peter_olsson

Roger wrote:

"Another point to consider - on my no(or tiny)-moving-mirror, no focal plane shutter cameras (a Hi-matic 9, a Mamiya Super 23, and a Sony D770) the biggest factor in making slow speeds sharp is eliminating the jarring caused by the act of pressing the shutter. "

A similar problem exist with Hasselblad, and other brands, 6x6

SLR's. The trigger is not "jarring" but pressing it still introduces

a momentum that tends to rotate the camera. This is decreased

by using the flash handle, which is connected with a cable relase

to the trigger. I'm more comfortable using the handle at

exposures of 1/60, handheld with normal lens.

If you already have a lens (the normal lens for instance) and

the pieces you are going to photograph are flat, such as the

poster you mention, the box of matches, paintings, etc, then

you will not get the (sometimes called) "wide-angle distortion"

no matter how close you work. You can prove this to yourself by

drawing a large X with rulers. Assume that the point where the

two lines in the X meets is the focal point of the lens. Then,

draw some more straigth lines through the "focal point". As you

will see, they have the same proportions both "above" and "below"

the focal point, there is no distortion. Therefore, for photographing

flat objects one only needs a lens which has a good correction

of optical distortion (as opposed to wide angle distortion) and

which gives a satisfyingly flat field of focus at close distances.

Stopped down, the Hasselblad normal lens (80 mm) meets these criteria,

perhaps with the exception of "exact" reproduction with very high

demands where the 120 makro is preferred, a lens which I myself

have never used (but it's designed for this kind of work, as you

mention yourself). The sonnar's are not

as good as the planars for close up work of flat objects. However,

even the superwide biogon 38 mm is supposedly extrordinary for

copying of flat objects, but I have never used that one either.

All in all, I was just trying to give you some options. The lens/lenses

you own today and some extension tubes will work for flat objects,

especially if you own a planar.

Scott, my camera doesn't have a built in meter either so I also

have to rely on a handheld meter. When I started to use the

incident part of the meter (sekonic 408) with slide film I had

a number of overexposed pictures. It was all due to the mistake

to always direct the incident dome towards the camera. After this

I have made it a habit to check carefully where the sun is

positioned before I measure, even when it's cloudy.

First, I check how the light is falling on the subject. If it's

a frontal light and I have the sun in my back, there's no problem.

The incident meter will give a good suggestion on how to expose

the film. If the light is coming from the side or from the back

of the subject corrections have to be made.

I always

take one reading with the meter dome facing the sun, even if

the camera is not in that direction. Then I take a reading towards

the camera (or towards where I plan to stand with the camera)

and compare the readings. If the subject has light coming from

the side and I can see, from the position where I want to take

the photograph, that the side lit parts are a significant part

of the picture, I usually expose for half between the two

readings. If the side light is less prominent in "my visualisation"

of the picture, I compensate less, and let the exposure reading

when holding the meter towards the camera to have more "weight".

If I am standing in shade and the subject is not, then I use the

spotmeter. :-)

I think my measuring technique is pretty basic, almost intuitive,

so maybe I have interpreted

your question wrong and you were asking for something else?

Scott, my camera doesn't have a built in meter either so I also

have to rely on a handheld meter. When I started to use the

incident part of the meter (sekonic 408) with slide film I had

a number of overexposed pictures. It was all due to the mistake

to always direct the incident dome towards the camera. After this

I have made it a habit to check carefully where the sun is

positioned before I measure, even when it's cloudy.

First, I check how the light is falling on the subject. If it's

a frontal light and I have the sun in my back, there's no problem.

The incident meter will give a good suggestion on how to expose

the film. If the light is coming from the side or from the back

of the subject corrections have to be made.

I always

take one reading with the meter dome facing the sun, even if

the camera is not in that direction. Then I take a reading towards

the camera (or towards where I plan to stand with the camera)

and compare the readings. If the subject has light coming from

the side and I can see, from the position where I want to take

the photograph, that the side lit parts are a significant part

of the picture, I usually expose for half between the two

readings. If the side light is less prominent in "my visualisation"

of the picture, I compensate less, and let the exposure reading

when holding the meter towards the camera to have more "weight".

If I am standing in shade and the subject is not, then I use the

spotmeter. :-)

I think my techique is pretty obvious so maybe I have interpreted

your question wrong and you were asking for something else?

photodo.com have now published MTF-tests of the Contax lenses.

http://www.photodo.com

Directions how to find the tests are given (i.e. go to the

lens test section, select medium format and then select

MTF-tested lenses, without mentioning a specific brand).

Rod, I wasn't aware of rebates when I bought my own Hasselblad,

if I had known I might have waited to see what a rebate would

offer. A free PME 51 sounds very good (I wonder if Hasselblad

is about to modify the PME 51?).

If you want to see a noticable difference between new and old

Hasselblad equipment, you can go to this URL:

http://www.hasselblad.se/press/detail.cgi?new/920654927.txt

It's the News section of the Hasselblad website, they compare

(and show pictures to prove it) the flare protection of new

and older lenses and cameras. I have noticed some flare problem

in my old CF80 so I'm tempted to get the CFE 80 some day. I like

the normal lens perspective.

You can find a lot of information on the 500-series models on

Robert Monaghans site, the Medium Format Library:

http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/index.html

He also have a must-read article on how to cure lens envy :-)

. You can click your way through his pages, somewhere there is

a lot of information that deals specifically on various Hasselblad

cameras and lenses.

Tuans large format page:

http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~qtluong/photography/lf/

$1500 with 3 lenses sounds very good but I'm not familiar with

the camera.

Matt, before you buy the flash you should try how it feels on the

camera, do not buy it on mail-order unseen. I bought my Sunpak

120J without having tried it and I was surprised how bulky the

combination Medium format SLR + Flash became. A flash like that

on your Mamiya would probably feel even worse. I think you would

be more comfortable with a flash with built in handle on the side

of your camera.

As always I'm biased towards Hasselblad...

The 203 will be lighter and smaller and since you're going for the faster lenses

the lenses will also be lighter and smaller than the equivalent Rollei lenses,

because there are no leaf-shutters. Price is high for both systems.

Does the negative carrier in V35 allow for full frame printing?

In the photo clubs Durst 305 one cannot print full frame with

the glassless negative carrier. Such a waste!

Perhaps this is a confirmation of my dissapointment with the

AF-D Nikkor 50/1.4 that I used to own. Normal lenses are my

most used lenses but I felt that the 50 lacked punch. Nowadays

I'm spoilt by the CF80 standard lens for Hasselblad, the center

sharpness of that lens from f2.8 + = is magnificent! I'm looking

into the Leica M with summicron 50, would that lens have more

punch than the Nikkor in "real picture taking"? (for me it's

B&W to 90%).

When the developer is very diluted, variations in water quality

will affect the result more than with developer that is less

diluted. In other words, distilled water should always be used

when having high dilutions.

I believe that medium format slide projection will always have

appeal to an audience. For someone who can access the right equipment, he or she will be able to dazzle the audience. The problem

is cost and future availability. It seems that all slide shows

nowadays are of the "dynamic" kind with a battery of several

slide projectors. There is never a dark spot on the screen,

a new image overlaps the other with fading etc. etc. This kind

of technique require several projectors not only to provide

overlap but also because it "consumes" plenty of slides. In the

end this costs huge amounts of money. Take for instance the

hasselblad projectors with their perspective control lenses.

They cost about $4000 each with lens. The perspective control

is necessary for some overlapping effects, for instance where

an image has the same background and only the foreground changes.

The effect is very nice, but if the images are not aligned

(perspective control lenses are necessary for perfect alignment)

it becomes disturbing. So, how to bring home money to cover the

cost? Well, as an amateur I would never get a nickel from slide

shows so I would have to be very devoted to save up the money.

For a professional it could also be difficult. When was the last

time you heard of anyone paying to see a slide show? A sponsor

would be needed.

All in all I'm pessimistic when it comes to the future of MF

slide projection.

Michael Reichmann has a workshop during that time. More info on

www.luminous-landscape.com

Just a thought: when I contact print I get this haze you describe

when I use

a thick, greenish glass at the photo-club but no problems when I

bring my

own, thinner, colourless glass with me. The difference is like night

and day. I suppose a contact print frame with a high quality

glass in it should be availabe from a well-supplied photo-dealer.

They, the filters, need the Hasselblad bayonett. If the 80 is an old C-lens,

you need the bay-50 filters. If it is a CF or the very new

CFE you need a bay-60 filter (larger than the 50). It seems that even though Hasselblad

have stopped to produce filters they are still in stock at

some places but, even better, independent filter manufacturers

such as B&W, Hoya and Heliopan make filters with this

bayonette fitting.

I had the manual (I suppose it's still around somewhere in my home)

but never used it since I found "The Hasselblad Manual" by Ernst

Wildi to give all the answers and then some. Wildi's book is now

out in a new, 5th edition I believe. Perhaps the 4th edition would

be best for you, it has a lot of details of the 503 CX.

I have the non-TTL 120J and agree with John that the flash is hardly

powerful enough for barebulb use. When using it in a room that has

a white ceiling, where the distance from floor to ceiling is 2.40 m,

I can rarely use an aperture smaller than 5.6 with Tri-x (which I

rate 250 or 320, depending on developer) when i bounce the barebulb

light on the ceiling. Outdoors (for fill flash) with reflector mounted it is a good

flash that covers the square format without vignetting with a normal

lens (I don't own a wide angle). With the reflector mounted one can

use at least f11 with Tri-x for full length portraits with normal

lens.

Mohan, so far it is not cold enough up here in Northern Sweden for

the Northern light to appear. Another problem with this phenomenon

is that it can be rather unpredictable, it takes some luck to be

on the right spot at the right time. The most common colour here is

the green N.l. but I have seen white and red as well (which was the

most spectacular of all "Norrsken" I have seen).

Since you ask about Stabil, I have one. It's the Stabil Snabb (Stabil

Speed), the long version (http://www.stabil.nu) which is 0.99 m.

So lengthwise, I supppose it qualifies as a monster tripod. But it

weighs half of Patriks tripod, so probably not quite as sturdy. Still,

I find mine to be VERY sturdy. My longest lens (Hasselblad) is 180

mm, no problems what so ever. With cable release and a slight

pressure of the other hand on the camera I even get sharp results

without mirror lock-up (this is my procedure for portraits).

I have seen a professional nature photographer use Pentax 67 on the

same Stabil model I own, but it was not a monster tele mounted on

it, the lens more looked like a short tele to me (but it could have

been a shorter focal lenght, I don't know how P67 lenses look).

My tripod head is the new Manfrotto compact pan/tilt head (1,2 kg).

This kind of negates the speed of using the tripod (it's a fast

tripod to set up and change leg angles, leg extension etc. on) so

one day I will buy a faster head, a ballhead.

Hi, I got some good answers on this question under the title

"Should fixer-clearing time on Tmax include colour removal?"

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001Gyc

<p>

It seems certain types of washaids is the way to go.

I use the Stabil Snabb (Stabil speed) large model, which is 0,99 m

when not extended! Sure, it's long but it's a great tripod to work

with, especially in the outdoors. I use it with Hasselblad with 180

mm lens, sometimes with flashgrip and a Sunpak 120J mounted. Even

indoors it's good if placed on a thick rug (the feet were not meant

for polished wooden floors...). The tripod is sturdy when fully

extended and even more sturdy when extended to an "intermediate"

position (which I mostly do due to the waste-level finder of the

Hasselblad). It's very quick to setup and take down and it's

comfortable to carry over both shoulders (no centerpost). The woold

makes it nice to handle without gloves in cold weather. It has

become very popular among scandinavian nature photographers working

with medium format equipment, for a good reason.

I suppose all the tripods you mention share the benefit of

independent setting of "leg-angles" which is one of the other major

benefits of wooden tripods. I choose Stabil because of speed of

operation, reviews in a Swedish photo-magazine, talk with the man

who makes them, built quality and price. I had not heard of Ries

when I bought my tripod but they are probably excellent (but more

expensive). The Berlebach was not recommended by a friend who found

his model to fragile in some respects (but I think he has an older

model) and the models I have seen didn't extend high enough without

becoming very heavy.

I forgot to mention that if you choose Hasselblad you should consider

the 503 CW (or the older 503 CXi) because it has through the lens

flash metering, which the 501 doesn't. Would be useful for weddings.

I have a Hasselblad 503 CXi and I don't understand what would be

so difficult about it. Don't change lenses if you cannot see through

the viewfinder (e.g. the mirror is up). Use the advance on the

camera, not the one on the film back (unless your loading film).

This is not difficult! The camera is lightweight, handles very well,

the lenses are very good etc etc. The Hasselblad is easier to use

than a 35 mm SLR, in my opinion, much thanks to the EV-settings on

the lens. There is no motor sound, since there is no motor (unless

you buy one). The modern focusing screens are very bright, and they

don't cheat you to put the focus on the wrong place (like another

screen brand that I bought for my Rolleicord) and are extremely

easy to change if you want to change from grid lines to split screen,

to the standard or whatever. The camera does not use batteries,

you will always get the picture. Even if your lightmeter suddenly

goes dead, you can guess the correct exposure (with experience and

with negative film, you will come very close).

The new Hasselblads have very good internal flare protection. My

model is very good in this respect and the newer models are even

better. Get the Hasselblad Manual by Ernst Wildi, it's cheap and

arguably the best book on any camera system (including 35 mm,

large format, APS (!) ...) and you will have good use for it even

if you go for another brand than Hasselblad.

Good luck!

This Manfrotto/Bogen swivel/tilt head that is mentioned a few times

above, is it sturdy? I realise it's application is for a monopod,

but does it lock down firmly?

(besides, what is "swivel"?? My English isn't good enough, haven't

heard that word)