In my understanding, the spacing between frames could be a bit off and the pressure of the pressure plate somewhat different due to the different thickness of the film (no packing paper.) Not sure how that influences film flatness.
I have to say, I never used 120 film in an A24 back - if yours works without modification, obviously no need to change!
An unmodified A24 back will only expose 11 times on a 120 roll.
An unmodified A24 back will only expose 11 times on a 120 roll.
Sirius, you say this in every thread about Hasselblad backs but it is not completely correct. The correct part about your statement is that you get 11 exposures if you load the film as you would load a 220 film. The incorrect part about it is that it is possible to get 12 exposures in an A24 back without modifying the back. Here is a guide to doing it:
https://mraggett.wordpress.com/2013/03/28/120-film-in-hasselblad-220-magazine/
I can confirm this. I bought an A24 back, and you just have to stop the film a quarter turn before it gets to the arrow to get twelve exposures. I loaded a dummy roll and confirmed it myself with my eyes.Sirius, you say this in every thread about Hasselblad backs but it is not completely correct. The correct part about your statement is that you get 11 exposures if you load the film as you would load a 220 film. The incorrect part about it is that it is possible to get 12 exposures in an A24 back without modifying the back. Here is a guide to doing it:
https://mraggett.wordpress.com/2013/03/28/120-film-in-hasselblad-220-magazine/
It is good that there is a work around to get twelve exposures from 120 film using an A24. I only have A12 backs.
Let's keep it our secret around here then! Wouldn't want everyone catching on and letting the A24 backs go up to the price of A12s. As it is I can get them for $30-40
Hmmm.... I've heard lots of terrible things about the A24 back! The spacing is wrong, the pressure plate doesn't work right because it is designed for film without a paper backing, it keeps winding even after twelve shots...Indeed. But secrets get out, and those of us who need them and know the secret will inevitably start snapping them up. <sigh> I just hope I get a few before they start skyrocketing like everything else Hasselblad.
I guess this is where I should make a statement that they are really, really difficult to repair. And repeat it until my pants catch fire.
Andy
An A12-N in good condition goes for 300 - 350 euros here... crazy
Let me talk you out of that conclusion.
Submit. Willingly submit!No, I said it's GAS. I know it's GAS!
Now I see it was only GAS!
Sirius will surely agree with that oneNo, it's GLASS...always need more GLASS!!
Thanks, everybody. I always thought I needed a longer lens for my Hassy... I mean, longer than my 150mm. I didn't even had a use for it, I just thought it would be cool to have one.
Now I see it was only GAS!
Thanks for making me think about it and decide to use the money for film.
Cheers,
Flavio
Sirius will surely agree with that one
In any case, given that Hasselblad prices are going up, what's wrong with GAS? Buy it, try it, if you don't like it sell it. You'll probably not lose any money if you didn't overpay in the first place (takes a bit of research).
First of all as my signature proclaims, "Nothing beats a good piece of glass".
Once you have the 250mm lens in your hands you will find that you will use it much more than you think you will. Beside you will use the 250mm lens more than the 350mm lens or the 500mm lens.
Remember that Yoda said, "The force of gas resist you cannot." Star Wars XXXVIII.
View attachment 233761
Yes I have felt this sting. In the UK they go for between £250-350, depending on condition, and I bought them all at the latter end of that scale.
As to the OP's question, I think it is largely a matter of appeal. 250mm is not a generally useful focal length for many people, and is only an f5.6 compared with the f2.8 of the 80mm. The regular 250 Sonnar is also one of the weaker performers in the Hassy lens stable, which probably also contributes to the lower price. The Superachromat version is another story
As to ranking my own lens use, it's hard to say exactly, but it would probably be: 100mm > 50mm > 180mm > 120mm > 80mm.
I only use the 80mm and the 50mm primarily for landscapes. I have to admit it seems I'm always on the fence about the 60mm or 150mm, but I'm only trying to buy what I know I will use. It's hard because prices seem to be through the roof for all the major medium format cameras.
I have the 30mm [Fisheye], 38mm [SWC], 50mm, 80mm, 100mm, 150mm, 250mm and 500mm and the 2XE extender. I do not shoot portraits so I do not use the 150mm very often and prefer the 250mm lens. If I were to do portrait work I would use the 180mm over the 150mm lens.
That's a lot of lenses Sirius which ones do you use the most? and how do you like the SWC?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?