Hasselblad & Arax Systems

[wolf_rainer_schmalfuss]

<p>Q.G. not to long ago, I was invited to an photo show at Duesseldorf. All important camera and lens manufactuer were there displaying their products. The well visited camers show was exclusive for pros and photo dealers. Most of the pro visitor's where standing at the Canon and Nikon stand, looking at their products and talking to the employees. At Leica's, to my surprise, just few people where looking at the M9 and S2 camera, and the stand was not very busy at all. At the Hasselblad stand they had displayed the whole row of the H-camera system. I was at the show for almost three hours. The Hasselblad employees where all by themselves during the whole time. Really, just very few people where just briefly looking at the Hasselblad products. Second case, I was at the big Calumet store at Duesseldorf, visiting an similar photo show. All important photo firms were there! I found the Hasselblad just behind the big Epson offers, just on an one squaremeter corner place, hiding more than displaying some Habla stuff. That was really poor for such an prestigous camera manufacturer. Sorry, but that tells me a lot!</p>

[rashed_s]

Dear Wolf, I been to the photo-expedition centre two years back at Bangkok, been there for the

whole day, indeed most of the people at the Nikon and Canon stands, very few at the Hasselblad.

 

I did ask some of the people why no much of interest for the Hasselblad, the answer was, those

whom interested in the Hasselblad are the Pro’s, not the snap shooters, Hasselblad product build

with Pro’s need in mind and build to deal with the most advance photography applications, this

makes the Hasselblad equipment of very high prices.

 

It is there for, normal people will have no interest in such high cost products, every wise man will

appreciate, this issue.

 

I paid recently around 14,000 USA dollars for my digital back CVF-39, thats just the back at a

time where I bought a friend of mine a Nikon camera with the lens brand new for only 700 USA

dollars with the shipment cost.

 

There are millions f people on the world treets at the moment having cameras and they all

shooting all sort of sense, would all those people need a hasselblad cameras to shoot the event

around taken place around them, of course not.

 

Hasselblad remains only for those have a serious interest in photography and thats what makes it

the best in todays market.

[ondebanks]

<blockquote>

<p>Hasselblad remains only for those have a serious interest in photography and thats what makes it the best in todays market.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's a bit simplistic. I'm sure Mamiya/PhaseOne, Leica, Pentax, DWH/Rollei etc. would all say "our MF systems are for those have a serious interest in photography too!".</p>

<p>None of these cameras/systems is "the best in todays market", because they all have their own usage-specific advantages or disadvantages. The market is fractured into niches and specialisms and there isn't a one-size-fits-all MF camera system for this.</p>

[rashed_s]

Dear Ray, although I like my Leica and my Rollei, they are not pratically all purpose cameras,

more strapteej ones, while the hasselblad cameras are hard working cameras under all conditions,

the Pentax, I have 645N and with 5 different lenses but there is a great question mark comes after

those lenses and sharpness quality, nothing to compare with the Hasselblad lenses by any means.

 

Thank you dear Ray

[wolf_rainer_schmalfuss]

<p>Dear Rashed,<br>

there is really nothing wrong with being very happy with your excellent Hasselblad camera, and your Hasselblad/<strong>Carl Zeiss </strong>glasses! I am wondering why Hasselblad users are always talking about their Hasselblad lenses! Hasselblad has never produced any lenses for their camera bodies! No camera or lens manufacturer can live only just from the number of professional photographers. Most users of very expensive and high quality camera products, are well situated enthusiast amateur photographers, and definately not the pros! Or, they are financing it for a couple of years. Many amateurs looking at the high glossy advertisements showing some pros with their tools, and naturally want to copy it, to get into the same prestige range.<br>

If you ever come to the Photokina, there you can see lots of "photographers" carrying their heavy camera gear with big glasses in front of their bellies, like an holy monstrance. They don't look at you as an person, they look first at your camera. This is very funny to watch!</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

Wolf Rainer,<br><br>Re that thing about lenses: sometimes persistance is a real virtue. Sometimes it's just plain stupid. ;-)<br>But you are absolutely right when you say that most V-System lenses are Zeiss lenses.<br><br>You're assessment of the market needs serious 'tweaking'. But would a detailed explanation make any difference to your resolve to see things the way you like to see things?<br>Anyway, the point Rashed made is valid: the behaviour of people at camera fairs is not a measure for the state of the market.

[richardsperry]

The 500cm is going for about $1000+ for a kit with wlf and 80mm lens.

 

The Kiev 88 is $775 'new' from Kiev USA with the wlf, TTL metered finder, 80mm lens, backs, and the 30mm fisheye.

 

Kiev USA does not do the MLU conversion though.

 

Arax seems to be a bit more expensive. They strip the kit. Appear to retrofit the camera more; sand blast and repaint

and leather. And they do the MLU.

 

Hartblei no longer does Kievs.

 

Whoever said that they are the same price, was a little off. Unless what was meant that the 500cm body alone cost

the same as the base 88 kit; that's probably true.

 

The Hasselblad 30mm lens is between $3-5K used.

[rashed_s]

I have checked the kiev USA, I am seriously interested the 6th. lens to my hasslblad system and

thats the 30MM, I understand for the price of a used Hasselblad 30MM lens I can buy a full kiev

system, but thats not what I am going for, I will have to pay the price for the lens which do deserve

and remain with my Hasselblad system, the quality matters.

[wolf_rainer_schmalfuss]

<p>Rashed, I know, that am MC 30mm ARSAT can be mechanical changed to fit onto the Hasselblad! Its quiet complicated and must be very precisely machined. Its not a Zeiss F-Distagon, but saves you a lot of money! I am using a "selected" 3,5/30mm ARSAT fisheye for years on my 6x6 PENTASIX 636, and with adaptor on my CONTAX 645 AF, and I am pleased with it! Why don't you give it a try, instead hunting after the rare and expensive F-Distagon. </p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

As a personal opinion, i do second Wolf Rainer's advice. The Zeiss F-Distagon is very expensive, and how often do you use, how long can you bear seeing, the fish-eye effect?<br><br>Important bit about what is said about the Arsat/Zodiak is the <i>"selected"</i> thing. Both mechanically (not much to go wrong, but even that - the diaphragm mechanism - is a very flimsy affair) and optically it is not really a 'masterpiece'. Cherry picking may eliminate the worst of them, but even "selected" ones are 'borderline'.<br>But they do provide the fish-eye fun for as long as it lasts, for a very reasonable amount of money (compared to the Zeiss lens).<br><br>The conversion, by the way, isn't that complicated at all. The aperture setting mechanism is turned into a fully manual one by removing a single pin. And then all you need to do is remove the rear bit of the lens tube, and replace it with the rear end of an extension tube of the camera system you want to adapt it to, reduced to size on a lathe or milling machine (you could use a file, but that takes a bit longer ;-))<br>So it shouldn't cost much to have it done (or do it yourself).

[rashed_s]

Dear Wolf, we have no good people to do modifications on camera gears out here, this is some

thing rare, I also like to learn and do good photography, I travel away from home and thats cost me

a lot, all just for photography, this is why I like my gear to sever me good and end me with good

results.

 

I am going to be pleased to find a decent 30MM lens for my hassy from b&h or keh.com.

 

I can not think of modifying a lens and better be straight click and fit.

 

Thank you dear Wolf, all of the inputs here are so much appreciated

[wolf_rainer_schmalfuss]

<p>Dear Rashed, the world has become very small these days, and the UPS service is delivering worldwide to any address. I know an good address (smiling) where I have this helpful information from. If the change has been selected and professionally done, I bet, you will not see much difference between the two glasses, except that the ARSAT glass is MC, and a lot cheaper. I guess the optical design of the F-ARSAT is similar to the F-Distagon anyway. I would never tinker trying it myself if you don't have the knowledge, the proper tools and machinery. And, it is absolutely NOT a flimsy affair, because rear parts of the optics must be mechanical moved and optical adjusted. Forget this "homemade" recommendation.</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

Wolf Rainer,<br><br>Yes, it <i>is</i> a flimsy affair. The focusing ring has quite a bit of play. The diaphragma (the other moving bit) is 'controlled' by a roughly cut strip of metal, that is held in place rather loosely, and cannot be adjusted properly (either the 'open' or 'closed' end of the range must be left in danger of the thing riding along that strip slipping off past the end). To be fair, the click stop ball bearings + springs are made quite well.<br>I would cut a better diaphragm control strip if i'd use the lens more often. But since i don't, i content myself with periodically opening the thing up and readjusting the thingy. It's easy enough.<br><br>Which brings us to the "homemade" recommendation: nothing needs to be done to the optics.<br>When adapting the lens to fit a Hasselblad (and perhaps other cameras too), the rear filter must be left out. That obviously does not equate to having the optics moved and readjusted. For cameras with a greater clearance between mirror and that filter, there is absolutely nothing that has to be done to the optics.<br>Wouldn't make sense to move parts of the optics anyway. It would throw an already only-competent lens off, and turn it into a very bad/unusable one. Adapting the thing to another camera involves moving the entire optics to the correct distance measured from the film plane. That's done by making the new rear mount bit the right length.<br>I do agree that you have to be somewhat confident using metal working machinery (and you need access to such) to tackle the job. But difficult it is not.<br><br>You will, of course, see a rather obvious difference in optical performance between the Arsat/Zodiak and the Zeiss lens.<br><br>Finally: why is it so difficult to get you to say things that are less 'advertorial', more true to life? ;-)

[rashed_s]

Dear Wold, I understand that this might not be fare, but could you please help me with finding one

in good condition and you do the modifications for me to make the lens work on my 503CW and I

am prepared to pay all of the expenses, please?

 

Thank you a lot and you can please email me on film4portrait@yahoo.com

[wolf_rainer_schmalfuss]

<p>Q.G., many people are not in the position, nor having the talent or tools, to perform such an precise work, <strong>difficult or not</strong>. I am just forwarding the statement from the expert, who has done it morec than once. Furthermore, not every of the ZODIAK fisheye lens is similar to each others, there are some greater tolerances which leads to, that you have to select the very best versions out. An major problem, which you have with more or less all of the KIEV camera and lens gears. It definately cannot match with the top class Carl Zeiss quality! Only the stuff produced for military etc. use, is mostly in very good to excellent condition. I know it very well what I am talking about, because I have enough of this stuff using it for many years on my 35mm and MF cameras, and I am very satisfied with it, beside my large number of excellent Carl Zeiss glasses.</p>

[kparratt]

<p>For a touch of comic relief, I must respond to Wolf Rainer's observation:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If you ever come to the Photokina, there you can see lots of "photographers" carrying their heavy camera gear with big glasses in front of their bellies, like a holy monstrance. They don't look at you as a person, they look first at your camera. This is very funny to watch!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Indeed Rainer, it is very funny to experience too.<br>

I was walking along the river bank, opposite Köln Messe. It was Photokina week 1998, and as usual the city was alive with photo interested people exploring the sights, and of course we passed many carrying cameras whilst strolling along the river walk. I say "we", yes, I was in the company of a very attractive woman, a Berliner with class, a good friend from years before and who had flown over to meet me in Köln. It was a good week. I was enjoying Germany at it's best. We were talking about old times when suddenly disturbed by something, she the changed subject and remarked: "I have been noticing that all these men with cameras are looking at YOU, as though I am invisible! ... (pause) .. I am not used to this. .. Are they all homosexual?!"<br>

I stopped, turned and looked at her, as she stared at me, her eyes demanding an explanation. Without a word, I slipped the camera strap from my shoulder, lifted it up over her head and placed it gently around her neck, as though it were a diamond necklace. The Leica M3 with 9cm Chrome Summicron came to rest between her breasts. I smiled, gave her a kiss on the cheek, took her hand and we resumed our walk.<br>

Some minutes later, after several others had walked passed, noticing HER, she said: "That's better."</p>

[wolf_rainer_schmalfuss]

<p>Q.G. your flimsy affair Mr. Smartie, is unfortunately not so flimsy. We both forgot, that the Arsat fisheye doesn't have an leaf shutter! Furthmore, the rear end of the fisheye lens is leading to deep into the camera body, so it would be necessary to shorten the mirror. The mirror sizes between the Habla bodies are unfortunately not all the same. It works out on some older 2000 models! So, an adaption of the Arsat fisheye to an 503CW body is not possible! That's it!</p>

[rashed_s]

All of this modifications do not really worth going for.

 

Dear Wolf, Q.G. did not know what camera I was aiming for, it was my mistake not to mention this

earlier.

 

My thanks for all of you and I really learnt a lot put of been posted here, wishing you all of the best.

[q.g._de_bakker]

Wolf Rainer,<br><br><i>You</i> may have forgotten that the lens has no shutter. I haven't.<br>But yes, it will not work on a 503 CW.<br>It will on an Arax. And then still is a flimsy affair.<br>;-)

[wolf_rainer_schmalfuss]

<p>Q.G. don't make me laugh now and twist your flag into the wind direction? The Arsat fisheye doesn't need any flimsy affair, of course it fits normally on an ARAX = mostly pimped old Kiev 88 or 60 cameras, originally made sometimes at the Zavod Arsenal factory.</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

Wolf Rainer,<br><br>The Arsat/Zodiak <i>is</i> the flimsy affair.<br>Makes me wonder what you have been doing while you should have read the posts you obviously want to take issue with. Do try a bit harder to stay with it, Wolf Rainer! You're caught out napping once again.<br>;-)

[kparratt]

<p>Whatever fits, I'd gladly have anything in that supports the beautiful Technoplan-T 3.5/45 tilt shift lens. What a gem! And there's no mount for Hasselblad, ... yet.</p>

[wolf_rainer_schmalfuss]

<p>Some people complaining about a lens, without having it in use! I am pleased with my 30mm Arsat fisheye for many years.</p><div></div>

[rashed_s]

I understand from Arax web site that they have done some modifications to the liev 88 but I do not

understand what sort of modifications they have to this camera, please?

[q.g._de_bakker]

Some people, Wolf Rainer, complain about a lens despite having more than one, even, in use.<br>Such is life...<br>;-)<br><br>Were you making a point?<br><br>P.S.<br>You need to clean your scanner.