|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 00:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:58 |
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2017 05:21
|
|
|
  
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
Been a while since I've posted any photos because it's been a while since I've taken any photos, but these are from the summer and I'm just getting around to them so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ At the lake  The farm Awkward Davies fucked around with this message at 14:57 on Jan 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2017 03:28
|
|
|
I'm way into this one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2017 20:27
|
|
|
I'm more a fan of this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2017 03:46
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2017 14:49
|
|
|
So excited. Auction of one of my rare collectible rifles was able to cover last month's impulse bid/win of a Hassy 501CM kit.  Loaded it up with Ilford B&W and have had it hidden from the wife till I sold the rifle. So many odd protruding gizmos on the lens. My main is a D700, this will take some slowing down to get used to. Hasselblad fucked around with this message at 04:15 on Dec 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2017 04:11
|
|
|
Here's a few from recent outings     
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2017 11:45
|
|
|
Spedman, are you cropping down from 6x9s?  
SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 05:30 on Dec 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2017 05:28
|
|
|
Yes, I like the ratio and the 6x9 gives me room to get the crop I want
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 08:31
|
|
|
 Untitled by glorge, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
Is a bellows worth the extra cash over extension tubes for close-up work? Going to be solely using the 80mm that came with the kit for quite a while, but the minimum focusing distance is pretty extreme.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
Hasselblad posted:Is a bellows worth the extra cash over extension tubes for close-up work? Going to be solely using the 80mm that came with the kit for quite a while, but the minimum focusing distance is pretty extreme. How close are we talking here?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
Hasselblad posted:Is a bellows worth the extra cash over extension tubes for close-up work? Going to be solely using the 80mm that came with the kit for quite a while, but the minimum focusing distance is pretty extreme. They don't really overlap very much in terms of real-world application. So... here's a quick rule of thumb for "normal" lens designs. 1 - At infinity focus, the optical center of the lens will be at 1x focal length from the film plane. 2 - At 1:1 macro, the optical center will be at 2x focal length from the film plane (at the expense of some significant light - you'll have to do exposure compensation). 3 - You actually want to undershoot just a smidge so you have room to focus back and forth in both directions. The 80mm CF has a bit under 9mm of extension baked into the helicoid. My set of Hasselblad extension tubes is 10mm, 21mm, and 55mm, though I understand they made a set of four with 8/16/32/56 set as well. With just the 10mm you can get from "unmodified minimum focus" down to about 10 inches on a side. With just the 21mm you can get from 'about 8.5 inches" down to about 6 inches. With 31mm (10+21) you can get from "a little under 6 inches" down to "about 4.5 inches" (notice how there are sharply diminishing returns here?) With 55mm you're stuck in a very narrow range "near 3 inches on a side". 65mm (55+10) gets you very close to life size and 76mm (55+21) is pretty much "there" - the extension in the lens will let you get the few mm you need and focus around it. Obviously these numbers are scaled back a bit if you're working with a longer lens... but that'll tighten your field of view anyways. I forget the specifics, but IIRC the various Hasselblad bellows will start a little bit past 55mm and go way out to something ludicrous like 200mm or something. Great if you're using one of the dedicated macro lenses, kind of crazy with the 80mm. The bellows are a lot harder to handle and really require a tripod, but you can use the 10mm or 21mm pretty decently freehand if you're steady.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 23:50
|
|
|
Hasselblad posted:Is a bellows worth the extra cash over extension tubes for close-up work? Going to be solely using the 80mm that came with the kit for quite a while, but the minimum focusing distance is pretty extreme. The bellows gives you more flexibility in the close-up focusing range. With the tubes, you can get a similar range as Yond Cassius described but you'll have to keep swapping tubes whenever you focus out of range that each tube has, which can be irritating. I used the bellows with the 120mm and it was quite perfect, although the bellows was meant to be used with the 135mm lens.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 01:40
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:How close are we talking here? Dunno. What would get me to 1:1 or so with a 6x6 and 80mm? I like the idea of the flexibility/range of a bellows, but cannot wrap my head around the price compared to tubes. I suppose I could get a set and stack them if need be. Just adds more work for what is already a drawn out process. Yond Cassius posted:They don't really overlap very much in terms of real-world application. So... here's a quick rule of thumb for "normal" lens designs. Wow, thanks. That is a lot to absorb. I saw a couple bellows with lens included, but $1k minimum was daunting. Seems like the tubes should do. In regards to tripod, that's a given when I have done macro work with my D700 and could guarantee I'd do the same with the Hassy. Hasselblad fucked around with this message at 05:20 on Jan 1, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 05:13
|
|
|
Hasselblad posted:Wow, thanks. That is a lot to absorb. I saw a couple bellows with lens included, but $1k minimum was daunting. Seems like the tubes should do. Yeah, there's not really any such thing as handholding for 1:1, but you'll see people stick on the 10mm or 21mm alone to get that little bit extra under minimum focusing distance. It all depends on what you mean by "close up work". As a rule of thumb, you'll want to add 1/4 stop exposure for 10mm, 1/2 stop for 21mm, and 1-1/2 stop for 55mm. These are reasonably linear for the ranges you'll be working with, so for 31mm you'd add 3/4 stop, for 76mm you'd add 2 stops, etc. The 9mm of back-and-forth adjustment in the lens is pretty small by comparison, so I wouldn't worry about it unless you're doing critical slide film comparisons or something.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 05:43
|
|
|
Yeah I used to use the short ext tube to shoot portraits with my 150mm f/4 because that was the only way to get a frame filling composition. If you want 1:1 you want a bellows.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 07:56
|
|
|
The bellows are large, heavy, and also cool
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 08:08
|
|
|
Got my tubes in - 10, 21, 55. I initially panicked as I could not get the 10 to mount. Then I noticed that a couple screws had backed out juuuust enough to hinder things. Now I just need to start making exposures and figure out if I am going to do mail in or develop my own B&W and Slides. edit:
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 19:48
|
|
|
Hasselblad posted:Got my tubes in - 10, 21, 55. I initially panicked as I could not get the 10 to mount. Then I noticed that a couple screws had backed out juuuust enough to hinder things. Now I just need to start making exposures and figure out if I am going to do mail in or develop my own B&W and Slides. Definitely develop your own black and white. It's dead simple.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 22:04
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 06:23
|
|
|
LF question here. The two sections of a Schneider 90/8 appear to be properly spaced in a Linhof Synchro-Compur #0 shutter, which makes sense since that's how they came originally. The lens is not properly spaced when put into an older 'just Compur' #0 shutter. I thought that Compur shutters of the same size would be interchangeable. What am I missing? How can I properly match a lens with the correct shutter if I am buying them separately? The Linhof Synchro-Compur:   The old Compur:   A picture, from a different camera:  Frontier Trail by S M, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 04:49
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:LF question here. The two sections of a Schneider 90/8 appear to be properly spaced in a Linhof Synchro-Compur #0 shutter, which makes sense since that's how they came originally. The lens is not properly spaced when put into an older 'just Compur' #0 shutter. I thought that Compur shutters of the same size would be interchangeable. What am I missing? How can I properly match a lens with the correct shutter if I am buying them separately? It depends. Some very old lenses were individually mated to shutters at the factory, usually by making the cells a little "short" and then fitting shims into the shutter body to get the spacing exactly right. Lose the shims and you're in for an expensive trip to a machinist's shop. Similarly, for a few designs (I found a reference to the Schneider Angulon 90/6.8, not sure about yours) Schneider actually milled out a few mm of metal from the shutters to let the front element sit further back. Modern lenses are much better about their quality control, so for them, shutters should be pretty well interchangeable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 06:00
|
|
|
 Saint-Chapelle de Paris
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 11:29
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 13:53
|
|
|
Dev'd some more Portra. Had some issues that I'm not certain weren't from me loving up when I finish the roll in terms of light exposure, guess I'll be super careful and see if I still have that issue. Some Vancouver shots: Into the Mist by Trevor Zuliani, on Flickr At attention by Trevor Zuliani, on Flickr That Screamers Movie by Trevor Zuliani, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 18:52
|
|
|
Finally started developing my own b&w again. Scan-180124-0008 by Jordan Brown, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2018 00:08
|
|
|
^What would you say is the all-in cost of getting the equipment and enough supplies to dev 5-10 rolls? Riverview by Trevor Zuliani, on Flickr Riverview Tower by Trevor Zuliani, on Flickr Stairgrid by Trevor Zuliani, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2018 02:27
|
|
|
VelociBacon posted:^What would you say is the all-in cost of getting the equipment and enough supplies to dev 5-10 rolls? For equipment, it cost me about €70 for a darkbag, a Paterson tank and some small sundries (measuring jugs, stopwatch, squeegee and a thing to hang over the shower rail for drying the film).
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2018 03:54
|
|
|
B&W is pretty affordable once you have the setup. For color, 120, I'd estimate that I paid about $100-120 for materials (dark bag, dev tank, graduated cylinders and containers of various volumes, odds & ends like hanger clips and thermometers), not including a temperature control kit (homebrew or sous vide - tack on another $70-80). You can just use hot tap water and good timing, but it's easier to have water in a container being held at the correct temperature. So an initial basic buy-in is more expensive than B&W, but not by a huge amount. You definitely need a lot of containers, though. For mixing the color chemicals. Once set up, I go through a 1 liter kit of dev/blix/stab for every four to five rolls. Chem kits are $25-50 depending on brand. Some are more consistent and easier to mix, but they even a $25 Unicolor kit works fine. I haven't done any MF shooting in a few weeks, though. Recently got a Bronica PG 65mm in apparent LNIB/NOS condition, but it was a real dud of a copy...maybe that's why it went unused for so long. So I don't have a wide-normal lens right now, just a tele-normal macro. And still waiting to fix the shutter for my 90mm 4x5 lens.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2018 04:48
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2018 11:21
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 00:04
|
|
|
That makes me want to get out of my funk and shoot more.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 20:19
|
|
|
Seafoam carpet would compliment an orange cat nicely.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 05:17
|
|
|
Helicity posted:That makes me want to get out of my funk and shoot more. Go go go!
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 05:45
|
|
|
 taqueria mestiza
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 06:36
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 02:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:58 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 07:40
|
|