Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 4 weeks later...
I have a 45degree finder with a built in Diopter of correction. I don't need the correction. Will it unscrew or is it fixed?

Pete

 

It will unscrew but when you remove it you will need to replace it with another lens even if you require no adjustment. There are 0 (Neutral) lenses available.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well exposed, processed and scanned 120 film, prints to 36"x36" easily. Not so the M9, I'm afraid. :-)

 

I'd say ANY image can be printed to ANY size. I've seen Holga pictures printed to 40" x 40". I've seen Salgado's 35mm TMax 3200 printed to 40" x 60". Were they sharp down to the last 1/100 of a mm in the final print? No. But so what?

 

If you're going to say the M9 (or any camera) can't be printed to such and such a size, you'd better be able to explain the standard you are using - that applies to that camera, but not to a Holga or 3200 ISO 35mm as well.

 

HOWEVER - I had an epiphany yesterday. The shop where I work just acquired a Hassy SWC/M (back on topic), and as I was driving to work, I was mulling the pros and cons of swapping a pricey but little-used M lens for the SWC.

 

Sitting in traffic, I noticed someone in the next lane driving a classic 1957 Chevrolet - the epitome of 1950's American excess. 18" fins, tons of chrome, the fuel efficiency of a HumVee, the safety features (outside of its massive build) of a shark-infested pool. I wondered, "Why would anyone want to drive an archaic, underperforming machine like that, in the era of air-bagged, safety-belted Smart Cars and hybrids?"

 

And realized: Because - it - is - FUN!

 

Today I am down one Leica lens and up one Hasselblad. ;)

 

I don't care that my M9 and 15mm C/V (cropped square) will generally equal the SWC at most rational print sizes (and won't be directly replaced by it). The appeal of the SWC is as a ratchety grindy solid old chunk of metal and glass that takes square pictures with a unique perspective - in about as small a package as possible.

 

In a way it is a throwback to my first-ever "creative" use of a camera - 43 years ago when I was handed a Diana and a roll of 120 Agfa ISS in a high-school art class. Square window finder, focusing by setting the distance on the lens scale, "sunny 16" for the exposure, point it and snap.

 

(Of course, the lens is sharper. And I do get shutter options beyond "B" and "I" and apertures that aren't marked "Sun/Shade/Clouds". ;) )

 

The SWC will be fun. The M9 will continue to be fun. The Canon 5D2 and 300mm lens won't be quite as much fun (but more fun than the SWC when photographing wildlife or sports action ;) )

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're going to say the M9 (or any camera) can't be printed to such and such a size, you'd better be able to explain the standard you are using - that applies to that camera, but not to a Holga or 3200 ISO 35mm as well.

)

 

MY Standard, Andy, and as I'm not trying to influence you in any way, it's the only standard that matters.

 

I off-loaded my M9-P and M9 at the end of last year and cancelled my order for the M240 and haven't missed them. :)

 

Each to their own, eh ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my modest experience, adequately exposed MF negatives are so much easier to print in the wet darkroom. That, and my growing disinterest in social affairs is why I am leaving little, but nimble formats.

 

35mm has always been a greater challenge. When I was a press photographer juried presentations required 16X20" prints which the judges viewed from any distance they wished. I sweated through producing good prints. Being one who was an Available Darkness freak I saw my work in globules of grain. It did not, apparently, diminish the work in the opinion of news photography editors.

 

Today it seems to me that the angst of photojournalistic making The Picture is being unfortunately influenced by a photographer's fear of being considered as being digitally incompetent.

 

A shame is when 'being there' with a consistent vision and personal visual vocabulary is judged by strict 'what it could have been' technical metrics.

 

Which strangely opens the gates to picture makers who master a cell phone camera in the spirit of us Olde Phartes who used 35mm when others were using 4x5 and MF.

 

So the loop is closing in these interesting times which I glimpse ony occasionally while looking over my shoulder, moving on.

Edited by pico
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like my SWC/M, too. :)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited by Rolo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pico, I had a grip very similar, but it was a genuine Hasselblad accessory. Eventually, I discovered it was the main cause of camera shake in my images!

I reverted to the classic 'Victor's' grip and my images sharpened up noticeably.

 

These days I have the winder for the 203FE which can serve as a grip, but I still prefer the classic method originally designed by VH.

 

I realize you have your own a reason for using the grip.

 

That 45 prism take s me back to my first 45 Deg finder. An NC-2 if I remember correctly.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

Can I ask about bellows? I am interested in getting 1:1 or higher magnification. Is it possible to use bellows (which one?) with an 80/2.8 FE and a 203FE or must I get the 135mm with the special bellows extension or another macro lens with bellows?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I ask about bellows? I am interested in getting 1:1 or higher magnification. Is it possible to use bellows (which one?) with an 80/2.8 FE and a 203FE or must I get the 135mm with the special bellows extension or another macro lens with bellows?

I can't answer with any experience, Philip, but this may help on exposure compensation using the 80mm Planar and extension tubes or bellows (plug the extension distance into the "extra extension" field)...

http://www.hasselbladhistorical.eu/HT/HTCuC.aspx

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've changed my stable, sold the HB 501cm and CFV50 (along with Nikon stuff, Technikardan, Xpan, and assorted lenses) to purchase an S (006) several months ago.  In the past three months have gone back into Hasselblad with a 503CW and SWC as I missed film.

Still shoot the S and really enjoy it but film is still special, don't care how good digital gets (and the CFV 50 is pretty damn good as is the S) but film has a "texture" and depth that even great digital lacks w/o modification to emulate film. IMHO

26514302612_2d26ae3f87_b.jpg

SWC with Fuji Acros

 

26867110752_34cd7d14a5_b.jpg

SWC with Fuji RFP100

Edited by Sailronin
  • Like 14
Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I ask about bellows? I am interested in getting 1:1 or higher magnification. Is it possible to use bellows (which one?) with an 80/2.8 FE and a 203FE or must I get the 135mm with the special bellows extension or another macro lens with bellows?

 

I bought an extension tube for my 501 a few years ago, I think it is about 67 mm.  I can do a 1:1 with it, at least it seems like that to me.  If you look at the flower shots in Doc's film section you can see what it does.  I paid about $50 for it used.  

 

Wayne

Edited by too old to care
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I use extension tubes, a 55mm and 21mm. They can be used in combination and get greater than 1:1 with an 80mm. I think I paid $20 each for them!

 

6967529643_09bd22ac80_b.jpg

 

6807435140_6fa31951af_b.jpg

Edited by Sailronin
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...