roland_haid

Hi,

 

I can not see your point. The aspherical lens technology in the 80ies was very different from the technology of todays consumer zoom lens. Then, a asperical element would only make sense on a high performance lens. Olympus would have pointed to this, why shouldn't they? If an inner surface reflects, the reflected light will bear abberations of the leading surfaces. That can lead to "strange" pattern. More simple, the reflection is a funktion of an angle, producing ring shaped pattern which could be regarded as aspherical. Last not least, the term aspherical (against Apochromatic) does not say anything about the lens performance and should be avoided.

The Technorama(s) 612 were listed with the following lens: Super Angulon (SA) 5.6/58 (PCII), SA 5.6/65 (PC) and Symmar 135 (PC and PCII). No other lens was available. All items are very rare and you need some luck to get it used. For new items, contact Linhof directly. It makes sense to adapt shorter lens than the SA 5.6/58 because focus mounts are available. For longer than 135mm, it is much easier to use a 4x5 monorail with a 6x12 back. Anything above 135mm is not really workable with the 612. A nice camera though.

Above all, a general remark: The FE series lens are all excellent but will go down in price slowly simply because they will outlast the focal plane shutter bodies. This is noticable even now. CF/CFi(e) lens will hold their value much better, even if they are cheaper right now. If you go the FE route you will need a good body. However, I would not recommend it if you are a professional.

 

Next remark, I would not switch completely from CF(i) to F(E) lens because of the maximum synchro speed. A second (200) body together with FE350 would make some sense and it is cheaper than to switch totally.

 

The CF350 is an older four lens design, so it is marginally better than the 2x180 Mutar/Sonnar duett. The CFe 350 is a Superachromat-Design and hard to get. Performance wise it is on top of the 350mm Zeiss lens, so it is an option.

 

Last remark, I would consider to swith from 503CXi to a 503CW body.

Theoretically it should work, but I doubt you can trigger you DB just with an adapter cable. The SBC inside your 503CW is indeed a variable switch. In order to make it work with your DB the timing, Volts and Amperes for both DB and SBC has to be translated. At the end, you have an other (small) black box.

- If you take care, your C Lens will work forever. The only part that could break is the main spring, but even the latest NIVAROX CFi-spring will fit with some work in that case. And... they are plentiful. But: DONT DROP THE LENS.

In order to use 67mm standard fiters on H.bay50 one need an 67mm/bay60-adapter and a bay60/bay50 adapter (I do not know if there is an 67mm/bay50 adapter, i believe not). The first is plentiful and cheap (several sources) the second one is often expensive. You can use a bay60 lens hood then. The bay50 hood will not fit anymore.

 

One the other hand, bay50-filters are quite cheap used, so this might be an option.

I do not think it's difficult to understand and its not irrationale. Hasselblad will focus on the high-end of the digital market with the H3DII including the -39Multishot. That is the niche Canon can not reach for a while. The H3D is fully integrated, that means only Hasselblad Digibacks make sense. In addition to this Hasselbald will market a cheaper camera (H2F) for film users which can be adapted to all current and older digibacks by the sync-chord. The H2F is the introduction into the system. It can be sold cheaper because it does not need the same support from the Manufacturer regarding digital. (in add.: It is debateable whether the lack of some functions will keep the body chaeper). Of course Hasselblad will offer own backs and upgrades to H2F-owners in order to make additional business.

It is a myth that non-retrofocus lens are better than retrofocus lens in principle. A lot of new high performance lens (including large format, where it would not be necessary at first glance)) are somewhat retrofocus.

The market for MF cameras is shrinking and MF cameras have to compete with 24x36 format digital SLR. This is most profitable on the high end where the smaller formats can not reach. Hence, the H3D Multi Shot capabilities. On the lower end it makes sense to have a MF camera which is not fully integrated with the latest digital backs, but can go with older digital backs or film backs. That camera could be somewhat more economic, then. In fact, this is the H2 (rev.). Of course the H2 can take digital backs as well, but connected by a synch cable. The aim is to haul photogs with older digibacks to the Hasselblad system, I think.

Sell the Carl Zeiss (Hasselblad) Softars and get Carl Zeiss (Contax) Softars instead. They are available in 67mm size, perfect fit for Bronica . There are no HBayonet60 (filter) to 67mm (lens) adapters. I have a HBay60 (filter) to 55mm (lens) adapter, got by chance and bay, but these are scarce.

According to Gianni Rogliatti (Objektive f�r Leica Kameras), the 4.5/200 Telyt is a classical five tele-lens formula. Introduced in 1935, it was kept in production until 1960. Therefore, optical quality should be more than acceptable. There is no reason to assume that the lens is not fully corrected - it is like any other comparable lens of its days. Earlier tele lens often had problems with distortion. The only drawback might be limited speed and heavy weight.

Huups, what do you want?

 

You can not compare 6x6 with small digital cameras directly by the object distance. 1:1 scale gives 55x55mm object size for your Hasselblad, for the same scale (1:1) for a small digicam object size is 8x11mm (Minox Format), or so. If you want to focus as close as an inch to your subject you need a focal lengh less then an inch. For Hasselblad, you need a focal shutter model (FC 2000 onwards) some adapters and short focus lens (12.5mm Luminar or so). Your are deep, deep in microphotography then.

 

So the question does not make to much sense. A scale factor would be better.

Again, for the CF4/40, Hasselblad says close to zero, hence 0.5mm, not 5mm!

Truly, Hasselblads figure are conservatve, in practise you can press a few millimeters..

Maximum shift at F/16 (source Hasselblad) is: CF4/40 - 0.5mm; CF4/50 - 5mm; CF3.5/60 - 10mm; CF3.5/100 - 14mm. This is for 55mm to 55mm square. CF have the same optical formula than later CFE lens. For 4.5x6 you can shift, but that is not a substancial improvement to a crop, other than safe film. For digibacks, shift is plentiful and useful.

It will barely affect image quality, but it will reduce the value of the lens if you want to sell it. So, it depends what you have paid for. In pure quality terms I would not care.

Hi Francois, I don not know the answer, but as a (true) Rollei clone it should be very easy to put a fresnel screen into the finder. I managed to fit a Hasselblad fresnel screen into a 1931 Three Shaft Rolleiflex (otherwise dubbed as Original Rolleiflex) without problems.

 

Just make shure that the camera has a PRONTOR :) shutter, if not get an other brand.

Hi Dan, the "Ears" contain the axis of the tilting viewing lens. Regards, Roland.

It is indeed - as Q.G. said. Incidence measurement is better, but keep in mind that for landscape a compensation to minus (-1/3 to -2/3) is often required because of the brightness of the scenery. Standard reflected metering gives good results because of that fact. In 90% you are better of with a good incidence light meter than with a spot meter: lighter cheaper easier to use.

"I am quite new to this forum (read a little bit since 4-6 weeks)" Indeed. Rolleiflexes have the best optics of all TLR (Planars and Xenotars), non come close. I would prefer an Oly TLR or Aires TLR, because they are rarer. Both have good optics, but they can not beat a Rolleiflex. SQ-A (80mm) should be close to the Rolleiflex TLR Planars, Mamiya 6 even so, if not better. Nothing to care about.

I had the same problem with a F 2.0/110 lens and thought it would be a minor repair. Sent it to Zeiss Oberkochen for check and repair. They suggested to change the complete barrel as they said it is out-of-alignment and can't be repaired. I finally agreed because I did not see any alternatives to this. Total costs were more than $1000. The lens is like new now because they cleaned all surfaces, but that was not an easy decision. If you're lucky the leafs are contaminated with oil only or a spring is broken. If the barrel is bent you need a first class mechanics, at least Zeiss will not deassemble the barrel for a repair which might be possible in theory.

I like the LEE filter system which is very flexible, the filter holder itself is much better build than COKIN. They take standard 100mm filters (adapters 49mm to 105mm thread). The filter holder fits to the lens adapter with a quick-release mechanism. The system does not come cheap, but the resin filters are very good and cover an exceptional wide range.

A rough calculation fot these items, if they are near perfect and some papers are included. 6008i: 500 EURO (low side), Distogon 50: 500 EURO, Sonnar 150: 400 EURO, Planar 80: 250 EURO. 150-200 EURO for the rest. In all 2000 EURO for the package is not way out, 1800-2000 is a fair value in Europe. Just make shure that there arn't EL-lens. Are there mags included? A 4560 magazine is worth something.

For me, the Ektachrome 160T is one of the best films for night photgraphy. But that means night city scenes and we talk about F4 to F11 at 1 sec. That is not long exposure. The film comes out nice then, with the electrical lights coming in a warm white and the sky comes neutral dark to black blue. Inside the film tends to cast pink, under standard electrical lights. This is not nice. Outside the film is stellar. I don not use a light meter for this, but I make bracket shots.

Hi Katherine,

 

the Rolleiflex 6008AF is heavy to carry around but at the end of production live cycle. The Mamiya 645AFd is still living but its future maybe somewhat uncertain. The Hasselblad H2 is in full production (H1 is not), but the system is expensive. All systems can provide extraordenary photos!!!!! If money is not a problem and you wish the manufacturers service in the long term, get a Hasselblad. For children the Rollei AF6008 is not the best, because the prism tends to enlarge a somewhat big camera. Mamiya would provide best money value, but if you often flash outside the studio, the shutter is limiting. The Contax is an option, but only available used.