|
theHUNGERian posted:If the Hassy 500 is a decent choice, all I need is a camera body, a film back, film, a finder, and a lens, right? Any reason to pick the CW over the CX or the CM? The 503CW and 501CM come with the Gliding Mirror System which removes viewfinder vignetting when using telephoto lenses. If you have the 250 then the GMS will really be useful. CW also has an auto-winder attachment available. I believe the CW and CX allow for TTL flash while the CM doesn't. If you don't care for any of the above, just look for a good 500CM.
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2020 03:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 06:34 |
|
|
The Bronicas ETR (6x4.5) or SQ (6x6) are also worth looking at and later models are a fair bit lighter than the RB67. I have an older model ETRS and love having multiple filmbacks. I was looking at also getting a Yashica 124G, but again, I think the lack of interchangeable filmback would annoy me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2020 06:44
|
|
|
theHUNGERian posted:Thank you for the input everybody. You can get a basically new 6x6 camera with everything you need to shoot it except film. It comes with a warranty too. I have one and it's great. Fully mechanical, exceot for the metered prism which has a TTL lightmeter in it. You can (and should) switch it out for the waist-level finder though, as it's much better for manual focusing, and gives you 100% frame coverage. Use an external meter if you need one. It has a (huge) focal plane shutter, and shutterslap can be an issue, but there's a mirror lock-up system installed which reduces the overall movement by a lot. I think you'd only notice it at extreme telephoto ranges or if you were doing macro work. There's a cheaper one based on the Kiev 60, which is also a great camera but it's not as modular as the 88. It is however hilariously fun to shoot with as it's a really honking big SLR. 6x6 will get you 12 exposures per roll, and the advantage of the Hasselblad/Kiev 88 design is that the magazines are swappable mid roll - so you can have one loaded with B&W and one with colour for example.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2020 07:22
|
|
|
You already have the best hasselblad lens so buy a hasselblad to take advantage of it. No other system will take advantage of it. Dont buy a 500c or any of the focal plane models (1600, 1000, 2000, 203, 205, etc). They are all incredibly unreliable and extremelt expensive to repair. Stick to the leaf shutter models (500cm, 501c, 501cm, 503 cx,503 cw, etc) or if you really want, the motor drive models (500el, 500elx, etc) Also keep in mind that yes a hasselblad will be more expensive but if you’re trying to resell it you wont lose much or any money. Other systems will be cheaper but nobody wants to buy a kiev at any price. Its also somewhat easy to find repair and service for a hasselblad. Parts are available and every major city in the western world will have an old guy who can get it serviced. Good luck getting anyone to fix a bronica. What you’ll need is a lens, body, viewfinder or prism (usually comes with the body), and a film back. I think emulsive has a comprehensive guide on the system. I think the best place to start is the 500cm body, a waist level viewfinder, and an a12 back. 80mm f2.8 is the standard lens and it is unbelievably good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2020 10:11
|
|
|
Do take note that if you do get a 500CM, the blackout might be up to 1/3 of the mirror with a 250.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2020 10:25
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:... resell ... Resale is a concern, as I have no idea if I will bond with the system. Helen Highwater posted:... macro work ... My existing camera is so dope for macro, I doubt I will try macro with film. alkanphel posted:Do take note that if you do get a 500CM, the blackout might be up to 1/3 of the mirror with a 250. I understand all the words, but not the message. Can you elaborate? alkanphel posted:The 503CW and 501CM come with the Gliding Mirror System which removes viewfinder vignetting when using telephoto lenses. "viewfinder vignetting" = "the viewfinder vignettes the film" OR "the image in the viewfinder has vignetting but the film does not have vignetting"?
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2020 15:56
|
|
|
theHUNGERian posted:"viewfinder vignetting" = "the viewfinder vignettes the film" OR "the image in the viewfinder has vignetting but the film does not have vignetting"? The latter.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2020 16:01
|
|
|
Yond Cassius posted:The latter. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2020 16:08
|
|
|
theHUNGERian posted:I understand all the words, but not the message. Can you elaborate? Basically the longer the lens, the more you see a portion of the viewfinder "disappearing" and being just black. Like a black bar coming up from the bottom or top of the viewfinder, I forgot which it was. Doesn't affect the film.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2020 16:49
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:Basically the longer the lens, the more you see a portion of the viewfinder "disappearing" and being just black. Like a black bar coming up from the bottom or top of the viewfinder, I forgot which it was. Doesn't affect the film. Got it. 1/3 of the mirror blacking out would be annoying, so I'll look into it.  and  for the input everybody. Really appreciate it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2020 17:47
|
|
|
Extra benefits of the 501 and beyond is that you also get the much brighter acute-matte screen by default. The 500c and 500cm screens are not even close to as bright, and the acute-matte is a $250+ upgrade (and the acute-matte D is a $400+ upgrade) Just make sure if you are buying a 501, to check if the seller has actually kept the acute-matte screen with it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2020 20:47
|
|
|
Here's some more to read, if you're not confused enough: start here https://emulsive.org/reviews/the-hasselblad-v-system-master-guide-overview And about the various film backs https://emulsive.org/reviews/camera-reviews/the-hasselblad-v-system-master-guide-film-magazines-instant-and-sheet-film-backs And here are some about the lenses https://emulsive.org/articles/the-hasselblad-v-system-master-guide-c-and-c-t-star-lenses https://emulsive.org/articles/the-hasselblad-v-system-master-guide-cf-cf-fle-and-ihi-lenses
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2020 20:53
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:Extra benefits of the 501 and beyond is that you also get the much brighter acute-matte screen by default. The 500c and 500cm screens are not even close to as bright, and the acute-matte is a $250+ upgrade (and the acute-matte D is a $400+ upgrade) Thanks. No matter what I decide on, since this would be a new system I was going to go with KEH, B&H, or Adorama, and I'll be sure to look for the acute-matte screen. Thanks! Wild EEPROM posted:And here are some about the lenses Yeah, I remember going through this and the MTF diagrams here (http://www.hasselbladhistorical.eu/HW/HWLds.aspx) before I bought the Hassy 250 mm SA. If I go with the Hasselblad system, a 50 mm FLE and a 100 mm Planar (along with the already existing 250 mm SA) would appeal to the minimalist in me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2020 21:14
|
|
|
Shot some 4x5 for the first time in 6+ weeks today, mix of Ektar, Portra 400 and some new Ektachrome E100. I'll probably have a look at these edits tomorrow and hate them but for now this is what I've managed to produce:  The Ektachrome really didn't come out well, I really don't think that the new Ektachrome is actually 100 ISO film, I think it's more like 80. I've shot a lot of provia and velvia in 4x5 and have always had good exposure but every time I've shot the new Ektachrome in 35mm or 4x5 it's come out too dark, it's also really contrasty even compared to velvia 50. Personally I think I'll stick with provia going forward, I've had better results with it at box speed and it seems to have better colours and exposure latitude.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2020 11:26
|
|
|
Shooting with a hood will fix that purple lens flare and probably provide some additional contrast as the veiling flare is removed.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2020 02:27
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Shooting with a hood will fix that purple lens flare and probably provide some additional contrast as the veiling flare is removed. Yeah I was trying to use the dark slide to shield the lens a bit but I also didn't want to get it into the frame so I didn't do a very good job. I was also shooting pretty much towards the sun for that shot, but I should have been paying more attention to the ground glass for the flare.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2020 03:04
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2020 15:09
|
|
|
Was just cleaning my Chamonix and man I keep finding new little details on that thing which aren't necessarily useful but show an insane attention to detail in the design and manufacture of it. It really is one of the highest quality things I own, thanks medium + large format thread for recommending it.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2020 09:44
|
|
|
Blackhawk posted:Was just cleaning my Chamonix and man I keep finding new little details on that thing which aren't necessarily useful but show an insane attention to detail in the design and manufacture of it. It really is one of the highest quality things I own, thanks medium + large format thread for recommending it. my 11x14 chamonix has copped such a loving beating in the 5 years that I've owned it. I repeatedly slammed my sliding van door on it several times thinking the door was jammed but it was smashing against the camera, there was a little bit of splitting in the wood which was easily fixed with some decent liquid cement. It's been dropped, dragged, fallen off a tripod when the tripod screw loving snapped and it still works entirely fine. It looks like it's done a lot of work. Anyone who's seen my photos knows I'm not the cleanest operator and if a huge chamonix can withstand 5 years of my abuse (not to mention being repeatedly drenched in silver nitrate) then they are loving bulletproof.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2020 10:03
|
|
|
Hah, I'll happily..ok, well maybe not happily, but at least admit that the build quality of the Intrepid is rather poor. I need to fix the bottom hinge mount for the rear element as it's now loose, but a much bigger flaw is that there's a gap in the focal coverage on the front element...and this is on a standard fujinon 150mm. Again, nothing I can't fix with a drill and a threaded insert, which I'll do when I fix the above mentioned hinge, but it's a fairly big flaw. However..for the price and weight, I still think it's worth while. It's still light proof , but it's definitely a buyer beware item. I still think I can make a lighter version myself, but it would take more spare time than I currently have.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2020 21:07
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2020 12:45
|
|
|
My chamonix is still trucking along 7 years after purchase with heavy usage and I haven't had to fix anything beyond a bit of sanding on the front to smooth out a mark from it hitting the pavement when my tripod fell over
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2020 18:06
|
|
|
I've had my Chamonix for 8 years and taken thousands of photos with it and the only thing I've had to do is adjust the screws on the front standard tilt detents. It's been blown over twice and it's totally fine.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2020 21:34
|
|
|
I had some screws fall out of the spring back and one of the three tripod mount holes fall out (in one of the windy tipovers) and Hugo sent a bag of replacement parts and spares express post free of charge without even replying to my e-mail It was on my doorstep in 2 days from China.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2020 14:45
|
|
|
Sludge Tank posted:It was on my doorstep in 2 days from China. I ordered my Chamonix on a Friday night and it arrived on my doorstep on Sunday morning. Crazy fast!
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2020 16:23
|
|
|
Not super pleased with my shots from this weekend but some came out ok, still need to work on the others to see if I can polish the turds. Both of the following are Provia 100, probably could have done with some more dynamic range.  I also shot another sheet of the new Ektachrome but at EI 80 and I was much happier with that compared to 100.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2020 20:14
|
|
|
Blackhawk posted:Not super pleased with my shots from this weekend but some came out ok, still need to work on the others to see if I can polish the turds. Both of the following are Provia 100, probably could have done with some more dynamic range. this is just not the sort of shot you can expect the dynamic range of slide film to work for
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2020 21:08
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:this is just not the sort of shot you can expect the dynamic range of slide film to work for Oh yeah, I mean not even print film would have worked in that case, but generally it was a pretty bright and contrasty afternoon because there weren't any clouds so every scene had a lot of dynamic range.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2020 21:11
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2020 21:36
|
|
|
I like the idea of a Mamiya Press Super 23. I like that it’s fully mechanical with no circuits or solenoids to fail. I like the rangefinder with adjustable framelines for 100-150-250mm and automatic parallax compensation. I like the 6x9 format. Setting it apart from the early Fuji 690 ILC’s, I like the cheap & abundant lenses and ability to change backs & formats. The back having (very limited) movements is intriguing as well. But what I don’t like is the preponderance of results I see from this camera’s lenses with color film. Searching “Mamiya press Portra” on Flickr turns up a few nice looking images and a bunch that are either too blue, affected by some magenta/purple coloration in the shadows and/or brownish red in the highlights, or just way too technicolor instead of the usually more muted palette of Portra on other cameras (especially later Mamiyas like the 6/7/RZ). But like a said there are a few good photos that pop in the search with decent colors. It might be said that their color results aren’t great because practically all the Mamiya Press lenses are single-coated, but so is the Ektar on the Medalist, and so apparently are the lenses for the G690BL and Mamiya C-series TLRs, and all of these have plenty of wonderful warm-toned image examples on Flickr. So I wonder if there are a lot of people out there with Super 23s who make crappy scans, or if the camera has lenses that just aren’t that suited to color photography. Has anyone here used them? What did you think of their results with color film?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2020 04:26
|
|
|
 Was convinced there was a picture here, but the sun had gone further than expected, not giving me the light I wanted. Then I also managed to not close my tank properly and let in a few handfuls of light. Did stand development again, but convenience aside, I can't see any real benefit on regular developement and even that is like, minimal. I pushed the other side of the filmholder by +3 and it looks like it too.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2020 07:36
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:I like the idea of a Mamiya Press Super 23. I like that it’s fully mechanical with no circuits or solenoids to fail. I like the rangefinder with adjustable framelines for 100-150-250mm and automatic parallax compensation. I like the 6x9 format. Setting it apart from the early Fuji 690 ILC’s, I like the cheap & abundant lenses and ability to change backs & formats. The back having (very limited) movements is intriguing as well... I've not used a Mamiya Press, but that's also Horseman VH-R money and the range of lenses you can get on one of those is only limited to those that use a copal 0 or 1. It's got parallax compensation, lines from 65 up to 180mm and the lines rotate for portrait as you rotate the back for portrait shots. Size looks similar, and you'd get a full range of front movements along with some back tilt. I only use a VH, as I have no desire to use a ranngefiner, but from a build quality standpoint it's real good. 
Megabound fucked around with this message at 11:04 on May 18, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2020 09:53
|
|
|
I was playing with one at the local vintage camera mall a few months ago (I went there pre lockdown with Thoren). It looked as fun as hell to use, and it was certainly built really well. I didn't buy it because the guy wanted about $500 for it with no film backs.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2020 10:00
|
|
|
Yeah the prices for VH’s on eBay have gone up up up. Mostly in valuation of the topcon lenses it seems.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2020 00:17
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:But what I don’t like is the preponderance of results I see from this camera’s lenses with color film. Searching “Mamiya press Portra” on Flickr turns up a few nice looking images and a bunch that are either too blue, affected by some magenta/purple coloration in the shadows and/or brownish red in the highlights, or just way too technicolor instead of the usually more muted palette of Portra on other cameras (especially later Mamiyas like the 6/7/RZ). But like a said there are a few good photos that pop in the search with decent colors. colors in the shadows can be indicative of lens issues for sure but i just flat out do not trust the color processing ability of most people shooting negative film
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2020 21:40
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:colors in the shadows can be indicative of lens issues for sure but i just flat out do not trust the color processing ability of most people shooting negative film Yes, a lot of them do look like flatbed scans that were perhaps done without much effort put into color correction. I wonder if even the best processing with them could equal newer lenses in color. But I’ve taken Mamiya Presses off my consideration list now. There was one available to me for a sweet price but it’s since sold. In the meantime, I’ve offloaded some gear and now have the funds that I’d originally planned to use to overhaul my Pentax 67, which has some issues that have kept it from getting used much in the past 9 months. I was all set to move forward with that, but now...ugh. I’m not sure. Gear post incoming. Could just sell the whole 67 collection. The Horseman VH is a new contender. Pentax 67: + Already have a comprehensive set of lenses from 45 to 200mm + Like the contrast, saturation, and flare resistance of the lenses. + Handheld operation is fairly straightforward. + Film is held flat + Used by Robert Adams - Heavy - Despite heft and solid construction, seems delicate, with temperamental focal plane shutter. Always kind of worried about the timing solenoids and frame counting roller. - Not a great focusing screen. - Lots of things can go wrong. Horseman VH + 6x9 with movements. I’m too futzy to mess with 4x5 holders right now, but want the ability to apply some more techniques. And I like the aspect ratio more than 6x7, at least for digital display. I was frequently cropping my 6x7 shots. + Simpler. All mechanical. + Folds up into a box for easy travel. - Will never have the same range of focal lengths. Wide end bottoms out at 27mm equivalent, and impractical for the kinds of supertele applications that the Pentax handles. - No reasonably doable way of getting wider aperture than f/3.5. VH Unknowns: How easy is it to stow and go, and set back up? Do you have to detach the lens before collapsing the bellows and closing it up? There is a rangefinder version, but is it at all practical for handheld use? I don’t mind having to grip a handle and a shutter release in the same hand, but will I be able to do everything else needed (focus, set aperture, advance film) with the other? Even if so, will it be floppy and unbalanced? I don’t know much about the lens versions. Are there newer ones with better coatings, like the Takumar - SMC Pentax divide in the P67 system? How bright and usable is the focusing screen outdoors? Does the small built-in hood do enough in most situations? SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 21:29 on May 27, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2020 20:00
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:VH Unknowns: I can clear up some of this. Stow and Go: I never remove the quick release from mine so setup takes a minute or so. Lenses do not fit in the body but attaching them is not a chore. Rangefinder mode: The camera is very solid, the bed locks into place firmly and you won't need to worry about slop. Focusing knobs, shutter, apeture are all up the front with film advance at the back. You'd still need to look at the lens to set yourself up for the final shot, and it will be a slower camera to use than your Pentax. Lenses: Horseman did a lot of variants with different names but the later lenses have better coatings, their last range was Super ER. There's some info available out on the internet in regards to all the different types. Otherwise you can use Fujinon-W lenses with them and they're fantastic. Keep in mind you're not limited to Horseman lenses at all, just what can fit on a horseman board, Copal 1 or smaller. Focusing Screen: Mine came with a Fresnel lens so it's very bright and usable. The little hood is OK for getting setup but I always use a dark cloth and focusing loupe for final focus. Front controls with focus knobs at front of bed, that's a Super ER lens, they have that barrel style cable release:  Back with film advance.  Full kit in my backpack, this is camera, lenses, 3 backs, light metre, fine focus loupe, dark cloth, cable release and spare film. Beer for scale. 
Megabound fucked around with this message at 22:14 on May 27, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2020 22:00
|
|
|
Awesome, thanks! The 67 has focusing screen/mirror alignment woes (or possibly just a miscast focusing screen with odd distortion) and it suffers for architectural subjects as a result. Direct framing through a ground glass back would eliminate the concern entirely, another point for the horseman. Although having to use a dark cloth would slow things down.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2020 22:32
|
|
|
Horseman ... obviously.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2020 02:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 06:34 |
|
|
Just got a "Schneider 135mm f5.6 235mm f11 Symmar in Synchro-Compur shutter" and a 6.8 90mm from an auction and I'm ready to take the plunge. What's the best next steps? Not looking to go all out or on the cheap. Almost all of my shooting is MF these days so I'm excited to bump up for epicly lame but cool to me landscapes with 80 pounds of gear. Here's what the 135 looks like. https://oneofmanycameras.com/collec...d-december-2017 I'm here to learn from your terrible mistakes! Thank you!
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 18:08
|
|
