Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Last year I bought a Vivitar 2x converter for Hasselblad on ebay for a very good price. I think I paid $35 for it, and it came in excellent condition. I haven't had a chance to try it until now, since I rarely need very long focal lengths for my work.
I had wanted to photograph the big lighted GE sign atop one of the old General electric buildings in downtown Fort Wayne. GE once employed over 10,000 people here in two factory complexes, each made up of a number of large buildings. Over the years most of the jobs have gone to China and Mexico, though a fairly large number of people still works for GE here. One of the old factories was torn down a couple years ago. I figure one day, the whole place will be gone and the sign, a well known landmark, gone too.
My longest lens is a 150mm CF Sonnar. Not long enough to get the close view I wanted, so I put the 150 on the Vivitar 2x and shot this:
I had to shoot at f45 (the lens was set to 22, effective f45) to get the depth of field needed to keep the whole sign and the foreground building facade in focus. This aperture is diffraction limited, but I was pleased with the results, which were the same from center to corners (crappy teleconverters often give VERy soft corners).
Here's a couple of 100% crops from the 4000 dpi full-res scan:
They're not tack-sharp but at f45, would the Hasselblad lens closest in focal length (250mm) be any better?
I had wanted to photograph the big lighted GE sign atop one of the old General electric buildings in downtown Fort Wayne. GE once employed over 10,000 people here in two factory complexes, each made up of a number of large buildings. Over the years most of the jobs have gone to China and Mexico, though a fairly large number of people still works for GE here. One of the old factories was torn down a couple years ago. I figure one day, the whole place will be gone and the sign, a well known landmark, gone too.
My longest lens is a 150mm CF Sonnar. Not long enough to get the close view I wanted, so I put the 150 on the Vivitar 2x and shot this:
I had to shoot at f45 (the lens was set to 22, effective f45) to get the depth of field needed to keep the whole sign and the foreground building facade in focus. This aperture is diffraction limited, but I was pleased with the results, which were the same from center to corners (crappy teleconverters often give VERy soft corners).
Here's a couple of 100% crops from the 4000 dpi full-res scan:
They're not tack-sharp but at f45, would the Hasselblad lens closest in focal length (250mm) be any better?
Al Kaplan
Veteran
At that tiny aperture it'd be unlikely to be much better. Diffraction would be as much of a problem if you used the 250 Sonnar at that f/stop. The 250 would probably have given you a bit more contrast and a flatter field, but field flatness is of no concern in that photo.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
That was my thought. I'll have to try this combo at a wider aperture and see how it performs. If it is sharp at an effective aperture of f11 or f16 (one or two stops down from wide open: f4 or f5.6 on the lens), then it will be a truly awesome setup that would save me the $800 or so that the Zeiss 250mm usually sells for used.
ChrisN
Striving
That's pretty impressive - one to keep a watch for, I think, especially if one shows up at the price you paid!
And a very good idea to capture the old landmarks before they disappear. I'm sure a lot of my photos of my city will be quite interesting 20 years after I'm dead!
And a very good idea to capture the old landmarks before they disappear. I'm sure a lot of my photos of my city will be quite interesting 20 years after I'm dead!