Shooting 35mm with a Hasselblad?

Discussion in 'Medium Format' started by tom_smith|22, Jun 20, 2008.

  1. I was just wondering if it was possible to shoot 35mm film using a Hasselblad, so you use the entire film surface
    for artistic stuff, etc. Specifically, with an A12 back on. I'd be self-loading the FP4+ from the box it came in.
    Thanks, Tom
     
  2. There was a rare 35 mm filmback with 24x56 mm film frames.
    First sold some 20 years ago.
    I would advise to use A12 or A16 fimbacks with Kodak or Fuji B/W films if FP4 is not available as rollfilm.
     
  3. Tom, it is possible, and I've done it.

    One of the main problems is film flatness. This was controlled in Hasselblad's own 35mm magazine by the film gate's construction, just as it is with any wide 35mm camera or magazine, such as the X-pan and other special 35mm mags made for MF cameras. The film curl will otherwise allow the emulsion to arch in front of the magazine's film plane, hence producing partially out-of-focus images.

    The other problem is camera orientation. There's no problem with horizontal images, but vertical framing is very awkward. A 90 degree prism can help, but it still does not provide for comfortable handling.

    Of course you'll need to mark the viewing screen for framing the image.

    But if you want to try it, go for it. I'll post some images when at hand.

    Cheers, Kevin
     
  4. I'd just crop the 120 version. Take a grease pencil or a Sharpie and draw crop lines on the top (smopoth side) of the groundglass. you can clean offthe marks wit hrubbing alcohol and a cotton ball or Q-Tip.

    I believe that the 24x56mm back Paul refers to was a custom modification made for Al Satterwhite, formerly of New York City , for advertising and stock work, back when King Kodachrome ruled the commercial photography world for 35mm based location photography (think Pete Turner, Jay Maisel, Arthur Meyerson, Eric Meola, Magnum's color photogrpahers, Sam Abell, William Albert Allard, etc.)
     
  5. Buy a Hassy to EOS adapter and an EOS film body. Fire away.
     
  6. "Buy a Hassy to EOS adapter and an EOS film body. Fire away."

    Great idea except that then he'll be

    a.) Only getting a 24x36mm image --and if he stitches two frames together unless he is shifting the position ofthe camera and not the lens he'll get parallax areas in the overlap.

    b.) He won't get as good of resolution as he would if he were using a lens meant for that 35mm camera.
     
  7. Here are some images made with the simple 35mm spool adapter I made from a cut down 120mm spool. The first, shown in two sizes: One on screen here at 511 pixels at wide, and a second at 1000 for closer focusing scrutiny.
    00PtsF-50769584.jpg
     
  8. The image above in a larger size:
     
  9. Once again:
    00PtsZ-50769784.jpg
     
  10. The above exposure was made at full aperture ... by mistake! Having read and set the EV value from the exposure meter winder knob, I simply forgot to turn the coupled ring on the lens. Had I exposed at the intended f11, it would have given the foreground depth of focus desired, whilst still retaing a soft background. Never the less, it is interesting to see just how shallow the DOF is at this close focus setting. I don't recal the settings applied to this next frame:
    00Ptsx-50773584.jpg
     
  11. Were I dedicated to working in this format, ie these image proportions, I would invest in a camera made for the job,
    and also stick to roll-film. So, in stead of buying the Fuji/Hasselblad X-Pan, I would use the funds as a downpayment
    on something like the Linhof Technorama, or that other magnificent kit from http://www.gilde-kamera.de , and simply
    use the Hasselblad as it's designer intended: the best 6x6 modular camera system ever made.

    But it was an interesting exercise, and worth doing. I hope this was helpful.

    Cheers, Kevin
     
  12. "Buy a Hassy to EOS adapter and an EOS film body. Fire away."

    Great idea except that then he'll be

    b.) He won't get as good of resolution as he would if he were using a lens meant for that 35mm camera.

    This is a myth, esp for top dog lenses like Zeiss. Google if you want to know why.
     
  13. I have the 35W back for the Bronica ETR series cameras. It gives an image area of 24X54mm. With a 50mm or 40mm lens and some Kodachrome you can do some nice landscape work. I have a lot more 35m Technical Pan than 120 TP so that's another film to try.
     
  14. Thanks for the responses. A mate of mine has a Hasselblad, so Ive got no interest in buying a specific camera for this.
    I didn't think about the film flatness. I suppose Id have to deal with it and pass it off as something Ive done delibrately.
    Those look good Kevin. What youve done to the 120 spool sounds like what I might be after.
     
  15. Tom, it was a simple bit of butchery with a hobby knife. I'm trying to find the photos I took of the process. I had intended to post them on a thread of the same subject ages ago. maybe they'll turn up.
     
  16. Jeff, I seem to remember the film in the Bronica 35mm mag travels horizontally ... ? Thus making the Bronica
    solution much more user-friendly than the Hasselblad version, where the film travels vertically. 'User-friendly',
    that is, for panoramic landscapes.
     
  17. Here is the fabrication documented. Ths first image shows the 35mm spool adapter in it's finished state. It was made fairly quickly, with moderate care taken. You can see that it's a bit rough, but with this as a 'prototype', I was really just testing viability of the idea.
    00Pym3-52437584.jpg
     
  18. The work bench.
    00PymA-52437684.jpg
     
  19. The idea is to simply cut off the two ends of the roll-film spool ....
    00PymF-52439584.jpg
     
  20. Like this ...
    00PymK-52439684.jpg
     
  21. Place it next to the end of the 35mm film cartridge, and observe how you will need to fashion the adapter...
    00PymW-52439884.jpg
     
  22. Be careful not to make the ends too short, because it is easy to adjust the fit by gradually removing more as required. Otherwise you will need to start again if too much was cut off to begin with.
    00Pymm-52441584.jpg
     
  23. With the film loaded, it was immediately obvious that film curl was a problem to solve.
    00Pymv-52443584.jpg
     
  24. So here is the finished job. Two small pieces of stiff card held in place with tape helped to reduce the curl. But it may also be obvious that the film is off-center. This was not intended. I did realise part of the way through the cutting process that I had not measured properly to allow for the asymmetric 35 cartridge design. This could actually be used to effect as a 'lens-shift' alternative. The Linhof Technorama 612 pc II employs exactly this design principle. ( http://www.linhof.de/ )
    00PynX-52447584.jpg
     
  25. The optimum lens shift alternative, i.e. the one offering the most virtual shift, is achieved by using roll film in a 6x6
    back.<br>;-)<br><br>Nice project, well explained, Kevin!<br>(Though i do still prefer the 'easy route'. Which leads to
    the very same image results. ;-) )
     
  26. Absolutely Q.G., I totally agree. There is nothing to be gained by not using roll film in the magazine, ie the
    'easy route'. With films as good as they are, one can easily crop from a 6x6 frame held perpendicular (for
    correct geometry) and still retain high image quality, especially when using Hasselblad's Zeiss optics.

    Of course this is about improvisation when in a tight spot. I remember after the first month of living in Norway
    when the money ran out quicker than I could count it. I was stranded and broke and had no money for film. So I
    cut squares of DuPont commercial film, loading each Hasselblad mag with one piece. It worked and I managed to
    make photographs when needed.

    Thanks for the feedback.
     

Share This Page