timlayton

January 20, 2012

Richard - any links to photos with the Imagon on your Rollei?

January 19, 2012

Russ, I think that is exactly it... It would be nice to just find the adapter, but that probably isn't real likely. Thanks for pointing this out.

Tim

January 19, 2012

Brian, thanks for the update. I am open to any ideas or suggests for soft focus on my Hasselblad V series other than the obvious Softar filters. I use them because I have to and when I compare those prints to my prints from real soft focus lenses on my other cameras, I prefer them hands down. I am hoping someone has an adapter or something that is easily obtainable.

The other option, which may not be a viable one, is if I could get some sort of adapter ring that would mount on my V series body and on the other side have a standard thread like 58mm or whatever. If I could get that I could probably build a soft focus lens and shutter. I will start a new thread to see if anyone knows of an adapter like that.

Thanks

January 19, 2012

I love my Imagon's in large format, but would love to see them with a proper Hasselblad mount. If you run across a ready-made adapter be sure to let me know.

Brian - are you talking about the Mamiya 150 and 180 f/4 soft focus lenses?

January 19, 2012

I was wondering if anyone knew about soft focus lens options for the Hasselblad V system other than the Softar screw on filters? I am not a machinist so making a custom coupling to make a soft focus lens work is probably not an option for me. I am hoping that I have overlooked something obvious and that a proper soft focus lens is actually available.

Thanks

November 24, 2011

I purchased the 903SWC that was in literally mint condition and I am loving the camera. I've now shot several rolls through the camera and I will never part with this camera. I love the freedom this camera gives me in terms of size, portability, and of course the quality goes without question. Without question this is my travel camera and all things wide angle. So far I am just using sunny 16 rule in coordination with the hyper focal markings on the lens and let it rip. In a dozen rolls of Tri-X in many different scenarios, I haven't got a bad negative yet.

Here are a few photos that I have scanned so far on my Flickr set at http://www.flickr.com/photos/timlaytonsr/sets/72157628115853858/

The 903SWC was a great addition to my 503CW system in my opinion. For those times when two cameras are appropriate, it is nice to have the small 903 read for wide angle and use the 503 for telephoto or normal shots. I do a lot of studio work with my 503 and I couldn't think of a better tool for that type of work.

In regards to the CFV back exploration, my experience didn't go well and after reflecting about things I am sure there were some variables or issues with the demo gear and that is to be expected from time to time with demo equipment. However, I did get enough captures to fully evaluate and explore the idea of using the CFV for travel and if I could match the look of my CFV images to my film. Long story short, for now I decided to continue to stick with film and be open to reviewing a digital back in the future if I have a compelling business reason to pursue it. Until then I will keep cranking out quality work with my 503 and 903 on my trusty A12 film backs.

Tim

November 19, 2011

Leigh, I agree with you in that I was not able to find any google hits as well, hence the reason for the post here. My goal with the post was to query owners/users of CFV backs like you to see if this is reliability is a common problem or not. You have not had problems so that is good to know.

I do not believe that my issues were a result of operator error as you suggest. I suspect that the demo back I received was probably flaky and I think that is why support suggested sending in my bodies for a spec check to eliminate them as a variable. For me, that is not an option at this time because I use my 500 series bodies almost on a daily basis.

I have seen you post a lot of quality threads here so I respect your input and comments. I am just going to let this cool down a little and then review my options again in the future. I would also like to use the CFV back on my 4x5 view camera. I actually bought an adapter and I am planning on keeping it for a potential future purchase. I think if I am patient I will be able to find a quality back at a good price in the future. For now, I just need to get my work done and research this at a later time when I am less busy.

I have a friend that has an anniversary edition 503CWD with the original 16MP CFV back and chrome 80mm F2.8 CFE for sale. He lives about 800 miles from me, but he says it literally looks like new and has all the original packaging, manuals, cables, etc. I verified the serial number to be a 2006 model. Do you or anyone here have any idea what that system may be worth? He is asking $6,800 for the entire kit but I have no idea if that is a fair price or not. I know what it sold for new, but that doesn't mean much.

Thanks,

Tim

November 19, 2011

Michael, thanks for the reply. I did mention in the above thread that I spent hours on the phone with tech support (two different sessions). They suggested sending in the camera bodies in for a spec check. You are right, they are responsive and professional, however after a 14 hour day and the endless "random strangeness" I just threw in the towel. I am intimately familiar with the configuration and operation of CFV backs at this stage of the game and I also fully understand the mechanical workings of the 500 series cameras. It really should not be this hard.

I have been a photographer for about 30 years and I am a very technical person as well. My logic is that if I was having this much trouble then I would likely be in for a lot of future frustrations and troubles when trying to use the equipment in a production manner. At a price point of $17k that isn't very desirable to me. I just want to take photos and make prints, not become a troubleshooting engineer. It really was a huge disappointment.

My suggestion for Hasselblad would be to post some getting started or "how to" videos on YouTube for potential buyers and those working with Hasselblad reps. I think that would cut down on most of the issues or obvious obstacles. It really shouldn't be that hard and for me to have such issues on two different tests (one a few months ago and then this current one) this tells me that these backs are either very touchy with the 500 series cameras or I received two faulty units and I have really bad luck. Either way, I am done with it for now.

I am just going to take Tetenal C-41 kits on the road with me and develop my color film that way and doing my Tri-X and T-Max on the road is easy. The advantage of the CFV back for me was the elimination of the developing and scanning steps while on the road, but reliability is much more important than a faster workflow. My goal was to never replace film in my photography, just leverage the CFV back in cases where time was an issue. I never got to the point in the testing process to see if I could even come close to matching the look of my film images with the CFV back or not. That will have to remain a mystery I guess. The great news is that my 500 series bodies with A12 backs do exactly what I need them to do and they do it flawlessly.

Tim

November 18, 2011

David, I appreciate it. I am not worried about it any longer. I am just more curious if others have had a reliable experience with the CFV backs or not. It is a testament to engineering to say the least, however it has to be reliable at that price point. Maybe I am the exception, rather than the rule hopefully.

The few images I was able to successfully capture were awesome, however you know the rest of the story. I have two 500 series that could benefit from it as well as a 4x5 view camera, so it was terribly disappointing to say the least. I am going to probably just monitor the net for a used setup and try again at a later time.

Tim

November 18, 2011

Leigh, I was making sure my exposure time for each image via the camera settings menu. For example, if I was going to make a 5 second exposure, I set the camera to 6 seconds. When I talked to Hasselblad support he explained to me that is how they control the activation of the sensor.

I literally spent 14 hours with the back and got 4 exposures that were valid. The most frustrating part of the entire deal was the fact that things would seem to change with no logic. For example, when I first setup in the studio I was getting some strange under exposed images so after about an hour I decided to take the gear outside and validate I could take some daylight exposures. I did and that worked perfectly as described in a previous message above. Then I went back in the studio and tried my 4 second exposure and back to the strange problems again. Then out of nowhere it started working and I got my first two images. I decided to go check them out in Phocus and they turned out great. I literally came back and inserted the CF card and the random problems started up again. I literally had not touched or moved the camera gear. I talked with support several times throughout the day and by 5pm I thought I had a solid setup so I went and purchased a bunch of flowers at my florist to photograph. When I got back I took the first two exposures without problem. After I worked with those in Phocus I came back to the camera and the random issues started all over again and I threw in the towel. I literally spent hours on the phone with support chasing down different scenarios using different body and lens combination in addition to connection modes (sync cable, 500 series, etc).

I can only conclude from my two different tests that the back, for whatever reason, is unreliable for exposures longer than 1 second and it is a very touchy and volatile configuration prone to a lot of random errors. It was literally the most frustrating day I have had in years. I had really high hopes for the back, but there is no way I can fork out that kind of capital after having two different sets of bad experiences which is very disappointing to me. I had even purchased an adapter for my 4x5 view camera which I will have to return. The idea and concept is awesome for 500 series owners, but the reality of my two different experiences was not good. I was really looking forward to being able to add the CFV back to my film workflow for my upcoming extensive travel projects, but I will just rethink a potential solution to a remote film solution which will probably cost a lot less than $17k.

I would still be interested in hearing from CFV owners to learn if they have a consistent experience with their equipment for exposures longer than 1 second. I may have received two bad apples for my testing, but at this point there is no way I can make a purchase based off of my experience.

Tim

November 18, 2011

David, thanks for the reply. Yes, I was using slower shutter speeds (anywhere from 2s to 30s). I was doing some macro studio work. I tried several different lenses (80 CF, 120 Makro CF, 50 CFi) with and without extension tubes and on two different bodies (503CW and 500C/M). I came to the conclusion, not sure it is right, but based off of two different tests I could never get the CFV-50 to operate reliably when using slower shutter speeds. This alone was a deal breaker for me because of my style of photography. To test my theory I stepped outside and fired off several exposures at f/8 1/125 to f/11 and 1/500, etc and had no problems. Unfortunately for me that isn't what I needed to work on.

Thanks,

Tim

November 18, 2011

Per Hasselblad tech support I used the sync cable as well as the 500 series options. Everything from misfires to magenta casts to severe under exposures. I literally would take a couple exposures and then for no known reason couldn't get a valid exposure again for many tries or in a couple cases, for hours. I was running 361 on the firmware which was the latest release until later today 365 was released. This is my second round of testing with the CFV-50 backs and the first experience wasn't much better. I discounted the first test as a fluke and so I tried again.

I had so many different issues that I didn't want to dive into the specifics because of the amount of time it would take to type it all out and provide the necessary details. At this point I have it packed up and have no interest in troubleshooting. I was looking for some general feedback if owners and users of the back have a reliable experience compared to my two very poor experiences. I am just shocked that a $17,000 piece of equipment would have this much trouble and on two different times. I am hoping my two experiences are an isolated incident.

Tim

November 17, 2011

I am hoping to connect with CFV-50 owners to see if I can understand why I've had so many issues with the CFV-50 and 500 series bodies.

I received an evaluation unit from Hasselblad to review for consideration of purchase. I've had nothing but issues all day with the setup. I was using it on a 503CW and a 500C/M (both of which are known good cameras).

I could go through the mountain of issues and random problems but that is not what I am hoping to resolve. I am wondering what others experiences have been with the CFV-50 on a 500 series camera? Is my experience today a one-off random day of horrible luck, or is this the norm for this gear?

My impression based off a 14 hour day that was one frustration after another is not very good. There is no way I could rely on this configuration for any type of production job based on my experience today. The thing that concerns me is that I have had nothing but perfect performance out of my 500 series bodies shooting film over the years and I find this experience today to be shocking and unlike any other Hasselblad experience I have ever had. When I think of Hasselblad, I think of high quality professional equipment that is reliable, but unfortunately I am left with an aching back and a headache based off a long day of frustration.

Thanks,

Tim

November 16, 2011

I wanted to give everyone an update. I went through the process of using the 903SWC, Mamiya 7 with 43mm, and 40mm CF on 503CW. As we all know, there are no right or wrong answers and most of this emotional versus a technical need. I enjoyed all three of these cameras because they all produce high quality professional images. Each rig has its sweet spot for me personally and that was the basis of my decision.

First a little background. I own a 503CW with a full lineup of glass which now includes the 40mm CF as well. I love this camera for many different reasons and have used it as my "go to" medium format system when I want or need the 6x6 format. I use this camera for everything from studio macros to landscapes and even street photography. The Mamiya 7 Rangefinder is a fantastic 6x7 camera that produces professional images with ease. The portability, high quality glass and internal metering makes this camera a top-notch travel, landscape and environmental option for me. Of course it is a no go on closeup work, but that's okay. Then there is the 903SWC and the 38mm Biogon glass. The super small compact size of this camera coupled with the high quality images makes this an ideal travel, street, urban camera for me. In short, I have use for all three of these cameras and for different reasons based on the project, environment or situation. Then couple in the fact that the 503CW and 903SWC can take a CFV digital back if desired, makes these cameras even more timeless then they already are, if that is even possible.

I started down this path because I am getting ready to do some significant and very frequent travel work. I could have easily used any one of these cameras as the solution without a problem. However, I wanted a very portable and easy to transport light weight setup to take with me on airplanes and to keep by my side during my travels. As you know from my original post I tried a 1988 903SWC from a local dealer that used to be a Hasselblad dealer. The camera was in pretty rough shape, but it did function perfectly because I ran lots of film through it. I decided to buy from KEH and got one that was 10 years newer and was in excellent condition. The nice thing about KEH is they have the 14 day return policy and a 6 month warranty on their equipment. For a little more money I thought this KEH camera was a no brainer.

If any of your know me, I am a film shooter and have been for over 30 years. I have only played around with digital when I had a no-cost opportunity. Based on my future travel requirements I am working with Hasselblad right now on a CFV-50 that I can use with the 903SWC as well as my 503CW and to include my 4x5 view camera. I found an adapter for my graflok back that will allow me to take single images or up to 5 for stitching from the LF camera. I have no idea what the quality will be, but I will be giving it a try.

My plan is to potentially use the CFV-50 for my travel images as the primary medium and keep lots of Tri-X and T-Max with me to use when it is an option and can develop, scan or make wet prints on my own timeline. I simply don't have the ability to expose, develop and scan my negatives on these travels in a timely manner. The CFV back for the 500 series analog cameras is an incredible option for Hasselblad owners. I am perfectly happy with shooting film till the end of my days in the 500 series, but in this specific case it is sadly not an option for me. I do have the option of creating a digital negative from my CFV digital files in the event I capture a "winner" on the back and didn't get it on film. I do a lot of contact printing both traditional large format silver gelatin and alternative (salt, van dyke, Pt/Pd, etc) which helps soften the blow of the digital negative approach.

It will be an interesting test over the next two weeks with the two cameras and the CFV-50. My goal is to get my digital CFV-50 images to look as close as possible to my analog film images so I am hopeful that is even possible. Photoshop and plugins, here I come. I will post again after I have some first hand experience to share.

Tim

November 14, 2011

Ron, thanks for letting me know. I do believe there is a certain magic or charm with the 903swc. Using the hyper-focal settings on the lens I am able to nail very sharp images every single time. I think there is a free type of feeling that is simplistic and easy that you get with the 903 that I don't get with any other camera. Of course the image quality is crazy good too. Do you notice any differences in your photos between the 40mm and the 38 on the swc? I would be curious if you put a few prints in a stack and could select the swc images over the 40mm ones. I am guessing that is not likely. It really is a unique camera that produces top-notch images.

A friend just ordered a CFV 50 for his 500 series and is going to mount this on the 903. I am interested to see what that is all about. For me personally, I shoot Tri-X about 99.9% of the time and love the results. I wish the images from the digital backs looked like my film images.

Thanks,

Tim

November 14, 2011

Rob, did you notice any difference in your work between the 903SWC vs. the 40mm? What type of photography do you do?

Tim

November 13, 2011

Frank, thank you. I really like your Liege Guillemins train station gallery. The lines, shapes, forms, etc just draw you in. Very nice work.

I am headed to Chicago tomorrow and I have the 903SWC packed along with a Mamiya 7 and the 43mm lens ready to go. I am going to use both and then hopefully have enough experience to make an educated decision. I may be able to get a 40mm for my 503CW and that would round out the experience if I can do that. I am going to try and do some city skyline type photos as well as some inner city/architecture if time permits.

I will circle back later in the week once I return back home and develop my films.

Thanks,

Tim

November 13, 2011

All good points.... I do agree that it is an impossible question. The decision to purchase or not is probably mostly emotional because after thinking about it and reflecting on the comments I have even more options than I first considered. I could just buy the 903 because I want to and leave it at that. It would make a great travel camera and it fits my style of photography. I could add a 40mm lens to the 503 and be just fine. That option is heavier and bigger but there is always a con to any choice. I could get a Mamiya 7 Rangefinder, enjoy it within the context of a Rangefinder and just do a 6x6 crop when I want the magical square. All of the above options are great which makes the decision so difficult.

I scanned and just posted a few of my photos from the 903 on my Flickr stream at http://www.flickr.com/photos/timlaytonsr/sets/72157628115853858/

Tim

November 13, 2011

Rob, both excellent tips. I was wondering if you or anyone else had an opinion about the 903SWC vs. just getting a 40mm CF for my 503CW? I am aware of the functional differences and different technologies such as no mirror, compose through eye piece or optional ground glass/prism and of course the highly acclaimed 38mm optics. After three days of using the 903 I am very comfortable with its use and applicability to my style of photography. The camera is a joy to use and even smaller than my 503.

I am just starting to make my proof sheets and hopefully prints in the next couple of days so that will tell me more hopefully too. I would be interested to hear from anyone that has gone through a similar soul searching exercise and what you think the differences are in practical terms between the two approaches. There is no bad option here, just a choice. I think the 40 lens weighs as much as the 903 if I remember correctly.

Thanks,

Tim

November 12, 2011

I have an opportunity to pick up a 903SWC that belonged to a local Hasselblad dealer. The camera was part of their rental program so as you might guess, it looks like it. I have used it for the last three days and have ran several rolls of film through it without a problem. The lens hood is missing and the rubber cup on the eye piece is missing, but both can be replaced.

Here is my quandary. I can pick up this camera for $2800 or get one in mint condition for $1100 more. Based off the serial numbers both were made in 1988. The question is this: is the mint condition camera worth the extra $1100 in your opinion? I am adding the superwide to my 503CW family.

Thanks,

Tim

September 11, 2011

It sounds like the 28 and 35 are both equally great and it is just a matter of what focal length I want. The only differences I can tell are the max aperture f/2.8 vs f/2 and min at f/22 vs f/16 and whatever other technical differences there may be, it sounds like they are both fine lenses. I just need to think though the focal length difference for what I want to do first and I am sure there are no bad choices it would seem.

Thanks

September 11, 2011

Phillip I normally shoot my Mamiya 7 with the 43mm which is the equivalent of about 21mm if I remember correctly. I needed something smaller than the M7 and the autofocus of the G2 should be great for those quick shots I am missing right now. For my fine art work I shoot large format almost exclusively because much of what i do is closeup/macro type work and I need the large negatives because I make very large prints for my clients. I personally love my photos from the M7 the best from any camera and I am really looking forward to using the G2 and taking advantage of the smaller system and high quality glass. I sort of see the G2 as a smaller version of the M7 with some nice feature enhancements. I am excited about getting a lens for it next week. I plan on using the G2 on hikes, street photography, urban shots, etc.

September 11, 2011

I wanted to reach out to the group here and see if anyone owns or has used the 28mm and 35mm lenses for the Contact G2? I just piked up a G2 body in excellent condition and need to get a lens. For my style of photography I like wide angle the best so I thought I would start here first. Any input or comments on your experience between the two lenses would be appreciated.

Thanks

Tim

September 10, 2011

Dave, thanks for the reply. I appreciate it. I have indeed been very happy with the 3880 and I will continue to use if for 16x20 and smaller because it just makes sense to do that and the quality is excellent. For me personally I would only use the 7890 for anything at 20x24 or above. I still print the majority of my prints in the darkroom and have slowly been printing more on the inkjets over the last couple of years. I have finally settled in on the Canson Baryta paper to most closely resemble my silver gelatin prints with Hahnemuhle coming in a close second with their Baryta FB paper. I am curious if you do much b/w and what your favorite paper is?

Once I get my 7890 next week I will definitely look closely at the shadow details and see if I need to adjust my ICC profiles. I am prepared for the size of the printer... I print on the 9890 at my pro lab and that printer is absolutely huge but those 44" prints are awesome. No wife at home and the 7890 is going to the studio so no worries there!

Tim

September 10, 2011

Dave, I am considering the Epson 7890 very seriously because I need to do 24" prints. I am wondering how you like the printer overall? Did you have an Epson before? I currently use my 3880 like a workhorse to crank out 16x20 and 17x22 on a daily basis. I specialize in b/w photography so the 3880 with the advanced b/w features has been a great fit for me and produces beautiful b/w prints. I was wondering if you do any b/w and how you would compare the prints on the 7890? Any comments are appreciated. You mentioned the Epson Golden Ticket promo. What is this?

Thanks,

Tim

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by timlayton