Although Hassy 110 2 is faster, in term of skin rendition it is slightly behind to that of Contax 120 4.

The second good lens of Contax is 140 2.8 which is not in Hassy series. I believe this one produces very nice skin tone.

I found a trend in both Contax and Hassy that as you increase the focal length from 80 to 140, there is a gradual improvement of the skin tone. Is this true in practice, or is this only happens in theory ?

Can Contax lenses put on Hassy with adapter ? If not, buying C645 give you more choices of lenses than buying the Hassy.

 

[fotografz]

Chi, the 120/4 is a prime reason to own the C645. It is one of my mainstay lenses for more than just macro work. It's only limitation is the f/4 max aperture and it's degree of sharpness that is less suitable for shooting women over the age of 20 ; -) The 110/2 produces much more beautiful portraits, and focuses quite closely without an extension ring.

No, the C645 lenses do not work on the Hasselblad, but all of the Hasselblad lenses from 35 fisheye to 500mm can be used on the C645. There is actually an amazing array of choices that can further enhance owning a C645. For ex&le, I have a Mamiya 645 to Contax 645 adapter that allows use of the respectable Mamiya 24/3.5 fisheye in full frame mode (not a great lens, but MUCH better images than any 35mm fisheye can produce).

Then there are the Hasselblad accessories like the Mutar shift unit. I use this with Hasselblad lenses on the C645 to correct perspective and control DOF.

In practice I've found the C645 35/3.5 to produce quite a bit more distortion than the Hasselblad 40/FLE with it's controllable floating element. I've also found the 150/2.F to be a slightly better people lens than the 140/2.8, but the 140 is an AF, auto aperture lens on the C645, which makes it a far better lens for the candid work that I shoot at fast paced weddings.

The perfect kit IMO, is a combination of a Hasselblad leaf shutter system with a body like the 503CW that allows flash sync up to 1/500th outdoors when shadows are an issue, and the C645 body which allows available light work outdoors up to 1/4000th so you can open up those apertures and isolate the subject.

IMO, the one limitation of the C645 is that it is a 645 format which I'm not all that crazy about in practice. I don't like the handling in Portrait mode, especially when using necessary fill flash for weddings and general people work. Since I use a 16 meg., square sensor Kodak digital back on the C645 most of the time, that issue went away.

When I shoot film, I always reach for the 6X6 Hasselblad 503CW or 203FE because they are operationally simple tools allowing me to concentrate on images not the awkward camera handling.

 

[jsmisc]

Mark,
Thanks for your thoughtful and helpful reply. I still use VHS for recording but DVD for playing pre-recorded films...

I also like the square format and use a Mamiya 6 for this. It has the advantage of also having an adapter for panoramic photography although it is an odd size and I haven't yet worked out how to scan it.
Hasselblad V system might be a sensible second hand option for me although on reflection I think that a digital back will still be too expensive for me at the moment. I didn't know about the 39MP back. I expect it is hugely expensive but no doubt fantastic quality. Maybe one day...

 

[fotografz]

Actually John, the beauty of securing a digital back is that it isn't an either or situation. You pop it off, and pop on a film back. The best of all worlds.

Cost is certainly a prime consideration. But look at recent developments where Imacon/Hasselblad backs came out under $10,000. and have already become available for less than the cost of a Canon 1DsMKII body. In a year or two they'll be out there for $5,000. ... then for even less. It's an assurance of longevity for an investment in a MF system and the superb images you can produce with it.

 

[thedruid]

Back to the original question, I may be wrong but for print sizes up to 12x16 the G2 should be very capable, are you unhappy with the quality, do you want to go larger? If you want another camera then it's down to funds and what feels good in the hand...Contax always feeeeeels good in my hands. You could get a C645 weekend rental (in USA) for one day charge if you rent Friday afternoon and put in some time before dropping cash...it's also becoming much more affordable the kit has dropped close to and below $2k if you look.

 

[rossawilson01]

It's not that the g2 is disappointing in any way IQ wise at 16x12, but I hate to crop my photo's so I don't and the G2 on the last few occasions has included elements that at the time I purposely framed out. I first figured on getting an N1 or RTS3 for their more accurate and brighter viewfinders, then I thought that the 645 can't be that much bigger, so why not use a larger format?

 

[jsmisc]

Thanks Marc,

That certainly is an attractive proposition and I will give it serious consideration. I am currently involved in scanning all my accumulated slides and negatives from down the years. I think it is going to take the rest of my lifetime however long that is. But it will be brilliant once it has been done - if I live to see it.

I would really like to be able to produce future pictures with the same sort of quality but without the scanning hassle.

The Tall Ships are coming to Newcastle this week and no doubt there will be some excellent "photo opportunities". I can hardly bear to go out there with my film cameras because of the stress of adding to my scanning burden and as my son says, I cannot help taking pictures.. I haven't yet scanned in my pictures from when they came to the city 7 years ago before I retired from my day job.

Now if I had digital to the same quality it would be a different matter. But I also don't want, apart from avoiding bankrupting myself through the unmanageable expense, to have a huge, heavy camera system.

I have all this expensive Contax and Mamiya gear, accumulated over the years and yesterday I stood next to a chap with a tripod and bags full of Canon digital equipment who was preparing to photograph the Tall Ships as they sailed in down the Tyne. I produced my little Casio digital 4MP camera and rested it on the crowd management barrier and snapped away. It was an excellent ex&le of how to make somebody else feel superior. I think he was probably press. I expect that I am envious but the point is that I came home and immediately downloaded the snaps such as they were into the computer with minimal effort and fuss. It would be great to do that with high quality stuff but I do love my Zeiss gear.

Sorry to have gone of topic.

John

 

[wang]

Marc, could you elaborate on some points ?

You mentioned Hassy 150/2F, I supposed you mean 150/4. According to Zeiss, this lens has an angle 29 which is slightly wider than 28 of 140/2.8. You said 150/4 is slightly better than 140/2.8 as a people lens, why ?

 

[fotografz]

No Chi, I meant the 150/2.8F (not f/2 like I typed by mistake). The F series lenses are for the focal plane shutter Hasselblad cameras like the 203FE etc.

In this series are lenses like the 50/2.8F, 110/2F, 150/2.8F, 250/4F and 350/4F and 350/2.8F. They all feature wider apertures than the leaf shutter versions. Evaluation of the performance characteristics are based on using the different lenses to shoot portraits and weddings. I find the German made Zeiss glass more pleasing in color and degree of micro and macro contrast verses the tendency toward edge sharpness with the Japanese made glass. Both are outstanding, so it is purely a subjective impression based on use. I currently have all of the F lenses except the 250/4 which is extremely hard to find due to pros using it for head shots and never selling them because it is so good (and I don't have the 350/4 or 2.8 because they are too expensive for the amount of use I would have for them).

 

[pops]

Mark - Does The adapter for the 645 take both types of Hassy lenses ? The Hassy adapter I bought for their H-1 only takes the "C" lenses !


Ken