Thomas Bertilsson
Member
Hello,
I recently had the pleasure of using a Hasselblad 500C/M with a Planar 2.8 lens. Wonderful camera indeed. I used it alongside my own older Rolleiflex, and was surprised to see after I developed the negs that the actual area of the 6x6 negatives were smaller while exposed in the Hasselblad.
Is this a commonly known thing, and if so, is there a reason for it? It seems to me that the larger the negative, the better the quality.
The difference is only a couple of millimeters in all four directions, but nonetheless surprising!
Thankful for enlightenment,
- Thomas
Saint Paul, Minnesota
I recently had the pleasure of using a Hasselblad 500C/M with a Planar 2.8 lens. Wonderful camera indeed. I used it alongside my own older Rolleiflex, and was surprised to see after I developed the negs that the actual area of the 6x6 negatives were smaller while exposed in the Hasselblad.
Is this a commonly known thing, and if so, is there a reason for it? It seems to me that the larger the negative, the better the quality.
The difference is only a couple of millimeters in all four directions, but nonetheless surprising!
Thankful for enlightenment,
- Thomas
Saint Paul, Minnesota