Hasselblad A16S - anybody still uses it?

[Hassasin]

I was wondering if anyone is still using the A16S back for supersede size. In the days of expensive film it seems a bit counterintuitive to waste extra side space of 6x4.5 to end up with super slide frame.

At the same time I suppose it must feel different to compose within smaller square area vs. doing a "panorama" shot, then cut it fit the amount. I am looking into getting one back for super slide, even if I'll have rather limited use for it. But unlike most purchases, this one is not clearing up in my head.

 

[BrianShaw]

No, never used a 16S or 16 back (yet) but occasionally think about getting one. Made a lot of superslides, though, using a Rollei TLR, a long time ago. Beautiful format in its day.

Composing in 4x4 or 645 is no different from composing in 6x6, really. If your eye is calibrated to the larger format in specific lenses you might need to take a step or two backwards to get the same image. No big deal. Adaptation happens quickly. Just like using both a 35mm camera and Hasselblad in the same session… not a whole lot of confusion results.

Which to get, though, requires thinking more about end goal than “wasting” film. 16S limits one to square format. A life sentence but not all that horrible… just smaller than a 12 back and “not worth it” if not making superslides. The 645 gives more format flexibility, and a bit of a chance of cropping in the long direction when cutting the superslide. I remember appreciating that advantage. (Rollei only has a 645 option).

For me the only advantage of 16S over a16 back, and not enough to incentivize me, is the lower price that seems common.

If I were to do superslide again, I’d make a viewfinder mask and crop a 6x6 rather than buy a separate back. Unless someone offered me a back for really inexpensive.

 

[Hassasin]

No, never used a 16S or 16 back (yet) but occasionally think about getting one. Made a lot of superslides, though, using a Rollei TLR, a long time ago. Beautiful format in its day.

Composing in 4x4 or 645 is no different from composing in 6x6, really. If your eye is calibrated to the larger format in specific lenses you might need to take a step or two backwards to get the same image. No big deal. Adaptation happens quickly. Just like using both a 35mm camera and Hasselblad in the same session… not a whole lot of confusion results.

Which to get, though, requires thinking more about end goal than “wasting” film. 16S limits one to square format. A life sentence but not all that horrible… just smaller than a 12 back and “not worth it” if not making superslides. The 645 gives more format flexibility, and a bit of a chance of cropping in the long direction when cutting the superslide. I remember appreciating that advantage. (Rollei only has a 645 option).

For me the only advantage of 16S over a16 back, and not enough to incentivize me, is the lower price that seems common.

If I were to do superslide again, I’d make a viewfinder mask and crop a 6x6 rather than buy a separate back. Unless someone offered me a back for really inexpensive.

Thanks. Yeah I hear you. A16 backs have become A12 price levels again, I suppose more people are looking into film economy these days. The A16S is a somewhat different story. Most have not been used much.

The mask that comes with A16 is actually Square mask, and that I have already. I was thinning same thing about shooting "wide" super slide on A16, then have the option to crop left or right from intended framing. Once 4x4 is exposed, that is the end of it.

 

[BrianShaw]

Wide superslide??? That sounds like a 645 transparency to me. It's completely do-able but how will you frame it? I used Gepe frames, mostly the ones with glass as the superslides pop quickly in a projector, and they came in many different formats. I'd bet that they had a frame for wide superslide. Not sure if htey are still in business, though... or that superslide frames of any kind are easily available.

EDIT: I'm incorrect about Gepe, it seems, they currently have a 645 slide frame; but their catalog once was much broader than now

Glass Slide Mounts - Gepe

www.gepe.com

 

[Hassasin]

Wide superslide??? That sounds like a 645 transparency to me. It's completely do-able but how will you frame it? I used Gepe frames, mostly the ones with glass as the superslides pop quickly in a projector, and they came in many different formats. I'd bet that they had a frame for wide superslide. Not sure if htey are still in business, though... or that superslide frames of any kind are easily available.

EDIT: I'm incorrect about Gepe, it seems, they currently have a 645 slide frame; but their catalog once was much broader than now

Glass Slide Mounts - Gepe

www.gepe.com

I said "wide" not wide Meaning shoot 6x4.5 with intent to crop into super slide later.

And yes, there are 6x4.5 slide frames, but that is MF 6x6 slide frame fit.

 

[BrianShaw]

OK... I think I understand you now. To me it's a good plan to shoot "wide" and cut to square superslide if that's the end product you want.

BTW, the Gepe page I linked may be an illlusion. I found it by searching "Gepe slide mount" but it does not link from their current main page. Seems like that product line is historical now. Being incorrect two times so quickly must meant hat I should step away from the computer!

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I think the format is sufficiently obsolete that the only way you're going to be able to mount them is to find NOS superslide mounts on Ebay or at a yard sale.

 

[Hassasin]

OK... I think I understand you now. To me it's a good plan to shoot "wide" and cut to square superslide if that's the end product you want.

BTW, the Gepe page I linked may be an illlusion. I found it by searching "Gepe slide mount" but it does not link from their current main page. Seems like that product line is historical now. Being incorrect two times so quickly must meant hat I should step away from the computer!

The mounts are now I believe only made by some Chinese company, and am not sure if anything beyond standard 35mm frame.

But there are plenty of Old New Stock or used but like new condition mounts as you please, often at excellent prices. So you can have any format ever made with little problem. The only ones hard to find are for 6x7, but I don't believe they were all that popular in its day and require dedicated slide projector, of which I think only 2 models were made, one from Mamiya.

So all MF 6x6 / 6x4.5 + all formats for 35 mm and the super slide, no problem. And yes, GEPE still the brand to get.

 

[AnselMortensen]

I thought about getting one to use for cropping for distant subjects, and still have a "full-frame" image, but gave up on that idea a long time ago...
Anybody know if the 4x4 image from an A16S has the two Hasselblad v-notches?

 

[BrianShaw]

Anybody know if the 4x4 image from an A16S has the two Hasselblad v-notches?

From looking at pictures on ebay... no.

 

[Hassasin]

I thought about getting one to use for cropping for distant subjects, and still have a "full-frame" image, but gave up on that idea a long time ago...
Anybody know if the 4x4 image from an A16S has the two Hasselblad v-notches?

Configuration appears quite similar to other backs, so I would say it does. How does that matter is another discussion. Mounted it will still be hidden.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I heard about it and several other rare format such as the vertical 645 for Hasselblad and the 35mm for Hasselblad, but I have never seen any of the rare ones available. I would not bother to use any of them. They are rare for good reasons.

 

[eli griggs]

The real advantage is the 16 and 16s allow for 16 frames of 4x4 CM and a mask will keep you at 12 frames spacing, wasting the savings in shootable film which is in many cases, simply foolish, if you can afford either 16 back.

IMO

 

[Hassasin]

The real advantage is the 16 and 16s allow for 16 frames of 4x4 CM and a mask will keep you at 12 frames spacing, wasting the savings in shootable film which is in many cases, simply foolish, if you can afford either 16 back.

IMO

Well, I have A16. A16S crops to 4x4 in camera so that is my dilemma. Is it worth a 100-120 it can be had for with limitations applied? I doubt it now more than two days ago.

 

[Hassasin]

I thought about getting one to use for cropping for distant subjects, and still have a "full-frame" image, but gave up on that idea a long time ago...
Anybody know if the 4x4 image from an A16S has the two Hasselblad v-notches?

Back to your post, as I have just realised something. It is now on my mind, but did you ask about the "v-notches" with intent to print these images "full frame" so the notches would show up in print? I'm intrigued by this idea.

 

[Axelwik]

I have a couple old A16 backs for 4x4, one complete and the other used for parts. I'm thinking of cutting the opening wider on the shell of the parts back to make it similar to 645. Then it can be used with the inner of the good back.

 

[AnselMortensen]

Back to your post, as I have just realised something. It is now on my mind, but did you ask about the "v-notches" with intent to print these images "full frame" so the notches would show up in print? I'm intrigued by this idea.

Yes, that was my intent...to print full-frame with v-notches...distant subject with a 250mm lens, cropped in-camera.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The real advantage is the 16 and 16s allow for 16 frames of 4x4 CM and a mask will keep you at 12 frames spacing, wasting the savings in shootable film which is in many cases, simply foolish, if you can afford either 16 back.

IMO

Which begs the question, why not just use the 6x6 format? There are slide machines that handle that size. Exactly why would someone want to waste film, especially after all the threads and posts complaining about the price of film and processing?

 

[Hassasin]

Yes, that was my intent...to print full-frame with v-notches...distant subject with a 250mm lens, cropped in-camera.

Which begs the question, why not just use the 6x6 format? There are slide machines that handle that size. Exactly why would someone want to waste film, especially after all the threads and posts complaining about the price of film and processing?

You would get a unique large space on both sides of the frame, 6x6 gives you somewhat equal strip around.

No question the back was meant for super slides, with still somewhat questionable logic, in times when film price was hardly a concern. I wish there was 127 in bulk, so this back would have made a lot more sense for playing around. But that would have required 127 film in bulk and at cost savings attractive enough to make sense of extra work involved in spooling own rolls. And this is not the case or will it ever be.

 

[Sirius Glass]

You would get a unique large space on both sides of the frame, 6x6 gives you somewhat equal strip around.

No question the back was meant for super slides, with still somewhat questionable logic, in times when film price was hardly a concern. I wish there was 127 in bulk, so this back would have made a lot more sense for playing around. But that would have required 127 film in bulk and at cost savings attractive enough to make sense of extra work involved in spooling own rolls. And this is not the case or will it ever be.

The reason for 4x4 is for supersides that can be shown on a 35mm slide projector, but it one has a Hasselblad and shoots slides, then a 6x6 aka 2 1/4" 2 1/4" slide project would be preferable.

 

[mshchem]

Is there any superslide mounts anywhere at any price??

 

[Hassasin]

The reason for 4x4 is for supersides that can be shown on a 35mm slide projector, but it one has a Hasselblad and shoots slides, then a 6x6 aka 2 1/4" 2 1/4" slide project would be preferable.

All true, not everyone has MF slide projector so I guess that was there Eason for Hasselblad to give that choice too (eve if could have been done with 6x4.5 just as easily).

But again, suddenly I came to liking the idea of displaying the smaller square frame with larger plain area including edge markings in a single print.

 

[Axelwik]

Is there any superslide mounts anywhere at any price??

I have a box or two in a drawer somewhere.

 

[Hassasin]

Is there any superslide mounts anywhere at any price??

eBay is my source, I have enough for now and they are less common, but do show up, I'm not sure if that Chinese brand makes any

 

[eli griggs]

The reason for 4x4 is for supersides that can be shown on a 35mm slide projector, but it one has a Hasselblad and shoots slides, then a 6x6 aka 2 1/4" 2 1/4" slide project would be preferable.

Preferable for what?

No everyone wants to make extra large colour prints, nor B&W, but simply want more resolution than 135, 16mm, etc, but does find the 4x4cm format and gain of 33.3% more medium format images, desirable, for varied purposes and pleasure.

The only downside that I've found to the A16, is simply forgetting it's no an A12 back, without a bright marking and reminder to employ masks one of two in the viewfinder one of two in the space between the back and camera, for 4x4 and 6x4cm.

6x4.5cm and 4x4cm are favorite camera formats for many here and the sharing, searching and trading and selling of these cameras here, give more than ample evidence of that.

Smply sticking to the smaller number of exposures in 6x6 rolls does nothing in the way of an advantage when different is wanted.

i am no alone in desiring those extra, smaller frames, when I see an advantage to doing so, including when we run low on 120 rolls in the field or away from our usual source.

120 in the Hasselblad is very good, but having other formats outside the A12 6x6cm, is better.

IMO.