Tilt/shift bellows

Hi...

As I've discussed in the other thread, I'm considering on getting a Hasselblad 500/501/503 system. But I'd also like to find a tilt/shift option for it, if there is one. It seems like a tilt/shift bellows is readily available on the market for Mamiya 645, like this one:

http://www.yaotomi.co.jp/upload/save_image/05182029_4dd3ad8e4848f.jpg

But It seems to me that Hasselblad never made something like that for their 500 series cameras. Am I wrong?

The issue is that the lenses are in fixed mounts, any extension using bellows will mean only close up focusing is possible.

If you specifically want tilt and shift look for a 6x7 Linhof, Horseman or similar.

Ian

see

http://photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/00MBpT

but the lenses have little extra coverage...

Get a real view camera. It will work ten times better and probably end up cheaper too. You can always put a rollfilm holder on a 4x5 if you
need to. Hassie did briefly make something called an ArcBody. Saw one for sale used the other day at some obscene price. There's a reason
it went extinct. Ordinary MF lenses aren't really engineered for movements. A few clumsy shift-whatevers are out there, if that is all you need.

Such things do exist, but yes they're only for macro (I presume that's what you want), and they're pricey (especially Hassy-branded).
As said, best option is that you can get a real view-camera, they're available in smaller formats so you don't have to lug around a huge 4x5 monorail setup (although 4x5s are more plentiful, ergo cheaper), then get lensboards that take Hassy lenses and back-boards that take either hassy bodies or film-backs (but these are expensive in themselves new, eg $120).
Or even a Fuji GX680 setup might end up cheaper than adapting a hassy to bellows...

Hi thanks for your answers.

Actually I don't have any experience with using tilt/shift, so for me it would simply be a bonus option to experiment with on my new camera. So I can live without it. Macro work would be nice, but what I was really aiming for is architectural work, because I do a lot of cityscape and street photography. So I guess I can forget about that, without a proper view camera, right?

A real view camera would be great, but I think 80% of the time I wouldn't use tilting and shifting, so I'd rather go for something more compact.

Thanks everyone

sodarum said:

Macro work would be nice, but what I was really aiming for is architectural work, because I do a lot of cityscape and street photography. So I guess I can forget about that, without a proper view camera, right?

Click to expand...

Not necessarily, you can do tilts and shifts on any format, really, depending on what's available. But for architecture you definitely need something that can focus to infinity, any Hasselblad lens on any sort of adapter to a Hasselblad body will be macro-only.
There are adapters to go between formats, eg you can use Pentacon/Kiev/Hassy lenses on 35mm with a cheap Ukrainian tilt-shift adapter, 6x6 lenses on 645 or 645 lenses on 35mm are also possible, but Mirex and Zörk adapters are expensive.
I'm not sure what can be adapted to a Hassy body (I know Pentax 67 can't work on Pentacon 6 because of a long pin, I'll presume Hassy is the same), but anything that could would have to be leaf-shutter unless you've got a 2000 body.

Some formats (like Canon EF) have dedicated tilt/shift lenses, a lot of others have shift only (or like Mamiya RB/RZ, a shift-lens on a tilting-focussing body gives both tilt and shift together).
From what I know (although I'm happy to be corrected), there are no dedicated shift-lenses for Hasselblad,except Hartblei Superrotators (good luck getting one under $600 for old-style, $1200 for new Zeiss co-branded).
So you're probably going to be stuck changing formats anyway. You could go down to 645, with Pentax 67 lenses on a $3-500 Mirex/Zörk adapter, go Mamiya RB/RZ with shift-lens on tilt-body, and Fuji GX680s are surprisingly cheap for what they are. But 4x5 bodies are mostly cheaper by comparison, get a rollfilm back and you're good to go.

Dr Croubie said:

4x5 bodies are mostly cheaper by comparison, get a rollfilm back and you're good to go.

Click to expand...

That's the answer, or just shoot sheet film. I had a T-S bellows for the Bronica S-system, and it was fine for macro/tabletop and for adapted lenses, but totally unsuited to architecture, and the same is true of any bellows that could fit on an SLR.

If you're dedicated to the idea of a rollfilm SLR with movements, you could consider the Fuji GX680 system, but it's a real beast of a camera. Make sure you see one in person before purchasing.

If you can find one, Bronica did a tilt shift bellows for their 'S' range. I managed to score one with a S2A setup I bought a few months ago, but I have yet to use it (might do this weekend, actually!). The thing about these bellows is that there is no movements when focusing at infinity, so they are probably only really good for macro and table top shots.

Cheers

sodarum said:

Hi thanks for your answers.

Actually I don't have any experience with using tilt/shift, so for me it would simply be a bonus option to experiment with on my new camera. So I can live without it. Macro work would be nice, but what I was really aiming for is architectural work, because I do a lot of cityscape and street photography. So I guess I can forget about that, without a proper view camera, right?

A real view camera would be great, but I think 80% of the time I wouldn't use tilting and shifting, so I'd rather go for something more compact.

Thanks everyone

Click to expand...

You will want front rise if shooting exteriors of tall buildings to keep the lines from converging.

You can pick up a used monorail dirt cheap today. Add a 6x7 back if you prefer to shoot roll film.

In my opinion the Schneider PCS 55 Tilt-Shift lens for Rolleiflex is the best way to go for 6x6 format. You can kluge together some 4x5in or 2x3in camera parts and make 6x6cm camera, but you will be limited in availability of 6x6cm film backs and not all view cameras can focus a 55mm lens.