Viewfinder coverage on a 500C or 500C/M

<p>Can anyone tell me if the 500C or 500C/M has 100% viewfinder coverage when using a waistlevel finder?</p>

<p>I'm doing pans and I need the full coverage. </p>

<p>Thanks in advance.<br>

<br />Steve</p>

<p>Steve,</p>

<p>I don't have the exact figures right now, but no: though the coverage percentage is somewhere in the 90s, it's not 100%.</p>

<p>I think the viewfinder coverage in the 500 C or 500 C/M depends on the lens used. Larger lenses from 150mm and up, will have less coverage, especially in the upper part or the image .</p>

<p>This issue has been addressed in newer models with the Gliding Mirror System (GMS)</p>

 

<p>Yes and no.<br>

The mirror is too short, so it will vignet, creating a dark band along the top of the view when longer lenses are used.<br>

But only on the top of the viewfinder image. On all three other sides, there is no difference, no matter what lens is used.</p>

<p>If by "pans" you mean stitched panoramas, it is not necessary to achieve full coverage. Frames should be overlapped by 25%, which you can easily estimate from landmarks in the scene approximately 25% from one edge of the finder. If the finder is less than 100% coverage, that just gives you a little more margin for error.</p>

<p>Edward - </p>

<p>Thanks for the advice. I print them full frame and mount them together. I don't stitch them together in the computer. Hence, the need for 100% coverage.</p>

<p>Perhaps there are cameras with a 100% viewfinder, but Hasselblad is not among them. The coverage is somewhere between 90% and 100%.</p>

<p>That alone should not keep you from aligning images in the manner you suggest if you crop each image accurately. The amount lost is trivial. However if you rotate the camera between frames, you face the same problems stitching programs are designed to overcome - changing perspective, matching and blending. If you don't care about that, you probably shouldn't care about the viewfinder accuracy either.</p>

<p>I've been using a Pentax 67 that has 100% coverage when using a waistlevel finder. It works very well. I just wanted to try and use the square. I don't crop the images. They are printed full frame and butted up against each other. That is why I was looking for a square format that would be 100% coverage. Unfortunately, I don't think the camera exists. </p>

<p>According to "The Hasselblad Manual" by Ernst Wildi, the viewing screen in a 500 series camera covers 98% of the film area in both directions. Both the WLF and PM90 show the entire screen, but the PM45 is 96% vertically and 92% horizontally. Series 200 cameras crop 1mm from the bottom of the viewing screen, but the film area is not affected.</p>

<p>Without perspective correction, straight horizontal lines will meet at an angle between frames. Objects split between frames will be different sizes on either side of the border. This will occur with any camera and rectilinear lens, even the Pentax 67. The viewfinder accuracy is irrelevant in this regard.</p>

<p>Edward - <br>

Thank you for the information. I think I should mention that I'm not trying to make traditional panoramas. I actually like the wonky perspective. With that said, the Pentax 67 with a 105mm lens does an excellent job at minimizing distortion and incorrect perspective.</p>

<p>The viewfinder screen of my Rollei 3.5F measures 56x56mm, which is exactly the same size as the film gate. I conclude, therefore, that the viewfinder shows 100% of the picture.</p>

<p>Robert,</p>

<p>Have you ever tested whether the coverage of the viewfinder is identical to that of what you get on film?<br>

And shift is only one thing to worry about when using TLRs. If the focal lengths of taking lens and viewing lens aren't exactly the same (and they never are) the angle of view will not be the same too.<br>

<br />"100%" screens may sound impressive. But i have yet to see one that keeps what it promises.</p>