Site Accesses since 9/10/97
Medium Format Site Startup Date: Feb. 14, 1998
Related Local Links:
Medium Format Home Page
Medium Format Cameras List Page
Photo Industry Economics
Photo Industry Statistics
Curing Lens Envy
Check into any of the medium format SLR model mailing lists. You will be convinced that you are the only one on the mailing list without that Zeiss 30mm fisheye lens, you know, the one that lists for more than your car costs. It seems everybody has had experience with four or five models of each lens, and can compare minute differences in performance based on extensive shooting experience.
Sorry to burst any bubbles, but the following analysis suggests that:
Our analysis uses this table for Hasselblad C lenses, from the Hasselblad Compendium per posting:
24mm f3.5 F Distagon - about 50 0.01% 30mm f3.5 F Distagon C - under 1000 0.24% 40mm f4 Distagon C - approx. 9,000 2.16% 50mm f4 Distagon C - approx. 75,000 18.03% 80mm f2.8 C Planar - approx. 210,000 50.47% 120mm f5.6 S-Planar - approx. 14,000 3.36% 150mm f4 Sonnar C - approx. 70,000 16.82% 250mm f5.6 Sonnar C - approx. 30,000 7.21% 350mm f5.6 Tele-Tessar C - approx. 3,000 0.72% 500mm f8 Tele-Tessar C - approx. 4,000 0.96%
The first thing to notice here is that over half (50.47%) of the total Hasselblad C SLR lenses sold were the humble 80mm lens. On the other hand, exotic 30mm fisheye lenses sold only 1,000 lenses, or less than one in 400 lenses sold. Many of those exotic 30mm optics probably went into rental programs too, so even fewer of us actually own one. So you and I aren't the only ones without this 30mm fisheye lens in our camera bags!
Most Hasselblad 500c series cameras were probably sold in kits with the standard 80mm lens and back as part of the package. Given over 50% of the Hasselblad C lenses were 80 mm normal lenses, what if we assume each owner would only want one normal lens, as seems reasonable? Then for every 80mm lens sold (50.5% of total), there is only one accessory lens sold (49.5%). So we might conclude that on average, each Hasselblad owner has only 2 lenses, one of which is the 80mm normal lens. This 2 lens per owner average figure agrees quite well with one independently derived from the user survey reported below too.
The typical medium format SLR lens kit trio is considered to be the 50mm wide angle, 80mm normal lens, and 150mm telephoto lens (equivalent to 28mm, 50mm, and 100mm in a 35mm SLR lens range). Since we had 70,000 150mm sales, and 75,000 50mm sales, we can suggest that probably 70,000 or so three lens kits were sold at most.
We are also assuming that each owner only bought one 80mm lens, but most owners bought one as part of the basic package. If so, then we have circa 210,000 owners based on 210,000 C lenses sold. Roughly 70,000 or 1/3rd of those owners at most could have the "standard trio" of 50/80/150mm lenses (since only 70,000 150mm lenses were sold). So we infer that most of the other 2/3rds of the 80mm lens owners didn't own either the 50mm or 150mm lenses. From ads and other resources, I believe that more like 80% of the medium format SLR owners have only the one standard lens and body package and don't own any accessory lenses.
If 85% of the lenses are the "standard trio" of 50/80/150mm, the remaining 15% or 1/6th of lenses sold must be concentrated in the hands of a minority of owners too. So those 60,000+ exotic lenses are probably concentrated in the hands of the professional and specialty photography amateurs, along with a handful of well-heeled (wealthy) or fanatical owners. About half or 30,000 of these lenses are the 250mm lens alone. Again, let us assume few folks bought two of these 250mm lenses. So out of our projected 210,000 hasselblad owners, some 30,000 owned the 250mm lens, or 1/7th of the owners. So I am suggesting that our next tier of four lens owners would be about 14% of total owners (or 1/7th) or less. The next tier of five lens owners might be about half of the previous tier (or 1/15th or 7% of owners), based on the next largest lens group sold (14,000 120mm macros).
Since the actual distribution of lens sales to fourth and fifth lens owners undoubtably included less frequently sold optics, these numbers are upper limits and the real numbers are likely to be a bit less than projected here. My other assumption here is that while the average may be 2+ lenses per owner, the distribution is bimodal. Most owners have only the one lens in the standard kit (circa 2/3rds at least, and probably 80%). The other lenses are mostly three lens kit owners and a declining number of 4 and 5 lens kit owners. But these owners of many lenses are more vocal, active, and visible on the rec.photo and mailing lists, so it just seems like they are the "average" owner. As I have inferred here, the real "average" Hasselblad SLR owner has only the one normal lens.
Summary:
This handy table gives considerable insight into past lens buying
habits. Today, we have more lenses to choose from so the
distribution may be spread out more. But the fact remains that the
overwhelming number of lenses sold are the "big-3" of 50, 80, and 150mm of
the standard lens kit. The majority of Hasselblad owners have only the 80mm lens
(~ 2/3rds+). Only a handful of owners go on to buy more than 3 lenses. The
average number of lenses owned is about two. The above table is also handy
in understanding why some Hasselblad lenses command a premium due to rarity, and
others like the 250mm are relatively common and low cost.
An interesting user survey of Hasselblad lens buying habits was published in Modern Photography of March 1971 in their Hasselblad 500c Readers Report No. 4 (p. 91). Some 40 Hasselblad 500c owners (of 45 cameras) reported owning a total of 55 accessory lenses plus the 80mm lenses. In other words, this group had only 1.375 accessory lenses per Hasselblad owner besides the 80mm normal lens. Six owners had only the 80mm lens. We would expect the more enthusiastic amateur photographers to bother to fill out a user survey and mail it in.
So it might be surprising to see that the average Hasselblad owner surveyed there had only 1.375 accessory lenses. The table below shows the number of lenses (one 80mm per owner assumed from survey) and their percentages. For the 45 camera bodies owned, that's 95 lenses total, or an average of only 2.11 lenses per camera body and only 2.375 lenses per Hasselblad owner. Again, these numbers support the surprising conclusions from the above total Hasselblad C lenses sold figures that suggest the average Hasselblad owner has only 2 lenses (from overall sales), one of which is the normal lens. Since it is unlikely that someone would own two bodies and only one lens, the multiple body owners may represent professional or serious amateur users who would be more likely to own multiple lenses too (and partly explain our slightly higher 2.375 lenses per owner figures).
The last column compares the survey percentages to the total C lenses sold figures (from top table). Given the small sample size and selective nature of the survey respondents, the correlation seem surprisingly good. The slightly higher number of telephoto lenses (both 150mm and 250mm) may reflect the utility value of leaf shutter flash synch featured on the Hasselblads for portraiture work, while wide angles are slightly under-represented. The 250mm lens is also one of the least expensive accessory lenses, and the longest telephoto to handhold easily. We might speculate that the 150mm telephotos tend to be the second lens purchased of the 3 lens trio (50/80/150mm). So perhaps some of these owners will buy their third (and last?) lens as a 50mm in the future, and bring these figures into even closer alignment with the total sales of C lenses table discussed above?
| Lens (mm) | No. of Lenses | percentage | Total sold |
| 40 | 2 | 2.1% | 2.2% |
| 50 | 11 | 11.6% | 18.0% |
| 60 | 1 | 1.1% |
--- |
| 80 | 40 | 42.1% | 50.5% |
| 120 | 3 | 3.2% | 3.3% |
| 150 | 20 | 21.1% | 16.8% |
| 250 | 16 | 16.8% | 7.2% |
| 500 | 2 | 2.1% | 1.0% |
Ownership patterns for medium format SLRs are very unlike 35mm SLR photography ownership patterns. Half the medium format lenses sold are normal lenses. The 50mm normal lens for 35mm SLRs have now been displaced by short zooms among 35mm SLR owners. About 2 out of 3 or more medium format owners have only the 75-85mm normal lens.
By contrast, most 35mm SLR owners have circa 2.4 lenses on the average (see lens envy pages). A check on these numbers can be made using current sales of Japanese SLRs (3.97 million in 2001 AD) against interchangeable accessory len sales (4.93 million in 2001 AD, see postings). Again, the math suggests that on average we have circa 1.24 accessory lens sales for every SLR sold, or circa 2.24 lens per SLR (including the standard lens). While you might object that these buyers may buy more lenses in the future, you could say the same about the buyers of the past buying lenses today. Today's buyers probably buy more zoom lenses, and far fewer fixed lenses than in the past, explaining the slightly higher value from the past (2.4 vs. 2.24 in 2001 AD).
But I suspect that this 35mm SLR lens ownership distribution is again bi-modal. Most 35mm SLR owners probably have only the standard normal lens or short range zoom lens the camera was sold with. However, I would bet that there are many more 35mm SLR owners who have five lenses than medium format owners who have five lenses! The relatively low cost of third party lenses and consumer zooms, especially on the used markets, makes it less costly and burdensome to accumulate a number of 35mm SLR lenses. The lack of third party lens makers for medium format means you are less likely to find owners with as many medium format lenses as they have 35mm SLR lenses (assuming you select owners who have both formats).
The average number of lenses owned even by Hasselblad owners (pros and amateurs combined) is circa 2 medium format SLR lenses per owner. There are virtually no zooms in medium format. By startling contrast, there are very few fixed focal length lenses sold compared to zooms for 35mm SLRs (especially autofocus models). In short, medium format lens ownership patterns are very different from 35mm SLR patterns.
The typical medium format "standard trio" of 50mm, 80mm, and 150mm corresponds to a 35mm SLR lens kit of 28mm, 50mm, and 100mm. In many ways, most medium format users are much more like 35mm rangefinder users. With the Leica M series rangefinders, you typically see a 3 lens trio of 28 or 35mm, 50mm, and 90mm in use. The typical medium format SLR owner of the standard trio of lenses has a similar lens complement, and can handle at least as broad a range of subjects (along with better closeup options with SLR cameras).
Just how many times do you actually use those exotic 35mm SLR lenses, anyway? The more you have, doesn't it seem like the less often you have time to carry and use them? Most of us find that we can get along very well with three or four well chosen fixed focal length lenses when traveling or for most of our shooting needs.
Very wide angle lenses on rangefinders usually require a separate viewfinder and zone focusing, as is the case with many medium format systems (e.g., Hasselblad superwide). Few 35mm rangefinders can use lenses longer than 135mm without reflex focusing units. The longest commonly handheld medium format lens is 250mm, which corresponds to about 165mm on a 35mm SLR. The widest commonly found medium format lens (for 6x6cm here) is 40mm, which corresponds to about a 24mm wide angle on 35mm SLRs. So very wide and ultrawide angle lenses, including fisheyes, are very much rarer among medium format SLR users too.
Conversely, lenses beyond 250mm represent only 1.5% of the SLR lenses sold in major lines (Hasselblad). Even the bulky 500mm f/8 glass lenses for MF, which cost $10,000 and up for some examples, are only equivalent to circa 300mm telephotos on a 35mm SLR.
While specialty macro lenses are available for medium format, there is no major advantage over 35mm if the subject's image height is the same in each case (e.g., 1:1 on both 35mm and MF). Fast lenses in medium format are limited to f/1.9 in 6x4.5cm, and f/2 in 6x6cm, versus f/1.4 and even f/1.0 for 35mm SLRs. Specialty lenses like tilt and shift lenses are very expensive, and not available on many medium format models (except with expensive adapters). There are few third party lens options for medium format lenses, especially those using leaf shutter lens designs. Finally, only a handful of zoom lenses, rarely more than 1 or 2 per camera model, are available in medium format. Surprise!
What this all boils down to is this; medium format users get along with only a few lenses, and often just one. We can partially compensate for the lack of a zoom by using our enlargers, and the larger film area of medium format. Rather than buy exotic lenses which are rarely needed, we hire or rent them as needed for specific tasks.
I have elsewhere advocated what I call the "80% solution". Go ahead and buy whatever medium format camera you want with its normal lens. The trick is to get by with just the basic camera and single lens kit, rather than buying all the lenses and accessories (now he tells me ;--).
Such basic camera kits are often relatively inexpensive on used markets, often under $1,000 US for even the Hasselblad 500 series cameras or Rolleiflex SLX cameras with Zeiss optics. Industry sources suggest that these basic entry level camera/back/normal lens kits have the lowest profit margins and markups, in order to get you into buying their camera and lens lines. Those deferred profits have to be made up on the lenses and other accessories. One reason such lenses and accessories are so expensive is that sales numbers are relatively modest too (see Hasselblad's table for several decades worth of C lens sales above).
You can probably shoot 80% of the photos you might want to take with this one normal lens outfit, based on studies of contest winning photographs. But keep your 35mm SLR outfit for its many strengths, such as low cost zoom lenses, fisheyes, fast lenses, long telephotos, ultrawides, and specialty lenses such as tilt and shift optics. These lenses would be hard or impossible to duplicate on most medium format systems. The two systems complement each other; they are not replacements or redundant systems.
After reading the lens sales and ownership analysis above, you will hopefully be relieved to discover that even most Hasselblad owners have only the one normal lens for their cameras. If and when you elect to add a second lens to your kit, you will be an "average" owner. Only a modest fraction (under 1/3rd) of owners have the standard lens trio kit of 50mm, 80mm, and 150mm. Even fewer have more than 3 lenses, and most of those owners presumably are professional photographers or those dedicated amateur photographers with special needs or interests.
Isn't this good news? When I read publications like the Hasselblad Forum citing which lenses these top professionals use, I was often surprised to see a number of authors used just the standard 80mm lens. Most of the top published professional photographers had only 3 or 4 lenses in their kits. In 35mm SLR photography, the top pros usually have very much more expensive and different lenses than the serious amateurs, and quite a few exotic lenses in their kits too. But in medium format photography, the amateurs and the professionals have a more level playing field. You have the same cameras, film, and lenses as many professionals. So you aren't at a disadvantage gear-wise, and as an amateur have more time in many cases to devote to your fun photography too!
While my focus here has been on Hasselblad cameras because these statistics are more readily available, my belief is that other medium format SLRs will have similar lens ownership and usage patterns too. It is still very hard to buy a used medium format SLR camera kit without getting the original normal lens as part of the deal. I have four used 75mm f/2.8 Nikkor lenses for my five Bronica S2A/Z/EC/C cameras, with only one camera bought without a matching normal lens. I have 3 Kowa 6/6MM bodies, and three normal lenses (one converted to a shutter lens). Similarly, normal lenses are dirt cheap for most older medium format SLRs (at least, relative to other optics), as our Kowa and Bronica price guides attest. It even costs more to buy a Kiev-60 with just the 30mm fisheye lens than it does to buy the Kiev-60 kit with standard lens and accessories and buy a separate 30mm fisheye lens. In other words, you have to pay somebody not to give you the normal lens in the kit!
There are useful insights from the ownership patterns we have discovered in this article. As noted, you can expect to get a real bargain (low markup) when you buy a new or used medium format SLR camera with just the normal lens and standard back with waist level finder or prism kit. The normal lenses are typically the most common and cheapest lenses to buy. As we have seen from the above tables, roughly half of the lenses for any given medium format SLR are probably the normal lens. In fact, I prefer to buy used cameras with the lens and entire kit, partly as the lenses are often factored in (even by dealers) at small cost (e.g., $25 for a 75mm f/2.8 nikkor in one case). But chances are that anyone who has a camera body for sale without wanting to also sell off the full standard kit is not one of those 2/3rds or 80% of amateur users, but rather a professional who has put much more wear on their camera bodies and backs. I would rather buy the whole kit from another amateur, and end up with some spares and backups, than just a body or back from a professional who has put much more lots more film through that camera or back. Make sense?
Conversely, you can use the above Hasselblad lens ownership statistics to project the difficulty of finding and buying alternative lenses in Hasselblad and other brands. In general, the more exotic the lens, the more it costs and the fewer of them were made (not unrelated factors, obviously). The ultrawide 35mm lens and the 500mm telephoto for Kowa 6/66 are both among the rarest and hardest to find lenses for that line. By contrast, it is surprisingly easy to find longer telephotos for Bronica S2/EC series cameras. Analysis of lens offerings and prices reveals that the Komura lenses for these lines provided a low cost "third party" lens offering.
Camera repair manual and photo article author Ed Romney noted this dilemma in some of his publications, relating to accessory lenses. He noted the pattern of amateur owners to buy the basic camera and normal lens, but not any of the more exotic lenses. So while the standard normal lens and camera bodies are low cost and plentiful on the used market, the situation for exotic lenses and accessories is very different. Nowadays, more affluent users and collectors alike are scrambling after a relative handful of exotic lenses for many camera lines. As a result, if you want to "invest" in camera gear that you hope will go up in price, look at the faster pro quality OEM 35mm SLR lenses and similar medium format offerings.
An alternative for users is to buy interchangeable lenses such as Tamron's adaptall or T-mount lenses, or auto diaphragm lenses such as Vivitar's T4/TX series for the popular mid-1970s SLR brands. Ivor Matanle in his classic 35mm SLR handbook suggests this use of lens adapters and interchangeable mounts gives you much of the fun of using the classic cameras, without the pocketbook pain of buying all those now rarer and collectible OEM optics with premium prices.
Compared to exotic OEM optics like fisheyes and fast lenses, low cost consumer quality zooms and prosumer lenses have experienced price compression. In other words, a Nikon 28mm f/3.5 IC lens used to cost three times as much as competing third party lenses of its day. That nikkor 28mm f/3.5 is now nearly the same price as the used third party optics, having declined greatly in price, compressing the price differences on today's used market. The combination of an obsolete mount and slow speed makes such OEM lenses unloved, despite their heritage and quality. So they are relative bargains for users, and have a potential to become collectible and appreciate as the supply drops and the collector interest grows. Or at least, that's what I hope!
We are also living in the "golden age" of EBAY camera sales (thanks to Sam Sherman for pointing this out!). What I mean is that before EBAY and online sales, most camera stores had dusty boxes of old camera gear they couldn't sell. Lots of stuff was too bulky and low demand items (e.g., enlargers) to bother taking to distant camera dealer sales events. People who inherited cameras tossed them out, or stuck them in closets or tried to sell them at yardsales.
Now, thanks to EBAY, a lot of unusual items are suddenly available for users and collectors alike. But I suggest that most camera stores are now online, as are most affluent Americans who are likely to have quality cameras and accessories like lenses in their closets. Now that I have found an affordable Hasselblad superwide SWC/M and a 35mm ultrawide Kowa lens, I hope to hold on to them for a looong time! So I suspect that a lot of camera lenses and accessories are disappearing into the hands of today's buyers - both users and collectors. So this gear won't appear on EBAY again anytime soon. Like musical chairs, you may get left standing if you are late to get into the game.
Many people believe that digital cameras will replace film and conventional cameras. I think that medium format cameras and film will continue to provide a high quality option in the future, just as they have in the past for 35mm film users. But medium format sales are slipping (circa 36% in Japan in 2 recent years). Many 35mm users are "upgrading" to digital cameras instead of medium format in the mistaken belief they are getting higher quality. Digital cameras are a huge threat to 35mm P&S and instant Polaroid cameras (which is why Polaroid Corp. is in such financial troubles). Future 16 megapixel cameras will also provide acceptable image quality in 8x10" and 11x14" prints and displace many 35mm SLRs and even some medium format cameras.
To me, that suggests a buying opportunity. We are already seeing many pros selling off their spare bodies and lenses to raise cash to buy higher end digital camera and computer setups. Again, I see this as a one time event, as a lot of folks swallow the ads and marketing hype and dump their film based cameras, depressing prices. Enjoy!
Email updates and comments!