Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,951   Posts: 1,557,905   Online: 943
      
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 39

Thread: Hblad questions

  1. #11
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,194
    Buy a Hasselblad and you will never look back. Buy something else and there are no expressed warranties.
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    192
    Quote Originally Posted by film_man View Post
    1. The 645 does not rotate however there was a 645 vertical back which however only gave you 12 shots, so it was pretty rubbish. There is a 645 mask for the finder but it is very tricky to find one. I though often of getting a 645 back for my blad but in the end I just crop, yes it wastes film but I still have the option of 6x6.
    Thanks. I will start with 6x6 and probably stick with it.

    Quote Originally Posted by film_man View Post
    2. By coverage what do you mean? I have a PM90 and you see the full frame. I use it with an acute matte D and it is nice and bright, I prefer it to the WLF. I do like the WLF on the tripod but once you start getting into acute angles it is inconvenient.
    Thanks. That is what I mean. I didn't know that it showed full-frame. I believe that the Pentax 67 and many (maybe most?) non-professional 35mm SLR's do not either. I will start with the WLF and eventually invest in a PM90 or something similar (I'm not familiar with the prism models). I just wanted to get a feel for how well these things are received.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    192
    Quote Originally Posted by henry finley View Post
    Just get a Hasselblad with the standard 80mm and don't nitpick about all the square vs. rectangular stuff, and all that other. Treat the Hasselblad like a box camera or an old Speed Graphic. Remember, the astronauts on the moon had NOTHING in the way of viewfinders. In essence they were carrying motorized box cameras. Do whatever re-composition in the darkroom. The Hasselblad's best feature is its small size. Other than that, the other cameras have the edge-to-edge composition features you seem to want.
    Quote Originally Posted by desertratt View Post
    In my humbug opinion you should buy a Hassie and stop worrying about the "perfect" camera. A camera is a tool. Would you get your undies in an twist about having the "perfect" monkey wrench? Or would you buy every monkey wrench made? When I photographed Elvis and the Beatles, Cary Grant and Lucille Ball did I have the "perfect" camera? I have one shot of the Beatles taken with a Nikon F and a cheap preset Spiratone 105mm f2.8 lens but it is good enough to be hanging in art museums, blown up big. it's the 'eye" that counts, not the box.
    I agree and will not nitpick about the square vs regular stuff. I think that I will just embrace the square and the Hasselblad for what it is. It has worked well for many many photographers out there.

    I'm going to start longer than 80mm though, lol. The reason being that my Flex's are normal and I'm beginning to feel the limitation. I will add a normal lens (60mm-100mm) after the initial investment.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    192
    Quote Originally Posted by vpwphoto View Post
    I also agree that "cropping" is not a sin. I like my black boarders for some work, but it's not some weird taboo to crop things to a rectangle,
    No the back doesn't rotate, so you will be stuck horizontal unless you get a 90' prism... 45' prism and WL finder are no fun to use in "vertical" arrangement.
    I'm not against cropping, I just don't do it. I know many photographers do it and they have to for some publishing and I do not look down upon them. I just really like composing and printing full-frame. It is what I'm used to.

    Quote Originally Posted by clearwater View Post
    Buying a Hasselblad to shoot non-square images makes about as much sense as buying a Porsche 911 with an automatic transmission.

    If you want rectangular, just buy a Mamiya.
    Well I said that I sometimes like rectangle. I'm not getting a Hblad just to all shoot non-square images. I'm simply exploring this possibility. But even then, I figured many people shoot non-square images but they crop. The reason for me to get a 645 back is to avoid cropping.

    Quote Originally Posted by cowanw View Post
    the waist level image is not upside down, just left to right reversed.
    Thanks, I knew that. I mean that it would be upside down when I want an eye-level perspective.

  5. #15
    cjbecker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    IN
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    742
    Images
    19
    I will have to point out that the screen of the blad does not show 100% it actually shows about 92ish% of the actual image.

    I refuse to use a 35mm without 100% but the blad is fine with 92ish%

  6. #16
    vpwphoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,109
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by clearwater View Post
    Buying a Hasselblad to shoot non-square images makes about as much sense as buying a Porsche 911 with an automatic transmission.

    If you want rectangular, just buy a Mamiya.
    I bought a Hasselblad as a tool to do many jobs.... It was common practice to use the "workhorse" of magazine cover publishing which often was a Hasselblad for rectangular purposes. Just as I am sure a few 35mm frames get turned into squares.

    Really this bravado and pigeon-holing is the stuff of "brand loyal" people rather than the professionals, and serious artist/image makers that use them to earn a living.

  7. #17
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,625
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by vpwphoto View Post
    I bought a Hasselblad as a tool to do many jobs.... It was common practice to use the "workhorse" of magazine cover publishing which often was a Hasselblad for rectangular purposes. Just as I am sure a few 35mm frames get turned into squares.

    Really this bravado and pigeon-holing is the stuff of "brand loyal" people rather than the professionals, and serious artist/image makers that use them to earn a living.
    correct. just use what works, cropping can be done any time.that can hardly be a purchase decission
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    St. Louis, Mo.
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    891
    I have owned and shot Bronica ETRSi, Pentax 645, 645n, and 645nll, Bronica S2a, EC, and Hasselblad 500cm 6x6 cameras and a Mamiya RZ 6x7 camera. I have handled my friend's Rollie SL66 and Pentax 6x7.

    My favorite medium format camera for portraiture was the RZ. My favorite camera for everything else is the Hassie 500cm that I currently own.

    I didn't buy the Hasselblad. I took it in on trade and was pleasantly surprised that all the hype was true. In my opinion, over all, it is the best medium format camera out there. The Hasselblad is very versatile, has great build quality, excellent optics, is lightweight and simply a pleasure to use. The only downside is cost.

  9. #19
    SFC
    SFC is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Ashland, OR
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by clearwater View Post
    Buying a Hasselblad to shoot non-square images makes about as much sense as buying a Porsche 911 with an automatic transmission.

    If you want rectangular, just buy a Mamiya.

    That's only valid if your rectangle proportions are always the same. If you sometimes come out with, say, 4x5 proportions, you're better off chopping a little off a square than even more off a 645 frame. And if you decide one image merits a square, by chopping a square out of 645 you end up with a pretty smallish image.
    Last edited by SFC; 02-08-2013 at 10:45 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  10. #20
    SFC
    SFC is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Ashland, OR
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by henry finley View Post
    I'll tell you what--all my life I had all these different cameras. And everytime I was out shooting, I'd bang my head against the wall over whether to turn the camera this way or that way. Once I bought a nice RB67 outfit and then I had to struggle with that stupid revolving back. I got rid of that camera after about a month. Invariably I could never make up my mind whether to go portrait or landscape, so I'd shoot both ways, and end up not printing either negative. To hech with all that. Now I shoot a square negative and deal with it later. Usually I just use a mask I cut out of offset printer's masking sheet material to use on my 8x10 easel and print the picture square. Besides a 500c is as compact a medium format camera as it comes. Who wants to drag an anvil around? Not me.
    Obviously, you've never picked up the lightest and fastest-handling 6x6, the Mamiya 6. Its lenses are as good as, if not better than the Hasselblad. I know--I have both. Just for example: the Mamiya 75 and Hasselblad 80 have comparable sharpness, but the Mamiya 75 has no distortion.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin