Hasselblad for a street photography: need advise

I am going to a trip in Northern Italy soon and would like to take my

Hasselblad 503 with CW winder and 45-deg prism. I am planning to use

FUJI Astia and Provia 100F slide films.

 

Based on my previous experience with this set up I did not have any

problem hand holding this camera and get a sharp slides with 50 and

100mm lenses in a sunny days. I tried never go below 1/125 a second

with a shutter speed.

 

Now is different, I traded my 100mm for 180mm CFi lens. And would need

to be at 1/500 - 1/250 with it. Usually when the subject in the shade

or there is a cloudy day hand held becomes a problem. (Not enough

f-stop to open)

 

How a pushing for a one stop will degrade a quality of my slides with

Provia 100F and Astia, assuming the final output is Cibachrom prints

of 11 x 11 inch ?

Tripad is not an option on the streets for me.

 

Would a monopad increase a chances of a sharper slides at a shutter

speeds of 125 and 250?

 

Of course 35mm equipment is more suitable for a street photography,

but when I look at my 6x6 slides and 11x14 ciba. prints, I can see the

huge difference compare to 35mm. It simply record more information,

more fine details - and it gives me a motivation (not every time

though). Photography is my pleasure not an assignment.

 

I Would really appreciate a feed back.

 

Jack

Hi Jack, I am not a Hasselblad user but I know what you are talking about. I am using a Rolleiflex 6008i for street photography, recently for example in Venice. My favorite lens is a 2.8/180mm Schneider Tele Xenar. I agree that medium format has an advantage over 35mm when it comes to image quality, even if it is a little slower and even if you have to push the film a little. A number of brief comments:

 

I don't use a prism. The waist level finder is often better for street situations.

 

You can push Provia for one stop with good results. Also the new Kodak Ektachrome E200 is quite good. Personally, I use one back with Provia at 100 and another back with Fuji's RMS 100/1000 that I either push to 200 or 400 (sometimes even 1000) according to my needs. I know many people don't like the RMS, but I think that is due to the comparisons at 100. It is really good at 200 and 400 (always in comparison, of course).

 

There is no question that a monopod would bring you sharper images. And make you loose spontaneity.

 

Try shooting at 1/500 whenever possible. 1/250 is still o.k., but there will be a visible decrease in sharpness. And sometimes that's o.k., too.

 

Please also note that the Schneider lens gives me an additional f-stop and more stability due to weight. On the other hand, with the Zeiss you can easily get some good close-ups due to its convenient close-focusing distance.

Hello Jack

Like you photography is my pleasure as a hobby, not a job to do. I use

a Hasselbad 501CM with the 80 CB and 160 CB lenses. Since your end

product is Ciba-Ilfochromes, you know the build up contrast is a

concern (unless you routinely mask). For 100 ISO chromes I use either

Provia F or Astia (preferred) like you. I often use Kodak E200 with

the 160 lens. I find that it has a good tight grain structure and

controls contrast well. It can be pushed readily to 320 with a slight

increase in contrast and the grain pattern still looks very good when

peering through my Rodenstock 3X and Schneider 8X loupes.

I use a monopod with a ballhead from time to time and I believe it

allows me to go one or two shutterspeeds slower than my normal

handheld speeds, depending on how much coffee I have drunk that day.

That being said, I don't think it would be much fun lugging a monopod

around Italy. Go with Astia in one back and the E200 in a second back

is my recomendation.

Doug from Tumwater

<p>I strongly recommend that you perform a few experiments before you leave home. First, I agree that you may be unhappy with the results at 1/250 second with the 180 mm lens. Even at 1/500 second you are likely to find the quality significantly below what you can achieve using a tripod. You may or may not be pleased by the results. Halving the shutter speed because you are doubling the focal length is only a rule of thumb. Longer lenses can be disproportionately affected by the motion of the mirror, etc.</p>

<p>Second, I think hand-holding an f4 lens at 1/500 second is going to be limiting. Anything dimmer than open shade and you will be out of luck. Furthermore, depth-of-field will be very shallow so you will need to focus very quickly and accurately. If it is prints you want, give Fuji NHG II a try. Some people prefer to shoot it at E.I. 640 rather than 800. Either way, the extra 3 stops will open a world of possibilities.</p>

This answer is kind of off-point, but I'll post it for possible reference by other MF street shooters.

 

Some one above noted the problem of keeping the shutter speed up high enough to hand hold, and the fact that this pushes the aperture pretty much wide open, causing a resulting loss of DoF, and making focusing that much more critical. The proverbial rock and a hard place. This virtually eliminates the possibility of zone focusing and reduces overall spontaneity.

 

My solution is to shoot Delta 3200 rated at EI 1600, and sometimes EI 3200, even in open shade and other relatively bright situations. This lets you shoot at 1/250 and f16 in open shade, and 1/500 and f22 in bright sun light (you may even consider an ND filter!!!). This is a real luxury and makes my Mamiya 7 handle like a Leica with a Summicron in place.

 

The obvious question then is: what�s the trade-off in the final image? Well, respecting Jack's question, it is huge, B&W and no Ciba's for sure. But, if you otherwise like B&W, the prints look great at 8x10 and rather acceptable at 11x14. There is grain, but it is minimal and the tonality more than makes up for it. It is kind of like a 5x7 in 35mm from Tri-X, but with better tonality. After all, you can expose for good negative density, something that is often traded away in very low light situations.

 

We often think of films like Delta 3200 as a specialty film for very low light situations, but in this case, it is a good choice for bight lighting and adds a dimension to MF shooting that was heretofore lacking, in my opinion. I am shooting this more and more lately, and I really like the freedom of handling a MF camera like a 35mm. And to me, the final images are very good looking indeed.

I would agree with the previous post. Delta 3200 can definitely make up for MF limitations.

 

Be careful of what developer you use as the formula used by most pro-labs will in my limited experiance create coarser grain (even by ISO 3200 standards). The best results I had was with a matched Ilford developer (Ilfotec DD-X) and a slightly colder temperature (18c from memory - but experiment) to stretch the contrast out.

Good point.

 

I use XTOL 1:1 for 15 min. at 75 degrees for EI 1600. I like this very much, but, there are other good choices for sure.

Make that a third recommendation for Delta 3200. It let me go handheld at f/8 with a Mamiya C330f inside a church that was lit only through windows, and the grain was a lot tighter than I expected; before Delta 3200 my experience was limited to T-Max P3200 (TMZ). Beautiful film and fun to use; just be careful in those airports.

I highly recommend a good monopod with a tilt (only) head (no pan function necessary, just spin the 'pod). Bogen makes a good, cheap head with a quick release built in, as well as a variety of monopods with flip lever section adjustments. You can carry the camera (I use a 2000fcw) on a strap, use the monopod like a walking stick, a propack in left pocket, meter in right and be ready to rock. The camera will snap on and off easily with very little futzing around. I use a fanny pack that holds an extension tube and a couple of filters plus the propack and meter.<p>

But here's the real trick, on the monopod, I trip the mirror lock with the middle finger and a split second later, hit the shutter release with the index finger, knocking the mirror slap factor way down. The monopod keeps the frame fairly well oriented during the brief image blackout. Sharpness is exponentially improved and slower shutter speeds are certainly available, <i>way</i> below 1/500. Take your camera (loaded) to yer favorite camera store and try this get up with a roll of Astia in the parking lot. It would be a cheap test and then you'd know.<p> You might want to ask this question on the medium format digest just to see if anyone different responds with a new idea... t

oops, I meant the general photo.net forum (so much for credibility)... t

I also use a lot of D3200 in my Hassie SWC and Mamiya 6. It's great in anything but bright sun. And the darker the shot, the finer the grain, for some mysterious reason. I'm hoping that Fuji will someday release Neopan 1600 in 120 size. It's another great high speed film. Arthur

.... and you could consider using the Provia 400.

I too have a Hassie and the current 180 lens. It is a marvelous lens, but I wonder if using it for street shots isn't creating more problems than it solves.

 

Have you noodled the notion that none of the problems you're coping with would exist if you were shooting the normal, 80mm lens? (If your MF street-shooting choice were a Rollei TLR then you would not even be faced with the problem of which lens.)

 

I'm no street photography guru, but from what I read about street shooting (in 35 mm format, customarily) the deviation from a normal lens seems to be toward wider, not toward longer, lenses; 35's, 28's, 24's, etc.

 

Moi, I'm a normal lens guy usually, and I just thought I'd throw in this comment since the resolution of the issues raised by the 180 seem to be growing more numerous and more complex.

 

I've enjoyed, though, the helpful discussion about D3200, which I've never used. Only P3200 in 35 mm format.

since we're issuing requests... I'd like Ilford to make 3200 delta in sheet film too... please?