paul_lasiter1

Check the previous threads. I have a CF180 and have also extensively used a CF150. The 180 IMHO is definately sharper than the 150--not that the 150 is a bad lens. I use the 180 for close portrait shots (i.e., head and shoulders, etc.) and generally have to use a Softar on it or my clients find the pictures "too sharp"--it brings out every imperfection. I also use the lens for some small pet photography, and it is incredibly sharp. The lens has a good very good feel to it and is a newer design than the 150. Everything else being equal, I would go for the 180. In a previous thread, one reader was trying to decide whether to trade his 150 for a 180. He rented a 180 and liked it so much he bought it! I believe the camera shop credited his rental payment towards the cost of the new lens. Hope this helps. The 180 lens is more expensive than the 150 both new and used.

I have recently discovered that Sailwind makes a magnetic adapter for the Hasselblad ProShade which allow one to use Leon high key and low key vignetter sets. For a catalog, you can call Sailwind at 1-800-868-3686.

I have recently purchased a used Hasselblad ProShade and wish to make a vignetter for use with this shade. I plan to get some frosted acetate and cut a small hole in the center making the hole slightly larger and larger until I obtain the effect that I desire. Is this a good plan? Any hints?

 

<p>

 

Thanks.

Paul Lassiter

I use a 60, 100, and 180 for weddings. I probably use the 60 the most of these three lens for my wedding work. The 60 is great for group shots, tight quarters etc. There are, however, times when a 40mm would be nice--e.g., tossing of the bouquet, "rice" throwing, etc. Other wedding photographers use 50, 80, and 150 with good success. I just like the 100 more than the 80. Another close friend of mine has a Planar 80mm as her only lens, and she does some might fine wedding work.

 

<p>

 

If you are only going to get one lens, I would opt for the 80.

 

<p>

 

/s/ Paul Lassiter

All CF lenses are T* meaning they are multicoated. Later C lenses are also T* (T* being the designation for Zeiss multicoated). Earlier C lens are not T* lens. The T* lenses have a greater resistance to flare than non T* lenses due to the multicoating.

 

<p>

 

C lenses have a self-timer built into the lens (the V setting, I think). They also have a different filter size than the CF lenses. Most CF lens have a Bay 60 filter mount (this makes its possible for you to use the same filters and accssories on these lenses).The C80 lens that comes with the 501 is really a CF lenses without a few of the bells and whistles that are incorporated into CF lenses --i.e. the 80 C has no EV interlock, the depth of field labeling is not in color, and there is no F setting for use with Hasselblad F series cameras).

 

<p>

 

I can not speak to the actual performances differences between C and CF lens. I think the difference between T* and non T* lens would matter more than whether the lens was a C or CF. The prices for used C lenses, however, are generally much less than for used CF lenses, which reflects the age difference between these lens. I believe that Hasselblad stopped making the C lens in the very early eighties and replaced such lens with the CF series.

 

<p>

 

Hope this helps.

I have used both a Metz 60CT-4 and the Hassy D-Flash in TTL mode with my 503cxi with excellent results. The Metz, of course, has an auto mode (whereby it relies on its own sensor) and a TTL mode where the flash relies on the signal from the camera. I have used both these modes and have had better success with the TTL mode--which makes sense.

 

<p>

 

On both the Hassy D Flash and Metz in TTL mode, you have to be careful to adjust the film speed on the Hassy body to compensate for subjects lighter than medium gray or darker than medium gray. For example, I will reduce the film speed setting when taking a picture of a bride in white and increase the film speed setting when taking pictures of a groom in black. For average colored subjects, no adjustment is needed. I have not used either flash with transparency film as I generally use studio lights with a flash meter when I need flash with E-6 film. BTW, Hasselblad recommends the SunPak TriPak II Battery as an external battery for the D-Flash. The manual does not tell you, however, that you first must get a three to two reducer plug so that the SunPak battery pack can plug into the D-Flash.

If you decide on going with the Hasselblad system (which I did), then be prepared to spend some serious money ($5,000 minimum) even if you go with used equipment. When figuring your cost of admission, you should consider that you will ultimately not be happy with just one lens. At least, I wasn't.

 

<p>

 

As far as sharpness goes, I would put my Hasselblad CF100 and CF180 lens on top of the sharpness list when compared with about any other MF lens that I have used (including the Mamiya RB67 180). These are very sharp lens.

 

<p>

 

The square format has pro and cons--but, it has grown on me. For example, it is an advantage to me when taking wedding pictures to not have to worry with turning the camera and flash on its side to take verticals. Moreover, square pictures IMHO look just as good in an album as rectangular pictures and offer some unique opportunities for composition.

 

<p>

 

Buying a camera is a personal matter involving many choices. The best way to make the decision is to try out different cameras and see what works best for you (and fits into the budget). Buying a Hasselblad will not automatically make you a great photographer. It is a camera system, however, that will not limit your creativity (unless you require autoexposure). There are other good choice depending on what you need including rangefinders like the Mamiya 7 if SLR capability is not important. Have fun!

I recently have been having problems with my 503cxi Hasselblad (really the A12 back). After I take a shot and advance the film, the shutter will not trip. To be more exact, the shutter release button will not release. After a great deal of experimentation, I have traced the problem to the A12 Back. When I remove the A12 back or replace it with another back (after removing the dark slide, of course), everything works correctly.

 

<p>

 

Have any of you experieinced this problem? This problem was random, but it is becoming much more frequent. Any suggestions? Is this a good time to send the back to Hasselblad for service (it is about 14 months old).

 

<p>

 

Thanks!

/s/ Paul Lassiter

Before you purchase a used RB67 make sure you check out the seals around the film back. These tend to get tarry (disintergrate into a sticky mess) after a while and need to be replaced.

 

<p>

 

The 180 is a great lens, I would not recommend the teleconverter route.

I have the Hasselblad flash bracket for my 503cxi and use a Metz 60CT-4. I use the Hasselblad over the flash adapter (Product #85344), and I am very pleased with the results. This setup does attached the flash securely to the shoe on the flash bracket and also moves the flash a pleasing distance from the lens/camera. Before I purchased this setup, I too was concerned about whether it would offer enough security to hold the Metz CT4. It does so quite nicely.

220 film is slighter thinner and only has backing paper at the ends. There also may be a difference with how the film is treated in processing depending on the lab. Some labs are setup primarily to handle 120 and take a shortcut or two in handling 220. For example, the lab may be setup to hang 120 strips in the processor. For 220, they may fold the strip over a hanger which has the potential to produce some uneven development over the middle frames. Check with you lab on this if you detect a problem.

 

<p>

 

A good friend of mine never shoos 220. His rationale is that if you or the lab botches a roll, it is better to lose 10 or 12 exposures rather than 20 or 24. I've lost a few rolls of 120 to lab errors and was glad that the rolls weren't 220. I still, however, shoot 220 on occasion because of the convenience and have not had a problem.

Always use the PC (x-sych) terminal on the lens--the other terminal is not linked to the PC terminal on the lens shutter, and your flash pictures will not turn out. If you are coming from 35mm focal plane cameras, it is easy to make the mistake of using the connector on the body and not the lens.

One advantage of the Metz 45CT over the 60CT is that Quantum makes a turbo battery pack that will work with it. The Quantum battery is considerably more compact (can fit easily on your belt) and is generally more manageable than the larger battery of the 60CT. Quantum does not make a batery for the 60CT.

 

<p>

 

Given that a flash has to produce twice the light to give you a one f-stop advantage, you don't really sacrifice that much with the 45 versus the 60CT unless you are taking wedding, etc. in large churchs wil light absorbing walls. More light is always better, everything else being equal, but the extra weight of the 60CT battery over the 45 is the tradeoff here.

Mark:

 

<p>

 

I sometimes experience the same problem you do as far as color balance being off in the prints I get back from the lab. In fact, I recently I took some studio type pictures with 120 Fuji NPS of some guinea pigs (for a newsgroup calendar)on tulip and then medium blue background paper with monolights (White Lightening Ultras). I trued up exposure by taking several Polaroid test exposures. I also shot a roll Velvia--adjusting for the different ISO. When I got the proofs backs, the colors and exposures were all over the board on the prints which I assumed was due to the proofs being machine made (the negatives looked perfect). I then got the lab to make enlargements of several of the prints/negatives and provided them with large samples of the background papers--all to no avail. The prints seemed off by about a stop on some of the shots (washed out pictures with no matching of the background). Moreover, some of the enlargements were not even as good as the proofs as far as color fidelity and enlarger exposure. By the way, the Velvia slides were right on money. I had several regular R-type prints made of these slides, and they were fantastic.

 

<p>

 

These prints were done by the premier lab here in Raleigh and were commercial grade not machine prints. It has been suggested that this was just a bad day at the lab, but it is a problem that crops from time to time. Unfortunately in this case, i was up against a dealine and didn't have time to have the prints redone.

 

<p>

 

On occasion, I have printed my own color prints, but it has been very time consuming. There are two ways to screw up: messing up the exposure in the enlarger (too long/too short) and getting the color balance off.

My Hassy A12 backs are relatively new, and I notice the same play or looseness that you describe. The looseness, however, seems to be back and forth rather than toward or away from the body. In fact, the slots in the back seem to be a very slight bit wider than the meter prongs from the body that slot in them. I assume this is in the design. In any event, my shots are tack sharp.

 

<p>

 

By the way, I hope these cameras are solidly built. I try always to pick my camera up by the body and support the lens, but in the heat of battle, everything goes including, on occasion, picking the camera up by the prism viewfinder.

 

<p>

 

Hope this helps.

I upgraded from the standard Acute Matte that came with my 503 to the Acute Matte D with a microprism/split prism. I find that this has been helpful with focusing. The Acute Matte D is brighter on the edges than the standard Acute Matte with similar brightness in the center. The slit image is fairly small but can be helpful in focusing.

 

<p>

 

It is highly unlikely that that you can get a good/discounted price on the Acute Matte D---they haven't been around long enough. You can probably get a trade-in on your old Acute Matte Screen--I suspect in the $100 range. Hawaiian Camera is great. Del Camera is also a good place to try.