645 format in Hasselblad System V

[WAn]

<p>Hi everyone<br>

There are 16- and 32-versions of the film backs for 645 format (120 and 220 films resp.).<br>

I suppose that<br>

1) the frame has landscape rather than portrait orientation<br>

2) the backs are not rotable.<br>

Is it correct?<br>

If yes, how people manage to shoot 645 in portrait orientation without hand and neck trauma?<br />Especially with waist level finder?<br>

Thanks</p>

[ian_grandjean]

<p>1) Yes<br />2) Yes<br />They don't - or they use other cameras/backs not made by VH...<br>

(Actually, there is a vertical 16-on back made by VH; but it's pretty rare...good luck in your search)<br>

<br />Sorry :-)</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>645 backs with vertical orientation get only 12 or 24 frames per roll. What's the point?</p>

<p>The simplest way to shoot portraits with an A16 or A32 back is by turning the camera, which is only feasible with a 90 degree prism. You can use an L-bracket on a tripod. As far as I can see, the only advantage of 645 back is that you get 16 or 32 frames per roll. If that's important, you can get a dedicated 645 camera, finder and lens for the price of an used Hasselblad body</p>

[john_layton]

<p>You have two options (aside from finding a V-16 back) to avoid neck trauma...one, use a 90 degree prism - or two, get a Hasselblad 645 mask set, which consists of a metal masking frame which fits neatly into your 12 or 24 exposure (square) film back, plus a plastic masking frame which fits into your viewfinder. For verticals with the mask, simply pop off the filmback and rotate the metal mask to vertical. In this way, you can work with a vertical format with the waist level finder - which is a nice way to work. </p>

<p>Two disadvantages of the Hasselblad mask kit are: one, the need to sacrifice film area - as you'll get the usual 12 exposures on the A-12 back, but in the 645 format, and two: the metal frame edges are further from the focal plane than the existing frame, which means that if you want to include these edges in your photo (for a black line around your print) these edges will appear to be slightly out of focus. Otherwise, it works great! </p>

<p>Just remember to tilt the camera slightly forward when installing the film back component of the mask - to prevent it from falling out! After installation, the back holds it in firmly. </p>

<p>I actually have a Hasselblad mask set - which I used quite regularly with my blad. My blad is gone, but I'm holding onto the mask set (they can be hard to find) in anticipation of someday getting another blad. However, if you're interested, I might be convinced to part with the mask set...so send me an email if you really want this accessory.</p>

[tree]

<p>Yes, Fuji makes film that works in Type 100 backs. The mapping from Polaroid film types:</p>

<ul>

<li>Polaroid 664 = Fuji FP-100B (ISO 100, B&W)</li>

<li>Polaroid 667 = Fuji FP-3000B (ISO 3000, B&W)</li>

<li>Polaroid 690 = Fuji FP-100C (ISO 100, Color)</li>

</ul>

<p>Enjoy.</p>

 

[john_layton]

<p>...and I disagree with the above post which states that the only advantage to a 645 back is more frames. I, for one, like the aspect of visualizing and composing through a frame which matches the actual size and proportions of the negative. Also, the finder mask set, despite the bit of awkwardness mentioned above, allows for two-eyed viewing of verticals through the WLF - which, for me, makes it more versatile than the dedicated 645 back. Furthermore, all you need to do to return to the square image is to pop out the mask, which means you don't need to change to (or buy) another back. </p>

[WAn]

<p>Gentlemen, thanks for the answers.<br>

Indeed, as Edward pointed out, my desire was to get 16/32 frames on the film -- the more the better. 12/24 is not an option, I'd better shoot square.<br>

It is rather unusual desire for me; normally I highly appreciate the square format. Just had an offer to shot in PJ style (tripod was not possible and little time for reloading) and arrived at this problem.<br />Personally I can live without 16/32, I'm just curious how wedding photographers lived with this restriction? Probably also used either full square or 645 systems or Rollei 6008 with rotating back... or as the last resort -- the prism and keeping the camera sideways..<br>

Ian, you mentioned "backs not made by VH"<br />Are there any 3rd party backs for VH with portrait orientation??</p>

 

[WAn]

<p>Tom,<br />I realize you replied my other question but posted here by mistake. No problem thanks :)</p>

[vick_vickery]

<p>I dont think it was memtioned that it works fine to use an A16 back on the camera with a waist-level finder and the camera turned to 90 degrees on a tripod while doing portraits...it doesn't take long to get used to standing to the side of the camera and look into the side-facing viewfinder...in fact, alot of the specialty portrait cameras made a few years ago had side-facing viewfinders as standard equipment.</p>

[russ_britt3]

<p>I shot Weddings for years with 3-A12 back and 3-A24 backs......kept them loaded and in my jacket pockets. When things slowed down a little I would just reload the used backs. Never got close to running out of loaded film backs....back are so much cheaper now. When I started out new Hasselblad backs were $880 each! I have seen them on E-bay for $50, just get a light seal kit and change the seals yourself.....I shot Hasselblad mainly so I would not have to turn the camera....moved up to Hasselblad from a 6X4.5 format camera. I love square wedding albums.....they were a easy sell....when the bride got prices from everyone else for a 8X10 album....I showed her a 10X10 album. The sale was made.</p>

[paul_gardener]

<p><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=419409">Edward Ingold</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub8.gif" alt="" /><img title="Frequent poster" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/3rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Oct 01, 2009; 09:29 a.m.</p>

<p>"645 backs with vertical orientation get only 12 or 24 frames per roll. What's the point?"</p>

<p>The point is you get control over the way the film frame is filled with the 12V back.<br />I used this option quite often when doing portraits that were to be printed 5x7"<br />There is a less expensive way to achieve this by using a mask kit that is fitted between the camera and the film back.<br />Only later cameras like the 503CXi and subsequent models allow for the mask to be fitted.<br />Like the A12V back these kits are NLA from Hasselblad.<br />They are offered occasionaly at auction sites.</p>