arthuryeo Posted May 13, 2006 Share Posted May 13, 2006 Just added a few more images from my latest exploration with my SWC-M. This time with a hood on and it seems to make a whole lot of difference in terms of contrast. <p><p> <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/4444984&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/4444984&size=lg</a> <p><p> <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/4445146&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/4445146&size=lg</a> <p><p> <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/4446238&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/4446238&size=lg</a> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted May 13, 2006 Author Share Posted May 13, 2006 The other test was to see how this lens behaved under bright light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evan_dong1 Posted May 13, 2006 Share Posted May 13, 2006 Arthur, Nice use of the SWC/M, especially how you illustrated the curving rail. Are you using a T* or non-T* lens? Is the hood the original Hasselblad hood for Series 63 or Bay 60 version of the SWC/M? Handheld, neckstrap tight, or on a tripod? I currently use a non T* SWC/M with the original lenshood. No flare whatsoever, as long as I don't shoot directly into sunlight. Evan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicaglow Posted May 13, 2006 Share Posted May 13, 2006 It's awfully early in the year to have sunshine up there!<g> Great shots! Which scanner did you use? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted May 13, 2006 Author Share Posted May 13, 2006 >Are you using a T* or non-T* lens? I was using a CF T* version. >Is the hood the original Hasselblad hood for Series 63 or Bay 60 version of the SWC/M? The hood is an original B60 Hassy hood. >Handheld, neckstrap tight, or on a tripod? All of my SWC shots were done handheld. I have not tried it with tripod ... yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted May 13, 2006 Author Share Posted May 13, 2006 >No flare whatsoever, as long as I don't shoot directly into sunlight. The hood is more than just for preventing flare, although flare is one of the major prevention it offers. One of the key things a hood prevents is lateral light entering the lens which interferes (read lower contrast here) with the relevant light from the real subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted May 13, 2006 Author Share Posted May 13, 2006 >It's awfully early in the year to have sunshine up there! Yes, kinda weird but it's welcomed. >Great shots! Which scanner did you use? I was using the Nikon SuperCoolscan 9000ED. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studor13 Posted May 13, 2006 Share Posted May 13, 2006 Arthur, I'm blown away. How did you get such a high dynamic range? Is it your technique, the camera, the glass, or a combination? I hope it was just the lens shade in which case my life will become very easy. I do this with a D70 but I need at least 3 shots, Photomatix and then curves, etc. adjusted in PS. Also what film did you use? I occasionally shot a 500C/M with Provia 100 in very low light, but if I can get what you got with single exposures, I may have to rethink the direction of my photography. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_bunnik Posted May 13, 2006 Share Posted May 13, 2006 Which town's centre is it Arthur? It looks so slick and clean it's almost the set for a movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runkel Posted May 13, 2006 Share Posted May 13, 2006 In this case, "town center" means <a href="http://www.redmondtowncenter.com/about_us">"open-air shopping mall"</a>. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike-images Posted May 13, 2006 Share Posted May 13, 2006 Nice stuff Arthur. I have just acquired a SWC/M and I'm really enjoying it. I'm not really into architecture - like it but can't do it well. My thing is people and I am getting a real kick out of the perspective distortions that are possible - think massive lips on a sax player from 12 inches! I can't unfortunately scan 6x6 yet. Love Fuji Astia's lower contrast and the way the shadows don't block in like Velvia. At the same time I really like Velvia's saturation and punch. Looking forward to seeing more in your exploration of this great camera. M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_neuthaler Posted May 13, 2006 Share Posted May 13, 2006 To be honest, I bought an SWC/M last summer & got bored with it in a couple of months. My own feeling is that, unless you use it professionally -- say for architectural assignments -- you tire of shooting winding roads, up-close-and personal foregrounds into backgrounds, etc. etc. I guess too I was just not creative enough. I added a 50mm Distagon C "T" to my Hassie 500CM kit, & get much more use from it IMHO. Good luck, though. It's a fun camera.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted May 13, 2006 Author Share Posted May 13, 2006 Andy, >Also what film did you use? I occasionally shot a 500C/M with Provia 100 in very low light, but if I can get what you got with single exposures, I may have to rethink the direction of my photography. I was using Fujichrome Astia 100F. It has the finest grain (RMS 7) and provides the widest dynamic range. Colors tend to be Fuji style (greenish/bluish). These are all taken handheld, so they are *not* multi-shots put together using the PS/CS2 HDR trick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted May 13, 2006 Author Share Posted May 13, 2006 Frank, >Which town's centre is it Arthur? It looks so slick and clean it's almost the set for a movie. No, it's not a movie set. It's a small nice suburban open-air mall in Redmond, WA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert x Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 I want one, I think. Your pictures don't make that thought go away Arthur. There was one on ebay a day or so ago from a guy with no history, no reserve and a two day auction - too good to be true and he never responded to my asking about using escrow......the search goes on. I don't know if any of you are familiar with Derry Moore ? http://www.derrymoore.com/ I wasn't until I read "Bill Brandt:A Life" - apparently a very young Derry Moore approached Brandt and asked him if he could be his assistant. Brandt declined but told him he would give him some lessons, on the condition that he bought an SWC. [He bought one.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
art_arkin Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 Wow, thats what I call perfect exposure. I love the way Astia reaches deep into shaddows not to mention its gorgeous skin tones and incredible granularity. I highly recommend the Hasselblad pro hood from the CF era though rather bulky compared to the bay 60 and in the case of the SWC it needs sideways mounting to clear the base assembly. It does however provide significantly better shading than the cute bay 60 and makes your SWC look very impressive. The Cokin P hood works too plus you can stack a few filters if thats your thing. Bay 60 allows just one on the SWC Thanks for the great pictures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monochrome11 Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 evan - i've been offered a near mint SWC (non T*) for a very good price... i'm concerned about flare (doesn't come with a hood) and lower contrast with this older non-coated lens compared to the later CT* version... you mention that you don' thave flare issues which is promising to hear, but how do you find the contrast without hood on your non-T* SWC??? thanks in advance! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_bunnik Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 Ken, although the lens is not T* coated, it is (single)coated. The hood is just very small and although using one is better than none, I doubt if it is that much help. I bought my 1969 SWC last year in very good condition for 650 euro's including an m12 back, original lenshood and finder. Here's an example of a shot form last winter. I cut off a part on the left because my shadow was in the picture. http://www.fotoapparatuur.nl/photos/FotoShow.asp?FTO_ID=8554 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monochrome11 Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 Frank - thanks for that... how much are early SWC's going for in now? 650 Euro seems like a fantastic deal! i love the compactness of the SWC, but after shooting a test roll of E100 slide film (yet to be processed) - there are a couple of things that cause me hesitation 1) the original viewfinder is horrible (I wear glasses and it's impossible for me to see the full frame - a far cry from the VC 21 finder I use on my M4-P), and 2) i find it impossible to handhold AND achieve level using the built in bubble level (apparently my fine motor control abilities are quite poor)... now, i know that both issues can be resolved, 1) by purchasing a newer VF or the VC angle VF, and 2) by using a tripod (though i intend to use it handheld as much as possible).... perhaps you can shed some light on these issues with your experience using the SWC... thanks in advance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted May 14, 2006 Author Share Posted May 14, 2006 Ken, <p><p> >2) i find it impossible to handhold AND achieve level using the built in bubble level (apparently my fine motor control abilities are quite poor) <p><p> I have to admit that in the first couple of weeks after I got my SWC, I was having the exact same problem. Now, it's a lot better. Here's the technique I use: <p> <li>image an axis that starts from the center of the frame and extends all the way to infinity <li>when you notice that the bubble is off center, you rotate the SWC about that axis until the bubble is centered. <p><p> I'm still taking, on the average, 2-5 secs to get it right. I'm sure if I use this camera everyday, it should take less time to get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_bunnik Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 I wear glasses also and indeed, it is difficult to see the whole frame through the (older type) finder (that is probably the reason I did not see my shadow in the picture while composing the shot). I have no experience with the VC finder. I would like the focussing screen adapter but that would make handheld photography impossible. I do not find it very difficult to use the built in spirit level. It takes a bit of getting used to and just very small changes are needed to put it level. It does take time so for a quick shot it will hardly work. These days I finish all my slides in photoshop however and a horizon is put level in no time using photoshop. Here is another example, this was taken from a tripod and it took me some time to compose. Shutterspeed was about 1/4th of a second. http://www.fotoapparatuur.nl/photos/FotoShow.asp?FTO_ID=6722 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike-images Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 On the basis of my 3 days use of my SWC/M ....-;) I suspect that we shouldn't get too hung up on the spirit level. I use a 21mm on my Leica with an external v/f and of course no spirit level. The only place it really matters is with verticals. We are, most of us, good at keeping the horizon level and I find that I use some vertical against the side of the frame to get the left-right tilt OK, the big issue is (imagine an aircraft) the fore and aft pitch which is what gets the verticals to do strange things. For many of the shots here, though not Arthur's originals, those verticals are not critical. On another note what is the little black bullseye in the centre of the v/f for? My son is sure he can see the spirit level bubble in it!! I've told him that he should review his intake of substances...but what is it - simply a centre mark? M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_bunnik Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 In my opinion it is just a centre mark. With the older type finder, the spirit level is reflected in the glass next to the viewfinder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monochrome11 Posted May 17, 2006 Share Posted May 17, 2006 <a href=" title="Photo Sharing"><img src="http://static.flickr.com/45/147954622_137a212446.jpg" width="402" height="500" alt="SWC - circa 1962" /></a> circa 1962... i pulled the trigger and purchased this today from a retiring pro who only used it for a few jobs... (including documenting the construction of the Skydome in Toronto base in the late 1980s)... non-coated lens but it's mint... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert x Posted May 17, 2006 Share Posted May 17, 2006 ken - oh yes indeed i am a very jealous man. Why don't I know any retiring pros ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now