Post your images taken with Hasselblad SWC

[Deleted member 88956]

Proper ? The 38 is such a wonderful lens and super wide in every direction - just shoot the whole square

My “proper” was a jab at A12V back which I never understood existence of. Nor will I ever.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

I hope it is worth repeating something I've said before about the SWC: it's a great camera for capturing a scene. But if you want to photograph something or someone within that scene you have to have exceptional skill.
That might explain why I no longer have one...

SWC is a very wide angle view, which in itself takes some getting used to, especially if one has not done any such a wide capture before (me for sure). But any camera should not be intimidating to the point of giving up on it, and perhaps even more so, one like the SWC. Perhaps I am misreading your post, as I can understand that wide view is not for everyone as it is a significant departure from almost any other point of perspective, including even super telephoto lengths which to me feels a lot more ... natural.

Ultimately SWC gives something that is unique in capability, but does need some mental adjustment to make the most of it.

Viewfinder is another area of "acquired" view needing brain development to not get in the way of composing within it. I will definitely use the focus screen set up (which also came with my kit) for places where time allows and getting as much as possible at the edges as intended without playing it safe.

After a mere 15 minutes using SWC though, I can see where all the moaning of pleasure is coming from. I probably should not have posted my pics just yet, as scanning is suggesting sharpness results that are in fact plain fake. Negatives are sharp on light box (with exception of in-the-far, but that is a result of me accidentally bumping (and not noticing) focus ring out of infinity and using wide open lens on all shots), but with my scanning set up in shambles right now I could not get the curly RPX 100 go flat which resulted in fuzziness shown. However, I posted anyways because in the end it was a very satisfying first go from pure lens perspective feedback and overall camera handling.

As for the camera itself, it was surprisingly small and light in my smallish hands, plus it felt good being hugged with both hands and very stable when releasing shutter. Super smooth experience overall, including film advance and the mechanical feedback. Being a Hasselblad virgin I think I am glad I started this journey with the SWC, partly because with all other bodies mirror movement would have definitely deafened, to whatever degree, the rest of handling feel. At the same time I am not on a lookout for any other horse in this line up, perhaps if I find a deal hard to pass up I will change my mind.

For now Mamiya RB67 and Fuji 690 are not getting put away, although both now look and feel like gear from another planet, yet both pleasure to use nevertheless, with all their quirks remaining intact.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

There are two reasons why square format is the perfect format:

• The square is geometrically optimal to capture the maximum of an image circle. This comes down to the best theoretical equipment weight to image quality ratio.
• Each image gives you three orientations for cropping later: square, horizontal and vertical. No need to rotate the camera or waste film on "orientation bracketing".

And yes indeed, compared to my second most commonly used camera (Mamiya 645 Pro TL) the Hasselblad is just a bit heavier but vastly more flexible. The only reason I even have the Mamiya is because I couldn't afford the Hasselblad 203FE to get aperture priority and faster shutter.

P.S. No, I am not a Sirius alias.

I only asked about use of A16 back on SWC as a matter of curiosity, although having one in the bag would not hurt, if say at end of the day film brought out goes low and opportunities keep popping up and getting 16 frames vs. 12 might make a difference.

As for square I always liked square, but same all the same - for composing square at the same time. I never look at square as a way to later crop it down to whatever horizontal ratio, which is not to say ending up with a cropped one is a bad thing or all resources ought to be put in place to prevent any cropping away from square just because of my mental policy. But I am saying square can be very powerful way of framing a scene. In other words, I never bought into argument of square's perfection due to later ability to get away from it, although that option is in play anyways.

 

[Sirius Glass]

If you are having problems using the view finder to place the bottom edge of the frame. Turn the camera upside down.

Once you are comfortable with the wide field of view of the SWC, drop 8 mm off the focal length and try out the 30mm Fisheye. Just remember to check to see that you do not have your shoe tops in the bottom of the frame.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

If you are having problems using the view finder to place the bottom edge of the frame. Turn the camera upside down.

Once you are comfortable with the wide field of view of the SWC, drop 8 mm off the focal length and try out the 30mm Fisheye. Just remember to check to see that you do not have your shoe tops in the bottom of the frame.

No problems using viewfinder, just a matter of getting used to how it shows vs. what is captured on film. The barrel distortion is not an issue, got past it quick, but still when one has no super wide shooting under his belt there are compositional aspects to adjust to.

As for fish eye ... now we're talking distortion, and I like things straight.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Second roll with 2nd back tested fine, functionally.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

 

[Deleted member 88956]

 

[Sirius Glass]

Very good. You are getting the hang of the SWC. Look for compositions with verticals near both side edges or horizontals near the top and bottom to see the power of the SWC rectilinear lens.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Very good. You are getting the hang of the SWC. Look for compositions with verticals near both side edges or horizontals near the top and bottom to see the power of the SWC rectilinear lens.

Yeah, I'm a bit limited in subject matter and rather ugly grey weather these days, but I can see what you mean. But even trying some table top is going to be fun, just need a ... big table

After these two rolls I am looking to get a 20mm for Canon F1. Won't be same geometrical performance, but very similar angle, one I never had for a 35mm.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Yeah, I'm a bit limited in subject matter and rather ugly grey weather these days, but I can see what you mean. But even trying some table top is going to be fun, just need a ... big table

After these two rolls I am looking to get a 20mm for Canon F1. Won't be same geometrical performance, but very similar angle, one I never had for a 35mm.

Take a look at post #3, photos 2, 3 and 4.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Take a look at post #3, photos 2, 3 and 4.

Yeah, I know what you mean. Input appreciated. Will post some when I get them.

 

[Arthurwg]

My “proper” was a jab at A12V back which I never understood existence of. Nor will I ever.

I'll give you $150 for yours.

 

[Arthurwg]

[QUOTE="VTLD, post: 2486929, member: 88956

Being a Hasselblad virgin I think I am glad I started this journey with the SWC, partly because with all other bodies mirror movement would have definitely deafened, to whatever degree, the rest of handling feel. At the same time I am not on a lookout for any other horse in this line up, perhaps if I find a deal hard to pass up I will change my mind.[/QUOTE]

Yes, the SWC was my first. They say you never forget your first and that was true for me. Be careful, however. I now have....a few more Hasselblads, including a NOS 501 CM for back-up, plus ...a few lenses, backs, filters and more. One of the best things about the V-System is how well all the parts work together. Indeed, I'm even considering a FLEXBODY

 

[drmoss_ca]

I got deep enough into it to find a ground glass screen and a prism finder to slide onto it. Then I could set it up like a view camera, and when happy put on the film back instead and take the shot. But even then, the slightest error in aligning any vertical or horizontal line in the scene would screw things up. And my perverse desire to make it into a portrait camera (possibly one of my more stupid ideas, or just a really good challenge!) turned out to be well beyond my skill level. I do enjoy the 28mm lens on a 35mm camera, or the equivalent elsewhere, like the 20mm on my Pen-F or Distagon 50mm on the 503cx. But it took me some time to figure out how to use them, and I'm afraid I'm a bit formulaic in the way I do (subject close and to one side of the frame, rest of background as blurred as possible. You see why I like the Nikon 28mm/f1.4! I keep a 20mm/f2.8 around for the F6, and used to have a Voigtlander 15mm for the Leicas, but they were/are like fish-eye lenses, for rare special effects rather than regular use..
I think I made only a couple of semi-successful portraits with it (marred by clumsy processing of Delta 3200):
One of a colleague during Sunday morning rounds at the hospital


and one of my better half:


It was OK to set up a scene, but so hard for me to have something within that scene as subject:


Perhaps it would have all come together with a few dozen rolls of film until I caught on. But when it was suddenly time to (involuntarily, due to leukemia) rationalise the cameras, and I had to keep one medium format camera, there was no way it was going to be the SWC and nothing else. But I do love to see what other, more skilled people can do with it.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I got deep enough into it to find a ground glass screen and a prism finder to slide onto it. Then I could set it up like a view camera, and when happy put on the film back instead and take the shot. But even then, the slightest error in aligning any vertical or horizontal line in the scene would screw things up. And my perverse desire to make it into a portrait camera (possibly one of my more stupid ideas, or just a really good challenge!) turned out to be well beyond my skill level. I do enjoy the 28mm lens on a 35mm camera, or the equivalent elsewhere, like the 20mm on my Pen-F or Distagon 50mm on the 503cx. But it took me some time to figure out how to use them, and I'm afraid I'm a bit formulaic in the way I do (subject close and to one side of the frame, rest of background as blurred as possible. You see why I like the Nikon 28mm/f1.4! I keep a 20mm/f2.8 around for the F6, and used to have a Voigtlander 15mm for the Leicas, but they were/are like fish-eye lenses, for rare special effects rather than regular use..
I think I made only a couple of semi-successful portraits with it (marred by clumsy processing of Delta 3200):
One of a colleague during Sunday morning rounds at the hospital


and one of my better half:


It was OK to set up a scene, but so hard for me to have something within that scene as subject:


Perhaps it would have all come together with a few dozen rolls of film until I caught on. But when it was suddenly time to (involuntarily, due to leukemia) rationalise the cameras, and I had to keep one medium format camera, there was no way it was going to be the SWC and nothing else. But I do love to see what other, more skilled people can do with it.

If you are going to use an adapter and a prism finder on a SWC then put it on a tripod and you will get the composition as desired not shifted.

 

[drmoss_ca]

If you are going to use an adapter and a prism finder on a SWC then put it on a tripod and you will get the composition as desired not shifted.

Perhaps unsurprising to you, I did exactly that. I was already accustomed to using 4x5 and 10x8 view cameras, so that was de rigeur. Nonetheless, I found myself unable to achieve what I wanted. It's all good in the end - someone else now owns and uses the camera.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

I'll give you $150 for yours.

I know it is a rare baby and I don’t have one. I’d keep it framed though anyways

 

[Deleted member 88956]

I got deep enough into it to find a ground glass screen and a prism finder to slide onto it. Then I could set it up like a view camera, and when happy put on the film back instead and take the shot. But even then, the slightest error in aligning any vertical or horizontal line in the scene would screw things up. And my perverse desire to make it into a portrait camera (possibly one of my more stupid ideas, or just a really good challenge!) turned out to be well beyond my skill level. I do enjoy the 28mm lens on a 35mm camera, or the equivalent elsewhere, like the 20mm on my Pen-F or Distagon 50mm on the 503cx. But it took me some time to figure out how to use them, and I'm afraid I'm a bit formulaic in the way I do (subject close and to one side of the frame, rest of background as blurred as possible. You see why I like the Nikon 28mm/f1.4! I keep a 20mm/f2.8 around for the F6, and used to have a Voigtlander 15mm for the Leicas, but they were/are like fish-eye lenses, for rare special effects rather than regular use..
I think I made only a couple of semi-successful portraits with it (marred by clumsy processing of Delta 3200):
One of a colleague during Sunday morning rounds at the hospital


and one of my better half:


It was OK to set up a scene, but so hard for me to have something within that scene as subject:


Perhaps it would have all come together with a few dozen rolls of film until I caught on. But when it was suddenly time to (involuntarily, due to leukemia) rationalise the cameras, and I had to keep one medium format camera, there was no way it was going to be the SWC and nothing else. But I do love to see what other, more skilled people can do with it.

I'm quite sure, given different circumstances, so you could have held on to it, you would have been quite happy it never had to go away.

While key strength of SWC is its lens and lack of distortion at such a wide angle, what gave me instant satisfaction was the handling. Comparing to feel of the Mamiya RB67 (or Fuji 690), SWC feels far smaller than the film it has inside it. So this was first instant positive, which is always good when it comes to key component of using a camera - the want to take it out.

No doubt it can be used for any kind of photography. The table top shot posted earlier was done with focusing screen and obviously to get the most out of a full frame there is hardly another way. Same for architectural shots.

But with this newer style finder incorporating bubble level within same view, it takes not as much as I anticipated to know it's there, and use it with little distraction, and that is a factor in getting verticals/horizontals right, when possible of course. Still the bubble level remains key in framing even for camera pointing up or down as it can still be used to keep frame on vertical axis, if composition requires it.

All in all, and with just a mere one hour shooting with it, I can't wait for a time when I can take it to places without much restriction or rush.

 

[Paul Ozzello]

If you get the Mark II Viewfinder app for your newer generation iPhone (with ultra wide lens) it can simulate the view of a SWC. Or just about any other camera lens combination.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

If you get the Mark II Viewfinder app for your newer generation iPhone (with ultra wide lens) it can simulate the view of a SWC. Or just about any other camera lens combination.

I do have the Mark II and with 12 mini it works without wide angle attachment. I like it, just wish it was featured better for other aspects of analog shooting.

 

[Sirius Glass]

If you get the Mark II Viewfinder app for your newer generation iPhone (with ultra wide lens) it can simulate the view of a SWC. Or just about any other camera lens combination.

The Mark II Viewfinder app does not make a phone lens rectilinear.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

The Mark II Viewfinder app does not make a phone lens rectilinear.

Of course but it is nice for spotting camera position when shooting off tripod. But, SWC already has a “mark II” mounted on top so not exactly a must.

Still, phone in the hand is handier in some scenarios to get “in the zone” before whipping camera out of the bag.

 

[Paul Ozzello]

The Mark II Viewfinder app does not make a phone lens rectilinear.

That’s not the point of the viewfinder app. You use it for composition. Kind of like a Polaroid back and you can even use it in black and white mode. Take out your phone - shoot a bunch of different angles of your subject, review them, then the ones you like shoot with the SWC.

There’s something about reviewing a static image on a phone from a distance that you can’t get from looking through a viewfinder. It solves that age old problem thinking you had a great shot and once developed it’s shit. You’ll save a TON of film.

Here’s an example. On my first try, the camera was too far to the left, the second a little too high, this third version using the Viewfinder app I was very happy with :

so I took out my 617 film camera w/90mm Schneider SA XL - one shot only. No surprises after developing the film - here is the final result on Velvia

Best $24 I ever spent. And it works with almost any camera and lens combination.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

@fatso I am assuming you're talking about this app? Are you using the wide attachment, and if you do, which one and for which phone? I have an iPhone 11 XL with 3 lenses and the widest it goes (without cropping) is the 55mm for the square negative.

At least from iphone 12 it has a extra wide lens which has angle of view 125 or something like that, so when Biogon is turned on there is plenty of space shown on screen outside the 6x6 frame. No attchment needed for 12 and later until Apple dumps that wide lens.

I had an exchange with developer and I actually think he is not much opened to suggestions. App is geared mostly to digital shooting, but can benefit analog as well, just with few and far between applications by comparison. I don't think this app will ever go into analog corner beyond what it does today. Why? I asked what is the reason for not having Hasselblad SWC on pick list. Reply: because some older phoes require wide attachment for frame to show up on screen. Fine. So I asked, how come you have Biogon 38/4.5 in lens database? No response.