What lens is more realistic?

[david_c3]

I use both a Hasselblad 203FE/205FCC with a 50 FE and a 110/2 FE lens for family

portraits/picture/events.

 

I use a Nikon F6 with a AF 180/2.8 ED to shoot sports shots of my son playing

soccer, lacrosse, hockey and get shots in focus etc.

 

My question is it is realistic to be able to focus and shoot sports with a

Hasselblad 203FE using either a 250 or 350/4 lens or is it too heavy a system to

work with?

 

I want to get either a 250/350 lens for the 203FE or just get a Nikkor

70-200/2.8 VR ED with my F6 to be more flexible with my action shots.

 

By the way, what would be the equivalent in 35mm of medium format lens with

focal lengths of 250 or 350mm?

[benny_spinoza]

It would not be realistic to use a manual focus 250 or 350 for action shots, unless the subject is far enough away and your aperature is small enough so that you can zone focus. To answer your last question, here is a rough guide....x/45 = 250/80. Note that 45 is about normal for 35mm, and 80 is about normal for 120 format. Solving for x gives you a good estimate. I say estimate, because the formats are not the same. One is rectangular (non-square), and the other is square. Sometimes I like to think of 35mm as a cropped 36 by 36 square, in which case 50mm is normal, so the above equation would be x/50 = 250/80.

[stuart_richardson]

As fantastic as the 203FE is with the lenses you have, for sports you will probably be happier

using something like the 70-200 on the F6. It will give you a much higher framerate, faster

lenses, high shutter speeds, more depth of field, AF, more shots per roll, and a higher

success rate. And let's be honest, do you really need medium format quality for shots of your

son playing sports? Do you really plan to enlarge them past 11x14 or 16x20? I can see using

the 203FE for portraits and even events to some extent, but the quality is an overkill for

sports, especially if you already have an F6 with is pretty much tailor-made for fast action

photography.

[ronald_moravec1]

Nikon with auto focus is much more practical.

 

Use 400 speed and clean up grain with NeatImage.com. It is wonderful

[david_c3]

Thanks. I was thinking the same way but did not know if anyone out there was using medium format for sports. I enlarge to 8x10 and 11x14 so 35mm is pushing the limit for my taste in grain (the less the better for me). I will get the Nikkor zoom.

[stever_max]

I have a Nikon N-75 with a f/2.8 20mm - 35mm Nikon AR zoom and a f/3.6 -f/5.6 28mm - 300mm AF Tameron XR.

 

I also have a Hasselblad 503CX with f/4 50mm, f/2.8 80mm, f/4 150mm and f/5.6 250mm Zeiss lenses.

 

I also have experience shooting sports such as soccer, skiing, and motorcycle racing. If you can prefocus and let the action come to where you are set up to shoot [a good idea for sports with any camera] the Hasselblad and use the hyperfocal distance then use the Hasselblad. However I think that for what you want to do you will be happier with the results [ease of use, speed shooting, fast framing with a zoom lens] if you use a 300mm zoom lens in the Nikon.

 

Steve