What's the best hasselblad setup (body+lens) for portraits?

120mm CF Makro f/4

>>3010016
The 4/120 is the only Hassy lens I own.

I'd post examples but my garbage snapshits on garbage film with garbage processing and garbage scans wouldn't do it justice.

If portraits are your thing get an RZ instead.

File: hasselblad_500elm.jpg (330KB, 622x510px) Image search: [Google]

330KB, 622x510px

Hasselblad V is a dead system so don't waste a lot of money on it
80mm and 150mm
just get an extension tube if you want macro, the 120 is one of the lenses that are still expensive for some unknown reason.

any body will take the finder you want. 500c does not have interchangeable focusing screens but the 500c/m, 501,503 will. Be wary of any body that requires batteries like the 500ELM pic related

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	PENTAX Corporation
Camera Model	PENTAX *ist D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5.1 Windows
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	46 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	622
Image Height	510
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2012:02:21 21:43:56
White Point Chromaticity	0.3
Exposure Time	1 sec
F-Number	f/22.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/22.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	31.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	622
Image Height	510
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Hard
Saturation	High
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Macro

File: untitled2.jpg (955KB, 1000x997px) Image search: [Google]

955KB, 1000x997px

>>3010025

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	6000
Image Height	5980
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	5600 dpi
Vertical Resolution	5600 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2017:01:26 16:05:01
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1000
Image Height	997

>>3010149
i appreciate that youre posting photos and all, but, kys my man.

File: a9d9107f960c64c8-earle2.jpg (997KB, 1571x1600px) Image search: [Google]

997KB, 1571x1600px

>>3009999
I have a 501c with the 80mm and just bought the 120mm yesterday. The 80 is nice for portraits, pic related. I only used the 8mm extension tube, the 16mm and up are pretty hardcore for closeup work.
For that, I used the 501c with the 80mm and an 8mm extension tube.

If you haven't considered it yet, I would recommend a cheaper 6x6 system and then you can put all that money you save towards buying a bunch of film or lights or whatever you need. The Hasselblad bodies are beautiful and the Zeiss lenses are supposedly the best, but the system is all mechanical and so more prone to jamming or just needing service to keep it in good shape. And larger formats are much less demanding of lens quality than 35mm is, you don't need absolutely the sharpest lenses you can get to take photos that look excellent and scan well or can print to large sizes.

You can build an entire Bronica SQ kit, for example, probably for less than just a 500 C/M body with a WLF and a single back and an 80mm lens. You could have a couple of extra backs, a prism finder if you want it, a whole set of focal lengths, and whatever other accessories you want.

>>3010213
1600 iso?

File: whatishappening.jpg (78KB, 750x610px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 750x610px

>>3010222
>If it hasn't activated your brain almonds, I'd recommend a cheaper digital Timex rather than that fully mechanical Rolex (which by the way, all those gears? Totally prone to failure) Not only can you have 10 Timex's on each arm for the price of one measly Rolex but when it comes to telling the time, digital watches are much forgiving on accuracy. There's no need to be synced to a quartz crystal or an atom when the digital Timex is synced through software. What difference is a few milliseconds anyways?

File: 4eff807ff5277f51-0047.jpg (811KB, 1498x1500px) Image search: [Google]

811KB, 1498x1500px

>>3010225
Nah just expired color stuff that looked like shit. I think 400iso Portra NC?

This was 320TriX Pan.
>>3010222
Only arguement against this, and totally my own opinion, after owning an SQ-A and GS-1, is that the Hasselblad is totally mechanical, less prone to issues. If you do encounter an issue, many more repairmen exist for this camera than a Bronica. Reproduction and sharpness wise, no difference. Color contrast, little to no difference. I can also post some examples from a Bronica, if you want to see. They're both nice. One will always be able to get repaired. I believe in repairs over replacement.

>>3010252
A watch is a fashion statement. A camera is not, unless you're a faggot.

>>3010222
>>3010257
also I'll add that Hasselblad V systems have dropped in price so much that the price argument is really moot. around here Bronica cameras (1 lens and 1 back) run around 3-400 and Hasselblad kits 6-800. The overall robustness of the bald makes it well worth the extra dollars to me.

>>3010257

Extremely grainy. Your developing and scanning is shit.

>>3010428
Doesn't matter if it's a fashion statement or not. Good design is good design. A Hasselblad will hold it's value much more than a Bronica system.