victor4

Q.G.,

Re: "...influence the meter reading when using the PME45..."

Had not considered same. Makes perfect sense. If I ever use it I will certainly keep that in mind. The PM 'E' was a poor choice. I use that viewfinder often but only with a handheld meter. The 'meter' therein tends to task my patience.

Again thank you for your help. Very much appreciated.

vic... :)

Q.G. De Bakker,

Thanks Q.G.! As long as they will fit and work as required i will order a set. Just didn't want to ruin anything by trying without asking. I did not know if the sides of the viewfinder pieces were transparent with defining lines only or with 'blacked out' edges. Sounds as if they should work. Thanks again!

vic... :)

Can't believe I could not find this in the archives, its probably

there but no luck. Hope someone can help.

Presuming the hasselblad 645 mask set, both viewfinder and back, will

work with the 6x6 12 and/or 24 backs.

They will be used on a 501 and/or 503. Along with either a PME45,

PM90 or the standard finder.

I usually print full frame and prefer to leave a bit of the film

rebate showing as a border on the print and as a rule don't like

cropping. Sometimes it is not feasible to rotate the camera.

QUESTION 1: Can the viewfinder and the back pieces both be used both

horizontally and vertically?

It can sometimes be difficult to envision the end result when looking

at a square trying to visualize the end result when 'extra stuff' is

cluttering up the view. The pictures of same shown on B&H's site

appear to be somewhat transparent.

QUESTION 2: If so can the viewfinder 1/2 of the set be easily blacked

out on the edges?

Thanks in advance. (Yes I know, get Wildi's book)

vic... :)

I use nikons for 35mm. No real reason why. Just what I've been using. Started with a Canon Ftb but bought nikon when looking for a newer manual body.

Have been seriously looking at Canon. The new 1dsMKii sounds very interesting (geez no kidding). Even though there are lots of complaints regarding lens distortion with this new camera. (Which I truly don't understand)

So can either wait for their lenses to catch up with the rest of their system and spend a lot of $ on new glass or can wait for the D2X and sink more money into nikon 'cuz that's what I happen to have.

Plenty of busy shooters use both without too many problems, so for me it probably does not really matter. Unless I wanted it to replace the MF gear. But since MF digital can be ever so much better I'll not replace it but will eventually add a digital back.

So the bottom line is I have no real preference but will probably stick with nikon just 'cuz that's what I happen to have, and its good enough for me. But I will wait for the D2x to see if its much better than the D2h.

vic... :)

What everyone else said.

Invest in the lenses, buy a body.

I have a 501CM and a 503CW. Will be keeping the 503CW. Even though I don't have a winder and rarely use the TTL it still has the capability. The 555, 553's are heavier and can not be used with out the motor. I say this with conviction because I know Mr. DeBakker will correct me if I'm wrong.:)

Gut instinct tells me that they are going to continue producing and developing something for the V series. At least digitally. There is just too big a potential market for them to completely ignore. I know it sounds weird but the dramatic price drop for used gear could very well be a good thing for Hasselblad in the long run. Think of all the new people exposed to Hasselblad. A brand new market. Every time someone buys another piece for their system the more they become tied to it. At some point they will likely spring for that new, gotta have it, whatever it is.

It is so hard to tell what Imacon dba Hasselblad is going to do next. The rumor mill has it that they are still coming out with a new V series lens line. Almost seems to make sense, discontinuing the 200 series, suddenly stopped the cfi to cfe conversion midstream. If they do indeed come out with a new lens series I would think that would mean a new body as well. If they are committed to keeping the V alive the new body would certainly support the old lenses as well. At least in some fashion as with the H1 and the V adaptor.

So invest in the glass and buy whatever 500 body suits your current needs.

Almost didn't think of it... If you don't need square, get the H1. Digital backs readily available for it. State of the art, yet all the old 500 series lenses work with it via the new adaptor. The question then becomes... If they do make new V series lenses will they work on the H1? Guess it never ends.

My personal preference would be the 500 series body. It will accept either the square or rectangular format digital backs.

vic... :)

Grant and EJ Sadler,

Don't really give a damn how many shutter cycles a canon or any other camera gets. Just read that on the other site. Thought it was timely, guess not. Read ... sense of humor. My point was regarding the 1000 shots. At least Jeff got a chuckle.

Jammey, you are quite right. There are those very good shooters who know what they are doing and need to shoot a lot to get just the right result. They tend to be few and far between, at least in this area. Here there are a lot of photographer wannabees that need to shoot 500-1000 shots just to get something usable.

If you re-read Marcs post he states he's been shooting 6-7 rolls of 220. That would be 168 to 224 shots maximum for 7 rolls depending on the back used.

vic... :)

Marc, never did like the look of the 30 fish eye, though I like my blad's. But film does make a lot of sense for weddings, unless you are like...

Jammey Church, 1000 shots? At a wedding? Why? It is my understanding most high end wedding shooters achieve about a 95% keeper rate. You must be selling over 900 photos. Way to go. On the other hand the new 1DsMK's shutter is highly rated at 150,000 cycles (a good thing)which means you will have only 150 weddings on that camera before you send it in for service (an expensive bad thing).

The recent comments (past two days) I've been hearing on another site regarding the 1DsMKii suggests that the new camera really discloses the downside of Canon glass. Especially the zooms. I don't know how or why that could be so different than the same glass on film but that's what I've garnered from their discussions.

Commercial shooters initially bought into the myth that it is cheaper to shoot digital than film, only to discover it actually costs more. The real advantage is convenience. Both to the shooter and the AD's. This may hold true for some event shooters as well.

Regardless of any other reason, when was the last time you lost shots on film. Oh that's right, if you forgot to load. I have heard too many complaints about unsalvageable files, disks and cards. Film has a certain dependability. It also has an easier to manage exposure latitude. The two big things film lacks that digital has is white balance. It also provides the ability to promptly review important shots. Two very desirable features for many shooters.

About 9 months ago I saw an ad from Florida looking for MF film shooters for weddings. Paying $1000 each wedding. All you had to do was shoot. Caught my attention since so many others are going to low end digital for whatever reason.

Has anyone else noticed that good newer used Hasselblad gear prices seem to be on the rise? The old stuff continues to decline in price.

EJ Sadler and Grant, I suspect the clients can not tell the difference. But the perception that there should be difference may come into play. If the client thinks there will be no difference then why employ a high end pro when uncle Schmuck's camera will do just as well. The future will probably see high end shooters using MF digital. Primarily for the same reason they use or used to use MF film. Alleged better quality, and the prestigious image associated with same. Costs more, so what just charge more.

Grant..."i picked up a 10$ rolleicord at a flea market that will blow away any digital....do i win?" ... only if it works.

I talk (and write) too much so I'll shut up now.

vic... :)

I too have been considering a winder, primarily for possible steadier hand held shooting at slow shutter speeds. Sometimes I'm quite steady other times not. Don't know if a winder would help.

A monopod can help for those times when a tripod is too awkward. Even better is a 'bi-pod', which is a tripod with one leg removed. Much easier/faster to set up than a tripod, more stable than a monopod.

Sunny, I have the PM90 and the PME45, I find the 90 very awkward to use. The 45 allows a much easier viewing angle. Very very rarely do I wish I had the 90 along, the only time would be when I want a shot from a higher angle, like when I'm in a crowd. (I'm only 5'6" tall so you may not have this very occasional problem) If you do get a 90, wait before selling the 45, you may not like the 90. Also polaroid backs are not usable with the 90.

I do use an old "L-grip" from the 500c/m series. It fits on the left side and has a built in trigger for the shutter. Don't know the model or whatever, but it works quite well when needed. Makes it seem easier to shoot. But I never use it for landscapes. Just more stuff to carry.

Another consideration is the newer grip, but it requires attaching the cable release to the body. Seems like a bit of bother, and the old version works just fine.

A Motor drive also adds quite a bit of weight. Even short hikes off trail could get a bit heavy after awhile, yes, no?

my .02 worth, vic... :)

Anna,

"If i did focus the suject in the middle and then recomposed wouldn't it leave me still with an out of focus result?"

Re-"aiming", focusing and then recomposing does not always work. Particularly when one wants more than one spot in focus and others out of focus. Also select focus, shallow dof, can be fussy, not on exactly the same plane when the body is rotated at the tripod point.

I do know that when shooting handheld wide open (shallow dof) If I focus the periphery then recompose the intended focal point is usually out of focus. This usually happens in very low light situations when no additional light is available to use. ie: street shooting at night using 35mm 50/1.4 wide open.

As I, and others have previously mentioned, add light for focusing. Lots of it if you are stopped down to any great degree. For about $15 you can get one of those 500 watt halogen work lites at your local home improvement center. Gets hot, but it works great unless you're shooting ice cream.

In the studio the split prism can actually get in the way at times, primarily due to the orientation of the split. I often just use the standard screen without difficulty, either with or without the 45 finder.

If you are still having a great degree of difficulty then have someone take a look at your camera. You should not be experiencing such undue difficulty.

Please let us know how it all works out for you.

Again, good luck! vic... :)

If you can focus in the central area then the split-image prism won't be much help in the corners and edges.

It can sometimes be difficult to ascertain desired depth of field when stopped down. Adding additional light just as a focusing aid helps a lot. Easy to do in the studio, just throw more light on the necessary area, for focusing only.

I also wear glasses, and alternate between the chimney finder and a pme45. The 45 does make it easier, but additional light helps for both. It also helps if you flag the camera (as well as the lens) from the lights, then the light does not get into your eyes.

Good luck! vic... :)

Philip Jeffrie, until I read your response I was thinking...sick, sick, sick, these people need help... but your hidden analogy to a thumper...

Yes the hasselblad is a true thumper;

Hardtail, no suspension,

Bore and stroke...75mm x 75mm,

Max engine speed ~75 rpm with electric supercharger

Primary drive, geared, manual (electric supercharger is available standard on some models, optional on some others)

Final drive ratio 12:1, 16:1, 24:1 or 32:1 depending on rear drive used,

Fuel system, 120, 220 or 70mm silver catalyst fuel packs,

Known concerns, severe piston and by bi-valve post ignition slap, may cause authorities to ban use in certain areas due to noise ordinances, also occasional primary valve spring seizure,

Straight exhaust, muffler not currently available as OEM or aftermarket.

Enjoy the ride...vic... :)

..."it is falling off on the sides, i can see it on the prints and i have to burn them in a lot"...

Sounds more like light leak. If you had "fall off" you would be dodging to get the same intensity as the middle. 'Extra' light getting onto the edges of the film would result in a negative with darker edges resulting in lighter edges on the print, thus the need to 'burn' in the edges to match.

Someone more versed in back mechanics can advise on what you need to do to check and replace the light traps. Just a guess.

Hope this made sense, I just woke up and haven't finished my first cup of coffee yet.

vic... :)

Which lenses do you have? I may be interested.

vic... :)

Q.G.,

Even though meant in jest guess I should have originally stated...will the 503 continue to be available in colors? ... oh well.

Have a good day, vic... :)

Q.G.

Wasn't sure, guess I was wrong. 2 maybe 3 years ago I asked a Hasselblad rep re: inadequate registration acheived when doing the remove/wind/replace back method. He indicated the 555 had the capability built in. Never did follow up on it, didn't make sense to buy yet another body for the one or two ideas in mind at the time.

Sorry, was being sarcastic re: colors, its just a tool not a toy. Don't need, wouldn't want. Although it might be kind of neat to see one in total chrome, totally reflective. Of course the lenses and backs would then also have to match.

vic... :)

"...The 503, with optional winder, can do everything the ELD and 501 thingies can do..."

I may be wrong but can't the 555 do multiple exposures without disturbing the film registration? Not that I need multiple exposures.

I just hope that 'Imacon dba Hasselblad' and Zeiss will continue to develop something interesting as previously 'promised' by Dr. Kornelius Fleischer, though it now looks very doubtful.

Aside from all that the real question is... will the 503 be available in colors? You know, we have to keep our priorities in order...:)

vic... :)

Per the British Journal of Photography, Fujifilm will no longer be

making MF cameras.

http://db.riskwaters.com/public/showPage.html?page=195980

Will holga really be the sole survivor of MF...?

vic... :)

Not Square? Have people forgotten how to read?

The V96C, 96C and the 384C are all square, with 16 Mp chips. The V96C is supposedly available for about US$10,000.

Potential downside is chip is 37mm (ok,36.9) whereas actual film area is more like 57mm. So there is a 1.5 lens factor. ie: an 80 on film will be a 120.

The 132C and the 528C backs are rectangular, 37x49, so the factor here roughly 1.16, an 80 would effectively be a 90.

So, the "Imacon doing business as Hasselblad" back is square, or not, depending on which one you choose.

$10K still buys a lot of film, but the digital back could save a lot of time. Enough to get a part time job to help pay for the back? Reckon I'll wait for a used one, or until prices drop some.

vic... :)

Oh yeah, alternatives. I used to use Tri-x and the old Plus-x. Somehow got sucked into the Ilford stream. Guess I would go back and check out the EK films, whatever they are now. I do kinda like the Ilford stuff. Papers too. Never have used anything but Ilford paper.

If they do disappear guess I would have to do a bit of experimenting, or maybe ..."go digital"... never can tell. If my work was any good I would probably despair their future demise. But as it stands I could probably have as much fun digitally, possibly more.

vic... :)

Looks like its time to invest in graphite pencils and vellum pads. Oh that's right, can't draw, the reason I got into photography in the first place. Looks like its time to invest in drawing 101...hmmm, it would be a lot cheaper.

Hopefully Ilford will be around for quite awhile. Time will tell.

vic... :)

There are two different 'looks' that I try to acheive. One is a harsh, caustic, kind of a rough tough look. The other is smooth with nice gradual tonal changes. These different looks are achieved as follows:

I use Ilford Delta 3200 if cloudy, rainy or otherwise low enough light. Processed in D-76 with a bit excessive agitation it produces a grainy look which I like for some situations. I shoot the 3200 at 1600. (For your camera simply add +1 exposure compensation and you will be shooting at ISO 1600. For a more 'nasty' look use no exposure compensation, for an ISO of 3200)

For the smoother look I use HP5+. Not being the most adept b/w processer I again use D-76 but with much gentler and less agitation than with the 3200. Produces much less grain. I've seen 16x20's from 35mm HP5+ that would amaze you. No they were not mine, I wish.

A third 'look' can easily be had with Ilford Pan-F+. Again it is very do-able in D-76. (It's so easy to get started this way). Pan-F is a much slower speed film and has much less grain.(Again you may find you want additional exposure, just add +1 compensation, this will give you an ISO of 25 instead of 50). Because Pan-F is so slow I've never use it for street photography with people.

Above all, learn to do your own film processing, it is quite EASY definitely NOT difficult. If I can do it anyone can. Yes, there are better ways to develop the above films for optimal performance. But to get started I can't think of an easier way than what is stated above. And it works!

You will learn that the 'film look' can enhance your photos. There are many ways to process your film which will give you the look you want. There is soooooo much info here on photo.net that you will go crazy trying to absorb it all. So just get started in a simple way.

If you haven't been spoiled by your 10D you will find that b/w film shooting will make you a better photographer. The amount of effort that goes into each print/roll soon makes you want to maximize your output. So you try harder on each shot, that is unless you are so spoiled by the 10D that you just give up soon after you started.

Good luck!

vic... :)

Presuming this was shot on 35mm, does the remainder of the roll reveal similar characteristics?

I would think, actually guess, that cracking would result in a darker not lighter line.

Second guess is totally off the wall but here goes... how about a static discharge?

vic... :)

Don't despair, we still have something with which to daydream. Once again, to tease and tantalize those fanciful daydreamers hereon this forum and as a reminder to Zeiss...

In January of this year (2004) Kornelius J. Fleischer stated that "At Zeiss, we currently work on an extremely impressive new lens for the Hasselblad 6 x 6 system. It will take us a while, so I do not promise it for this year's photokina."

So far they are keeping in line with that statement. To wit: Obviously was not at this years photokina.

This could mean several things. New body for the new lenses. Lenses that don't need a new body. More amusing but nonsensical hype from Zeiss.

What do you think they are going to come up with next?

vic... :)

Ok, a serious response.

Black trim 'brasses' easier than chrome. ie: chrome looks nicer longer.

On rare occasion I have heard comments to the effect that the chrome will show as a reflection in a subject easier than black.

For studio work I always drape the camera and stand with black velveteen if shooting anything reflective.

vic... :)

The red and yellow ones are good for fall photos. The chrome works great for self portraits due to its higher reflectivity. Black works best at night. Blue is best utilized for shots including water, or for those landscapes that are mostly sky. The rare gold collectors cameras are just for show and don't really work. As mentioned before the lizard skinned ones are good for wildlife.

vic... :)