PME45 for Hasselblad 500 series

[cl_ho2]

I enjoy taking picture with the standard view finder on the 503CW but

it is a bit inconvenience to get accurate metering for the picture

with a separate hand held spot meter.

 

The standard view finder is bright and easy to focus without using the

magnifying lens/hook attached. I find it very difficult to get

accurate focus when the magnifying lens is used.

 

I just wonder it is difficult to focus the image when using the PME45.

Is the image bright enough for focusing? Does PME45 offer a view/image

which is similar 35mm SLR ? Or, it is just like the magnifying lens

on the standard viewfinder.

 

Thanks for your advice.

[nicholas_wybolt]

The PME45 presents a bright, magnified, and non-inverted image for focusing. Even with glasses I can see the entire focusing screen.

 

I've found the metering modes to be very accurate, although I do not use the incident meter.

 

-Nick

[cl_ho2]

Hi Nick,

 

Is it easy to focus the subject through the small eyepiece in the PME45 ? I am worry it is not so easy to get focus using the PME45 attached, like the way using the standard eyepiece on the standard folding finder.

 

Thanks for further comments.

[gl5]

i tried the PME45 and found focusing quite easy with it. and

importantly, framing was unreversed which sped things up quite

a bit for me. but alas, the PME45 is a bit bulky and heavy.

 

i settle for a older prism finder (i have the PME5 but you could get

the PME3 or PME51). the metering is EVs rather than f-stops but

i find it quite accurate. but i also added a very light and small

hand held light meter, the Gossen Luna Digital F and love it

[squareframe]

the first time you look through a PME45 you will be amazed. you will never be happy with your 35mm viewfinder view again. the metering is superb and there are magnifying options for close-up studies. there are some operational/interface issues that I had addressed with Hasselblad and posted to this forum to share. check the archives.

[roland_haid]

I use a PM5 on the 503CW from time to time, when the WLF is not convenient. I prefer the PM5 to the new PM(E)45, because i like the older form and the 3x enlargement. But, if you wear glasses and prefer to use them with the prism finder, the newer finders with only 2.5x enlargement would be much better. I doubt you can see the full screen with glasses through a PM5. Yes, there is no problem to focus accurately, the image is bright enough and, I agree, better than the 35mm SLR I have seen. Regards

[klaus_ottmann]

I use the (bulky) PME45 on my new 503CW. I wish I could do without but I find focusing extremely difficult with the standard viewfinder, primarily because of the reversed image. It distracts too much from composing and focusing. The PME45's viewfinder, however, is excellent and you feel much closer to the image. Focusing is also very easy. And the metering is very precise.

 

If you are only looking for an easier way to meter, you may not appreciate it as I do. Using a small lightmeter like the Gossen Digisix, which also measures EVs, would be almost as convenient as using the PME45, and with less bulk. However, for me, it is not an option. I need the PME45's viewfinder (having switched to medium-format from 35mm Leica) to photograph comfortably.

[vlad_ravich]

I dont see the weight issues with the PME45, I happily use it all the time on my 501CM, it is bright, clear, unreversed, and accurate, it is a joy to use, it isnt as heavy as people make it out to be, makes the camera much more usable at eye level, the WLF has its places

[jay_.]

I use the PM45 which is the same finder, without the meter, about half the cost (used). I can't handhold a Hasselblad steady enough to make the images better than 35mm, so I have no issues with the WLF and find the 4x magnifier the best for focusing. I never flip it down, I put my eye right up to it and compose through it also. For travel I also got a new-in-box Kiev NC-2-type prism, which is small and light and only cost me $99. It's not as good as the Hassy prisms but for the occasional moving-subject or handheld shot, it's a good one to travel with. I also have a PM45 which I only use for indoors with flash, which is primarily the only time I handhold a Hasselblad. The PM45/PME45 have the advantage of an adjustable diopter which I need in addition to glasses, plus higher eyepoint which is also nice with glasses. The trade-off is magnification, and I find that I need the split/microprism screen to focus accurately in dimmer light with it. I never saw the purpose in spending so much money on a metered prism that doesn't couple to the aperture or shutter. Once I've got to take my eye from the camera to set the exposure I figure I might as well be using a handheld meter, such as my Sekonic L408 which is a palm-sized 5-degree spotmeter. The only advantage to the meter prism IMO would be with a bellows. Extension tubes and filters are a no-brainer to factor into a meter reading. In addition, when using the camera on a tripod, a built-in spotmeter is a liability because it forces you to disturb the composition to take readings from various places.

[nicholas_wybolt]

Hi again,

 

I have no trouble focusing through the PME45's eyepiece, which is pretty good since I wear glasses. I don't know if it's a "high eyepoint" finder by design, but it's far superior to any 35mm SLR that I've used.

 

Perhaps you can rent one to try it out.

 

-Nick

[cl_ho2]

Hi Klaus,

 

What is the performance of the Gossen Digisix lightmeter ? Is it accurate ? I have checked the Gossen information which states Digisix has 25 degree of coverage (reflective). I am using 80mm CFE which is 50 degree coverage. How to get correct exposure using this small Gossen meter for reflective reading ?

 

Thanks for your help.

[gary voth]

I love the PME45.

 

BTW, I have a mint PME90 I will sell you...<g>

[eddie_shiew]

Both PME45 and PM45 are great and superior than all previous prisms because they are 1-1/2 to 2 stops brighter than previous prisms. If you have the current Acute-matte screen, then it adds another 1-1/2 to 2 stops brighter than older Hasselblad cameras with older screen and older prisms.

PME45 adds the convenience when you are using with any extension tubes or polarizer filter or any filters on the lens, it will compensate the exposure for you. Much easier then using with hand-held meters that you have to do the calculation in your head. For glass-wearers, both PM45 and PME45 have diopters correction built-in; however, if you have stronger diopters, Hasselblad has another diopter piece you can add on to them.

[joe_mcguckin]

I wear eyeglasses and find focussing camera with the pme45 is a real chore. My camera has the factory supplied screen.

Would one of the accu-matte screens help? They’re quite expensive now...

[orsetto]

This may be the oldest thread resurrection I've ever seen: 16 years after the last post? Yikes!

 

Anyway: yes, you probably need one of the staggeringly expensive Acute Matte screens with split image focusing aid. The prisms have lower magnification and brightness than the WLF eyepiece, its the sacrifice you make for unreversed viewing. The advantage of the A.M. screens used with prism finders isn't so much the brightness as the split image rangefinder circle: it gives you more definite focus confirmation independent of your eyesight "guessing" focus on the plain matte screen. To some degree, this depends on the lens: 40-50-60 Distagons and 80 Planar benefit most obviously, while 100 thru 250 are a little easier to focus with the plainer screens.

 

There are three Acute Matte screens with split image: 422170 is the earlier non-D version with checker gridlines, 42217 is the same screen updated as "D", and 42215 is the cluttered split + microprism collar + crossbars Type D screen. The most cost effective and practical is the non-D 422170: the "D" version offers no real advantage used with a prism (and little to no advantage with WLF) but costs way more. The split/micro/bars "D" screen is love it or hate it: the center screen area is horribly cluttered, and Hasselblad's microprism coller is useless as a focus aid with any lens under 150mm.

 

Not everyone is enamored of the Acute Matte screens, of course. They are grossly expensive, and the versions without split image are not much easier to focus than the original old dark groundglass screen with black crossbars. If you are satisfied with your original screen aside from difficulty nailing precise focus, you might consider the older Hasselblad (non-Acute-Matte) 42188 ground glass with split image center, 42218 diagonal split image with microprism collar, 42234 ground glass with huge central microprism spot, or 42250 huge microprism spot + checker grid lines.

 

These sell for a quarter the price of an Acute Matte, have the same brightness as your existing screen, but add helpful focusing aids. The old 42188 actually has the largest-size split image circle Hasselblad ever put in a screen, the other two have a gigantic, very bright microprism-only aid which many users find less distracting (albeit also less precise) than a split image. The diagonal split screen is only useful if you really need a diagonal split.

Edited January 25, 2019 by orsetto