Finally gave in and bought a Hasselblad

[36cm2]

Proud new owner of a 500cw with 80 and 150 mm lenses. My love affair with photography started with my dad's Rolleiflex, moved to an F100 to learn the basics more easily, returned to the Rolleiflex for larger print quality, then leapt to a 4x5 field camera for even more. While the Rolleiflex will never be replaced as #1 in my heart, I felt a need for a strong medium format kit with interchangeable lenses that I could travel with. Hence the Hassy. The 4x5 is still king of quality, but I'm hoping that this new kit will keep me happy in the 11x14 and 16x20 print range.

A couple of questions for you. I have a prism finder (not metered, I meter separately anyway), but was thinking about getting the waistlevel finder (which parallels how I work with the Rolleiflex). Do long-time users prefer one over the other and why?

Also thinking about completing the lens set. I shoot primarily landscapes. All black and white. Would you agree that a 250 Sonnar T* and a 2x converter (can't afford the Hasselblad one, this will be a Vivitar or Kenko) will round out the kit?

Thanks.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

...Also thinking about completing the lens set. I shoot primarily landscapes. All black and white. Would you agree that a 250 Sonnar T* and a 2x converter (can't afford the Hasselblad one, this will be a Vivitar or Kenko) will round out the kit?

Thanks.

Welcome to the club and enjoy your new camera.

Wouldn't you need something wider than you've got for landscapes? I'm surprised you're aiming for something longer instead.

 

[Q.G.]

I mix prisms and waist level finders.
On a tripod, tackling a static scene, i prefer the WLF. When going walkabout, i tend to use the prism more.

The 250 mm would indeed be a fine addition to the set.
But that from someone who likes the 250 mm focal length a lot. Other people may like other things.

The Vivitar or Kenko converters are not the best you can do (a bit of distortion near the edges), but still good.

Compare the results you get to your 4x5"s, and though i too think there is no substitute for 'real estate', you may be surprised at how well that miniature format does.

 

[36cm2]

Ralph, you would think that, but I find myself reaching for longer lenses much more than wides. That being said, I'm open to people's thoughts on wide angle lenses as well.

 

[Q.G.]

For landscapes, i think it's either as wide as possible (40 mm Distagon would be good. The CF FLE version is a good lens. 38 mm Biogon if you don't mind losing TTL viewing) to get in as much as possible of the landscape, or indeed long, to pick out details.
Myself, i like the details better than the look-at-everything-at-once landscapes. It's all too easy to lose 'focus', to produce pictures that do not have any subject in particular.

 

[hspluta]

I've just gotten into Hasselblads myself after 35 years of shooting everything under the sun. Currently I have a 50mm C lens and a 150mm C T* lens along with the manual macro bellows. Both lenses are just amazing to me. I am now looking for an 80 or 100 for that in-between length, but would like to get a CF lens, just for the feel and the newer shutter. Later I may add a longer lens, but I tend to shoot wide a lot more often. I found that a 90mm on my 4x5 was the most used lens in that arsenal. Now that is actually closer to the 40mm in 6x6 however the square factor makes the 50 feel more natural to me.

I picked up one of the Kiev TTL/Spot 45* prisms and really like it a lot. My eyes just have a really hard time with the WLF. My next big expenditure will be for a Maxwell screen with the MicroPrism center, I am just not a big fan of split screen finders.

 

[sandermarijn]

My eyes just have a really hard time with the WLF.

So did mine. I found my Hasselblad not a pleasure to use for that reason alone. Some people rated highly their so-called chimney finders. These magnify but not by so much that your eye can't cover the entire composition; they also correct for near/far-sightedness, -3 to +3 (by turning a ring on the eyepiece).

I finally got myself an ugly chimney finder too. It makes sooo much difference in composing and focusing. This must be one of the most underrated accessories. Drawback is that the thing doesn't fold- it always sticks out and makes the Hasselblad significantly bigger. (You can take it off but then you have to remove the back first.) It's light though.

Might be an alternative for the OP as something in between a WLF and the prism finder.

 

[sandermarijn]

Some pictures of the chimney finder. It's ugly alright but really useful. They go on ebay for something like 25-60 euros depending on luck, state, etc.

One other advantage compared to the WLF is that your head helps stabilize the camera; with the WLF everything is sort of floating. Especially helpful when one's hands are not super steady (me ).

 

[36cm2]

Man, that's like putting a pig on lipstick. Well, you know what I mean. I'll certainly consider it nonetheless.

 

[Ian David]

I love the WLF (but my eyes are still pretty good) - I use it all the time.

Ian

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Ralph, you would think that, but I find myself reaching for longer lenses much more than wides. That being said, I'm open to people's thoughts on wide angle lenses as well.

That certainly depends on your preferred type of subject. The 40 CF FLE, 50 CF FLE and 250 CF lenses are all excellent.

 

[outwest]

When you are working out in the sunshine the chimney finder has advantages over the WLF such as no glare off the screen. The only advantage of the prism finder in landscape is if you have to have a high tripod position. As far as wide angles in the landscape, I find my 50 to be of limited use due to needing a strong foreground in the composition and it is not always there. I get a lot more use out of my 60. Thinking about it, I've only used the 250 on wildlife.

 

[swittmann]

Congratulations to your new cameras, 36cm2 and hspluta!!! I am also a brand new Hasselblad owner now. After 10+ years with a faulty and unreliable Pentacon Six I felt it was time to *finally* buy my dream camera I bought my kit last Saturday (500 c/m with 3 lenses, 2 backs, WLF and prism, along with some other accessories).

My prism is a 45°, unmetered one. It isn't a beauty either *LOL* but I like it a lot. Very comfortable to use, bright and not too heavy. It balances the camera well.

Now I find myself switching back and forth between the prism and the WLF, as I have been using one on the Pentacon over all these years (I may add that the Hasselblad's screen is MUCH brighter and so much more fun to use).
I will see if I will develop a preference for either the WLF or the prism. At the moment, I use the WLF somewhat more. Ask me again next week

Cheers,
Sandra

 

[Willie Jan]

A couple of questions for you. I have a prism finder (not metered, I meter separately anyway), but was thinking about getting the waistlevel finder (which parallels how I work with the Rolleiflex). Do long-time users prefer one over the other and why?

Also thinking about completing the lens set. I shoot primarily landscapes. All black and white. Would you agree that a 250 Sonnar T* and a 2x converter (can't afford the Hasselblad one, this will be a Vivitar or Kenko) will round out the kit?

Thanks.

I use both a prism and a waist. The prism can be of use when the camera is on a higher position. Otherwise you will need a stair to see the picture...

I also use a 250 and a vivitar 2x. rumours are that the vivitar en kenko are also hasselblads, but i do not know for sure. I haven't got any complaint about it.

Have fun.

 

[Q.G.]

rumours are that the vivitar en kenko are also hasselblads, but i do not know for sure.

I do. They're not.

 

[36cm2]

I've decided to get the converter and stick with the 45 degree prism I have for at least a little while. The more I play with it, the more I envision the prism's usefulness. If it doesn't work out, I'll choose between a chimney and WLF. As my eyes are still pretty good, I'm leaning toward the WLF. As for long or short lenses, I'll see if the converter satisfies my need for tele and see how often I curse not having the wide. I carry 90, 135 and 240 with my 4x5 and shoot the 135 and 240 about 95% of the time. Maybe that will change. I'm certainly more conscious of it now then I was before this thread. Many thanks for the suggestions and experience.

 

[Mark Fisher]

The 50 cf is a wonderful wide angle. I'd personally use the 50mm more, but different people are different. 250 would be next on my list (to expand from my 50-80-150 kit)

 

[daleeman]

My eyes are shifting so I use the magnifier in the WLF a lot. Actual frame up my image with WLF with the magnifier up and out of the way, focus with it down. When I go on tripod I almost always use the magnifier.

I have an old style prisim with a dead meter. I'll use that when shooting with the 150mm and the left hand bracket to free hold portraits.

My fav lens is the 40mm T*. Just never get to shoot it enough. The lens cap I have is toast, so worn from the prior lens cap owner. So I had a leather guy at a biker shop make me a hood like you would see on a 500mm F4.5 or 300mm F2.8 Nikon... This leather lens hood is really nicely tooled and has a cleaning cloth for an inside liner. I love it. It stoppes people all the time mostly because of the lens cover.

Been looking for a cheap T* or CF 250mm but have not found one when the $ is in the pocket and the unit is at hand. Will keep looking.

 

[ishutteratthethought]

Sold my blad 4 years ago to go to 4 x 5, regretted selling the blad. Kept the 4 x 5 gear and purchased a 501CM with a 60mm Distagon,
I am wanting a 150mm (better yet, a 100mm) but I rarely need or want a different lens, kind of weird. I use just the 60 and am just fine with that.
Steve

 

[knifeinthedark]

I always use the wlf to focus...it is very effective and i sometimes use the Prism when some shots will look wierd if shot from waist level...

 

[jeffreyg]

I,m partial to the PM5 but also use the WLF on occasion. I have a Schneider loupe/magnifier that fits similar to the magnifying hood with an interchangeable base and doubles to look at full frame negatives on a light box.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

Way to go!

Jeff