Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/08/11

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Fwd: 35mm vs 2 1/4, again, my real world experience
From: "BIRKEY, DUANE" <dbirkey@hcjb.org.ec>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 10:55:39 -0500

I'm glad to hear that many of you are happy with your Hasselblad.  As =

far as an equipment problem, I did critical focus tests with all of my =

lenses twice to insure it was not focusing error.   Perhaps I should =

clarify my results.  I found in certain situations (i.e.: mostly =

architecture and studio and other situations where wind and depth of =

field were not a problem) the results were awesome and more pleasing =

than the results from 35.  I believe I stated that some of the results =

were awesome in the original post...... =


 But for the pictures I really cared about: landscapes.  Depth of field =

and subject movement were two continual problems that made for less =

than desired overall sharpness. In those instances where I shot both,  =

I have great 35mm negs and zip 2 1/4.  Actually, sharpness may not be =

the best term.  As it was often lack of depth of field and subject =

movement that was giving the unsatisfactory results, not lack of =

resolution.  I rarely print personal BW stuff larger than  11"x 14" and =

from viewing distances of 2 feet,  Grain is not a factor.   =


I used a Bogen 12 pound tripod, (3246 with 3047 head) the 500c mirror =

pre-release and a cable release.  If my technique is lacking, I'd be =

interested to hear what part is.  I shoot around 15,000 images a year =

on 35mm and 90% of those could not be captured with Hasselblad period.  =

Of the 10%, only about 10 shots a year really could use a larger =

format, for which I can borrow Mamiya or shoot 4x5.

My real world experiences showed that the Hasselblad did not fulfill =

the requirements I wanted and needed in many cases and in those which =

it could perform well, it  was often plain overkill in that the quality =

ended up being lost in reproduction anyhow.  A fun exercise, if you get =

Outdoor Photographer magazine, is to guess what format was used for the =

cover, 35, 2 1/4, 4x5 or 8 x10.  It's not as easy as most people think. =

 So... for it's worth, my results are indeed  different than yours, as =

are my needs and requirements,  But... I'm glad I sold it.

Duane Birkey
HCJB World Radio =

Quito Ecuador =


***** Message Was Scanned For Viruses ***** =