@arricammarques1955 I’m sure they would work well. I was using older cards (fast but not that fast) and they worked fine. Took a while to write the files, though.
I really appreciate the honest appraisal of the value. I have a 500C/M and love it, and have considered the digital back, but I think your statement at the end really said it all. Save the digital for a different camera.
for others seeing this video, Alastair is setting asa on the camera due to the spot meter in the camera, which sets the focal plane shutters' speed, as it is Aperture priority, like in mirrorless, but this meter determines shutter speed in most of the modes, A/D/Z, only in M is it fully manual. {you HAVE to turn on this camera, it has an electromagnetic focal plane shutter, so to use the e-shutter in the back, you need the magnet to open the shutter, to get the leaf shutter(if a C or CF lens is in front), and this curtain out of the way, so an exposure can be made}.
Hello With the 500 series body, no need to go through the back for flash sync. You go directly with the flash trigger cable on the CF lens flash socket. lens/back sync is done internally through the legacy mechanical camera body to back sync. Flash sync on the back is for technical cameras like Alpa's Cambo's ... that have to use the lens flash port to sync lens and back.
Thanks for letting me know! My old backs (V96C and CF39) now that I think of it, had a direct lens sync. I was just really worried about frying the back - that was an experience I never want to repeat.
thanks for making this video. I thought you'd have to keep the shutter open and THEN use the digital shutter on the back to use the camera..so this helped a lot
@@jjlad5037 Maybe that as well. But also ocean and mountains 10 minutes apart. You can ski and mountain bike and swim in the ocean in the same day. Our mountains are also on the $10 bill. Perfect climate, not too hot or cold.
@@jjlad5037 Vancouver was absolutely amazing, but Downtown is wild and saddening to see - reminded me of paradise during the day and The Terminator: Armageddon at night. Pray for y’all because the drugs is our fault as Americans.
Alastair, fyi, to get lightroom to see the fff or 3F file types, you do the dng conversion in Flexcolor software (free), then it's straight TIFF , tiff or Dng that most software can handle, or for modern Hassy's [X1D/X2D and H6D] you have to use phocus directly, as the f formats are legacy, but they revised the packaging so you must use phocus to decrypt it. ( from memory the Phase One, Capture One software IS also agnostic enough to take it, it can deal with most others, no matter the raw packaging type).
The 500 bodies are wonderful - IF - I repeat - IF they don't jam!!! (And a quick pointer: There is no need to speak at 500 words per minute. The vast majority of English speakers are NOT native speakers.)
My 500 bodies haven't jammed too much but they are not bulletproof. Some are totally trouble-free and others are problematic. Impossible to tell which is which, of course. And it's always the one that you need. As for my speed of speaking - thanks for the comment (seriously). I do tend to both speak quickly and to not annunciate very well. One of the many aspects of our videos that I need to work on. I often think I should put a note under the camera that says, 'slow down' as a reminder.
@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird Overall, it was an excellent video presentation of this incredible camera system. I for one wish they had stuck with the classic 6x6 aspect ratio instead of the 645. THANKS!
Interesting. Mine is pretty much bang-on, but I do take care when I'm shooting backlit or bright sky scenes, as the centre-weighted aspect of the meter is not small and it will get affected by bright areas. Also, I shoot neg film almost exclusively so exposure isn't as critical as it would be with chrome film. Sorry I can't offer much more insight than that.
@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird Yeah, I was expecting there to be a cabled connection for the digital back to recognise an exposure going off. Any idea how an exposure is triggered, perhaps some kind of shock-sensor? Or optically triggered to sense when photons are hitting the sensor?
@@HesselFolkertsma Honestly, no idea exactly how it's done. I think it might be as simple as the back using the shutter release tab (the one that trips the back to show an exposure has been taken). That said, the process is rather reliable and the shutter tab is certainly not made to tolerance that one would need for a digital back - or that one would think one would need for a digital back. Hard to tell, but I can tell you it works.
@@leej5842 Thanks for sharing. I rather enjoyed the read! I burst out laughing when I saw your comments on the film you had. I have a freezer full, myself. I'll. never shoot it all and I should really get selling. I just might be able to afford that new digital back!
Amazing how expensive they were when they were new... And how expensive they are now. I didn't realize they were that pricey, though. Wouldn't give up my 203 for a 205, though. The centre-weighted meter in the 203 is pretty much unstoppable. The 205 had a spot meter and was much more fickle.
Great to see a review of this that deals with all its quirks as well as the benefits. Funny you mention grandfathers and Minoxes, I just got mine out and found that the guy I bought film from is making metal cartridges for them and filling with in-date film now. Might have to shoot it again.
@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird Of course, the site is called mshobbies.co.uk and it's run by one guy as far as I can tell. Once went to buy some and ended up having a long coffee and a chat about it all.
I certainly had a lot of focus struggles with my digital backs and 500-series cameras. It wasn't necessarily back focus, but the issue for me was that because the plane of focus is so noticeable in digital you could really tell if things weren't perfectly in focus. Couple that with the fact that things just don't 'pop' into focus on a Hasselblad (unlike, say a Pentax 67) and it was really hard to hit focus. I found that with a lot of testing and being careful I could predict where the plane of focus would fall - namely just as where I wanted to focus came into focus - of course all 500-series cameras are going to be slightly different, and your situation may well vary. Thankfully, Hasselblad offered a shim set for their backs so you could change the sensor distance slightly to get the focus plane where it suited you best. Not sure if they still do.
How about we raise our goal to 56mm sq. Who knows somebody just might make one someday, I hope, till then 39mmx49mm is all I got.@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird
for general information: what you did was because the digital back has no idea when the camera has fired, called funnily enough shutter latency, the first cable gives the back the trigger signal, when to activate the pixcels, the other one uses this info, and the back's tech, to meter the scene and fire the modern flash units (radio/ir-slave, or otherwise). one other tip, for composition, use the LV in the back, set your CF lens to Focal plane mode, which opens the shutter in effect giving you a dslr style lens, aka apature and focus only, use mirror up mode to (clears it out of the light path), then put the live view on in the back, hey presto, an idea where the subject is in the frame.This Focal plane shutter idea can also work for shooting, using the back as the "focal plane shutter", but in reality the pixcels are scanning the frame; here you have to press the shutter button on the back, this "takes the photo".
@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird no worries, and be careful, as they can be used on Cambo, Alpha and other technical cameras to, so there are TWO flash sockets on the back, one for shutter trigger in, the other to go OUT to the cold shoe, to supply the pocket wizard, or other radio trigger eg, profoto, or broncolor.
Ha! Gosh, I have no idea. I can't see why not, though - as long as the back will record video. Man, that would be amazing. What a great way to get a unique look.
@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird Honestly,after using for a couple of video works the Pentax 645z,I would say that there is no point trying to shoot video on medium format but the challenge of simply doing it. There is the medium format look into the video but it rarely has enough space to shine and in most cases you can tell that the camera wasn't the right one for such job.But it was fun using it and since then whenever I see big sensor I want to try it out,well if you put the big sensor behind a film body,oh boy now I really question how much do I need that extra kidney. Thanks for the responce.
@@gaarakabuto1 I think you're absolutely right. The results may or may not be worth the trouble. If you do want a medium-format sensor look there are other cameras (Fuji GFX, for instance) where you can put an adapter on and shoot video that way. That said, it would be fun to try. Oh, and your kidneys told me that they don't mind being auctioned off in the name of accumulating more photo equipment. At least I think that's what they said... ;-)
The CFV II backs do, indeed, work with F series cameras. Older backs do not, as far as I understand. I can’t speak for all of the different bodies but I shot all of the forest images with a Hasselblad 203fe and the 110f2 and the 40 f4 FLE in ‘f’ mode, on the CFV II back with no extra cables.
I've been wanting one of these since the 1st gen was available for my 500cm but honestly with the price they are coming in at and the rarity of being nearly impossible to find they are just not worth it when You can just shoot good film stock and get the film look. At the price of newer Fuji GFX50r or s even you can get a used system and a lens for under the price of this digital back and have good AF and much better controls.
This is the problem - inasmuch as old cameras are, well, old. Digital backs (especially 50MP ones) have requirements that the camera manufacturers years ago could never have possibly imagined. The solution with the CFV backs is incredibly well done - for what it is. The backs work reliably and well on the old bodies. But it does come at a tremendous cost. I don't want to suggest that Hasselblad could have done more - in fact I'm amazed they could do it at all and it's a real testament to their ability to innovate and solve problems. That said, my Fuji GFX 50r is a 'better' camera in every technical way. What is more, if you want the feel of older Hasselblad optics a different approach might be to adapt them to a GFX rather than adapting the sensor to the camera. Film is another subject entirely. I just shot a bunch of TXP on my Hasselblad (and a bunch of other cameras) and it was a delight!
@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird Totally... I would love to have the GFX50r with say a vintage manual focus lens or something like a Mitakon Zhongyi 65mm 1.4 would be amazing for the cost of the lens and body set up. That would be about 3K or under with the cost of the GFX50r going down in price.
The 907 has no shutter built in like the Fuji, therefore it's somewhat garbage without either the Hassy lenses with the built in shutters or a V system body. The 907 is really a "bonus" for someone who buys the CFV II 50C for their 203 and wanted to poke around with the new Hassy lenses on occasion, but its ergonomics are pretty weird (particularly absolutely no viewfinder without a V system body). Anyone primarily using the new lenses should probably go the X1D route.
I use X1D and 907X and 503CX and a bunch of X, H and V lenses. For general use the X1D is much more convenient and also less expensive. Handhold the 907x becomes only convenient with the optional grip, not only for ergonomics but also for missing functions without grip (like AEL, back button focusing) The 907X lacks also flash TTL, GPS. Shooting on a tripod, the 907x becomes a winner compared to the X1D. Using the electronic shutter isn't bad at all, it requires just a learning curve to be steady during the 1/3 second sensor reading time. it's also not compatible with flash, most domestic LED lightings, moving subjects. The problem shooting digital on a V system camera (and prism finder you have to use with non square format) is that it becomes extremely heavy compared to the X1D or 907X.
@@jean-claudemuller3199 I think the main distinction with the electronic shutter is whether you’re shooting handheld portraits versus landscapes. If the latter it seems like much less of a problem. I’d say my biggest disappointment is the small sensor size. I suppose some day we will get a 6x6 :)
@@NicholasAndre1 I was a medium format film shooter for over 20 years and I would newer wish going back to this bigger image sizes and their lack of depth of field for landscapes. Even with the smaller 33x44 digital it's never possible getting ultimate landscapes sharpness over the whole image depth without focus bracketing. The Hasselblad 33x44 50 Mpix files are so clean in color, lack of artefacts, sharpness that they are able to be blown up to 200 Mpix with even a detail quality increase. My wishes would be a new 33x44 50 Mpix backlited Cmos with global shutter.
I'm holding that lens in my hands right now. I haven't cleaned it for a while, and it's completely blemish-free. Besides, with the filter ring on there it's near impossible to put my hand on it while working with it. No soft-focus effect here.
@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird Axle grease on the lens works well. So, too, some sandpaper for a more permanent soft focus.... Just kidding. As a kid, though, I learned about simply fogging the lens with my breath for a few seconds of soft effect. Each shot would, of course be a surprise.
The Hasselblad 120? I have the CF version (the one in the video) and I really like it. It doesn't have mojo like the 110, but then I don't want a macro lens to have too much mojo. It's clinical without being too cold; it works really well close-up, which is great (again, important for a macro lens) Definitely worth the purchase and I have used it a lot over the years.
My bloopers are part of my charm! And I'm aware of know how to date my Hasselblad bodies. VHPICTURES. Lenses are a different story, unless there is a system that I'm not aware of?
Thank you for a real world look at using this.
The trouble shooting and learning process made it very relatable.
Really enjoyed watching it.
It was our pleasure to make it. Thanks for your comments!
@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird SD UHS II 260MB/s, for CFV II 50C ? Also prefer snapping with film. Cheers, mate.
@arricammarques1955 I’m sure they would work well. I was using older cards (fast but not that fast) and they worked fine. Took a while to write the files, though.
I really appreciate the honest appraisal of the value. I have a 500C/M and love it, and have considered the digital back, but I think your statement at the end really said it all. Save the digital for a different camera.
I am gladI have found this video. Thank you !!
for others seeing this video, Alastair is setting asa on the camera due to the spot meter in the camera, which sets the focal plane shutters' speed, as it is Aperture priority, like in mirrorless, but this meter determines shutter speed in most of the modes, A/D/Z, only in M is it fully manual. {you HAVE to turn on this camera, it has an electromagnetic focal plane shutter, so to use the e-shutter in the back, you need the magnet to open the shutter, to get the leaf shutter(if a C or CF lens is in front), and this curtain out of the way, so an exposure can be made}.
Hello
With the 500 series body, no need to go through the back for flash sync. You go directly with the flash trigger cable on the CF lens flash socket. lens/back sync is done internally through the legacy mechanical camera body to back sync.
Flash sync on the back is for technical cameras like Alpa's Cambo's ... that have to use the lens flash port to sync lens and back.
Thanks for letting me know! My old backs (V96C and CF39) now that I think of it, had a direct lens sync. I was just really worried about frying the back - that was an experience I never want to repeat.
Claude, Thank you, this is great to know.😊
thanks for making this video. I thought you'd have to keep the shutter open and THEN use the digital shutter on the back to use the camera..so this helped a lot
I expected something like that, too! But it works like a regular film back - with some slight differences, of course.
great channel i can't believe it isn't 100x the size
I knew that was Vancouver as soon as I saw the forest!! Best city in the world
For opioid OD's perhaps.
@@jjlad5037 Maybe that as well. But also ocean and mountains 10 minutes apart. You can ski and mountain bike and swim in the ocean in the same day. Our mountains are also on the $10 bill. Perfect climate, not too hot or cold.
@@BugalooB Lots of west coast cities in the USA enjoy beautiful scenery, yet have been reduced to open air toilets...Vancouver is well on its way.
@@jjlad5037 Vancouver was absolutely amazing, but Downtown is wild and saddening to see - reminded me of paradise during the day and The Terminator: Armageddon at night. Pray for y’all because the drugs is our fault as Americans.
Alastair, fyi, to get lightroom to see the fff or 3F file types, you do the dng conversion in Flexcolor software (free), then it's straight TIFF , tiff or Dng that most software can handle, or for modern Hassy's [X1D/X2D and H6D] you have to use phocus directly, as the f formats are legacy, but they revised the packaging so you must use phocus to decrypt it. ( from memory the Phase One, Capture One software IS also agnostic enough to take it, it can deal with most others, no matter the raw packaging type).
The 500 bodies are wonderful - IF - I repeat - IF they don't jam!!! (And a quick pointer: There is no need to speak at 500 words per minute. The vast majority of English speakers are NOT native speakers.)
My 500 bodies haven't jammed too much but they are not bulletproof. Some are totally trouble-free and others are problematic. Impossible to tell which is which, of course. And it's always the one that you need. As for my speed of speaking - thanks for the comment (seriously). I do tend to both speak quickly and to not annunciate very well. One of the many aspects of our videos that I need to work on. I often think I should put a note under the camera that says, 'slow down' as a reminder.
@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird Overall, it was an excellent video presentation of this incredible camera system. I for one wish they had stuck with the classic 6x6 aspect ratio instead of the 645. THANKS!
i wanted to ask you what your experience with the Internal lightmeter of the 203 FE is, mine tends to underexpose at times, unfortunately.
Interesting. Mine is pretty much bang-on, but I do take care when I'm shooting backlit or bright sky scenes, as the centre-weighted aspect of the meter is not small and it will get affected by bright areas. Also, I shoot neg film almost exclusively so exposure isn't as critical as it would be with chrome film. Sorry I can't offer much more insight than that.
Interesting how they got it to work so seamlessly.
It's pretty remarkable, really. I expected it to be more of a challenge to shoot with.
@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird Yeah, I was expecting there to be a cabled connection for the digital back to recognise an exposure going off. Any idea how an exposure is triggered, perhaps some kind of shock-sensor? Or optically triggered to sense when photons are hitting the sensor?
@@HesselFolkertsma Honestly, no idea exactly how it's done. I think it might be as simple as the back using the shutter release tab (the one that trips the back to show an exposure has been taken). That said, the process is rather reliable and the shutter tab is certainly not made to tolerance that one would need for a digital back - or that one would think one would need for a digital back. Hard to tell, but I can tell you it works.
@@leej5842 Thanks for the comments. Let me know when you post your blog post - I would like to read it.
@@leej5842 Thanks for sharing. I rather enjoyed the read! I burst out laughing when I saw your comments on the film you had. I have a freezer full, myself. I'll. never shoot it all and I should really get selling. I just might be able to afford that new digital back!
The Hasselblad holy grail is the 205fcc. Most people never even heard of it, because it had to be ordered. Now it costs $15k for a working one.
Amazing how expensive they were when they were new... And how expensive they are now. I didn't realize they were that pricey, though. Wouldn't give up my 203 for a 205, though. The centre-weighted meter in the 203 is pretty much unstoppable. The 205 had a spot meter and was much more fickle.
Great to see a review of this that deals with all its quirks as well as the benefits.
Funny you mention grandfathers and Minoxes, I just got mine out and found that the guy I bought film from is making metal cartridges for them and filling with in-date film now. Might have to shoot it again.
Seriously? The Minox? I would love to shoot my Grandfather's Minox again but I wasn't sure where to find film. Can you supply a link?
@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird Of course, the site is called mshobbies.co.uk and it's run by one guy as far as I can tell. Once went to buy some and ended up having a long coffee and a chat about it all.
@@iNerdier Super! thanks for the info.
Thanks for sharing!
nicely presented , TY.
Glad you liked it!
Has anyone experienced backfocus when using a digital-back with hasselblad 500 series Camera?
I certainly had a lot of focus struggles with my digital backs and 500-series cameras. It wasn't necessarily back focus, but the issue for me was that because the plane of focus is so noticeable in digital you could really tell if things weren't perfectly in focus. Couple that with the fact that things just don't 'pop' into focus on a Hasselblad (unlike, say a Pentax 67) and it was really hard to hit focus. I found that with a lot of testing and being careful I could predict where the plane of focus would fall - namely just as where I wanted to focus came into focus - of course all 500-series cameras are going to be slightly different, and your situation may well vary. Thankfully, Hasselblad offered a shim set for their backs so you could change the sensor distance slightly to get the focus plane where it suited you best. Not sure if they still do.
@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird I'm finding I have to do the same exact tricks to get good or decent focus.
Hi, what is the brand of the strobe transmitter are you using?
Here I was using a PocketWizard. I think it was pretty old - but at least I wasn't going to fry anything with it.
I just look up the size of the sensor on the CFV II 50C its only like 36 +mm sq. Not very big so no wide angle. My phase one 45+ is nearly 645 size .
Wide angle is a challenge on these backs - has always been an issue, for sure. I wish they made a 55mm square sensor, but that’ll never happen.
How about we raise our goal to 56mm sq. Who knows somebody just might make one someday, I hope, till then 39mmx49mm is all I got.@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird
for general information: what you did was because the digital back has no idea when the camera has fired, called funnily enough shutter latency, the first cable gives the back the trigger signal, when to activate the pixcels, the other one uses this info, and the back's tech, to meter the scene and fire the modern flash units (radio/ir-slave, or otherwise).
one other tip, for composition, use the LV in the back, set your CF lens to Focal plane mode, which opens the shutter in effect giving you a dslr style lens, aka apature and focus only, use mirror up mode to (clears it out of the light path), then put the live view on in the back, hey presto, an idea where the subject is in the frame.This Focal plane shutter idea can also work for shooting, using the back as the "focal plane shutter", but in reality the pixcels are scanning the frame; here you have to press the shutter button on the back, this "takes the photo".
Some great tips there - thanks.
@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird no worries, and be careful, as they can be used on Cambo, Alpha and other technical cameras to, so there are TWO flash sockets on the back, one for shutter trigger in, the other to go OUT to the cold shoe, to supply the pocket wizard, or other radio trigger eg, profoto, or broncolor.
Hi,I am masochist,I wonder can you shoot video on the 500c/m with the CFV 50C?
Ha! Gosh, I have no idea. I can't see why not, though - as long as the back will record video. Man, that would be amazing. What a great way to get a unique look.
@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird Honestly,after using for a couple of video works the Pentax 645z,I would say that there is no point trying to shoot video on medium format but the challenge of simply doing it.
There is the medium format look into the video but it rarely has enough space to shine and in most cases you can tell that the camera wasn't the right one for such job.But it was fun using it and since then whenever I see big sensor I want to try it out,well if you put the big sensor behind a film body,oh boy now I really question how much do I need that extra kidney.
Thanks for the responce.
@@gaarakabuto1 I think you're absolutely right. The results may or may not be worth the trouble. If you do want a medium-format sensor look there are other cameras (Fuji GFX, for instance) where you can put an adapter on and shoot video that way. That said, it would be fun to try. Oh, and your kidneys told me that they don't mind being auctioned off in the name of accumulating more photo equipment. At least I think that's what they said... ;-)
So did I understand this correctly
The digital back works with the Hasselblad F series cameras ?
I thought this ain’t possible only 500 series
The CFV II backs do, indeed, work with F series cameras. Older backs do not, as far as I understand. I can’t speak for all of the different bodies but I shot all of the forest images with a Hasselblad 203fe and the 110f2 and the 40 f4 FLE in ‘f’ mode, on the CFV II back with no extra cables.
I've been wanting one of these since the 1st gen was available for my 500cm but honestly with the price they are coming in at and the rarity of being nearly impossible to find they are just not worth it when You can just shoot good film stock and get the film look. At the price of newer Fuji GFX50r or s even you can get a used system and a lens for under the price of this digital back and have good AF and much better controls.
This is the problem - inasmuch as old cameras are, well, old. Digital backs (especially 50MP ones) have requirements that the camera manufacturers years ago could never have possibly imagined. The solution with the CFV backs is incredibly well done - for what it is. The backs work reliably and well on the old bodies. But it does come at a tremendous cost. I don't want to suggest that Hasselblad could have done more - in fact I'm amazed they could do it at all and it's a real testament to their ability to innovate and solve problems. That said, my Fuji GFX 50r is a 'better' camera in every technical way. What is more, if you want the feel of older Hasselblad optics a different approach might be to adapt them to a GFX rather than adapting the sensor to the camera. Film is another subject entirely. I just shot a bunch of TXP on my Hasselblad (and a bunch of other cameras) and it was a delight!
@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird Totally... I would love to have the GFX50r with say a vintage manual focus lens or something like a Mitakon Zhongyi 65mm 1.4 would be amazing for the cost of the lens and body set up. That would be about 3K or under with the cost of the GFX50r going down in price.
The 907 has no shutter built in like the Fuji, therefore it's somewhat garbage without either the Hassy lenses with the built in shutters or a V system body. The 907 is really a "bonus" for someone who buys the CFV II 50C for their 203 and wanted to poke around with the new Hassy lenses on occasion, but its ergonomics are pretty weird (particularly absolutely no viewfinder without a V system body). Anyone primarily using the new lenses should probably go the X1D route.
I think you're right. The X1D is probably smarter if you're starting from scratch.
I use X1D and 907X and 503CX and a bunch of X, H and V lenses.
For general use the X1D is much more convenient and also less expensive.
Handhold the 907x becomes only convenient with the optional grip, not only for ergonomics but also for missing functions without grip (like AEL, back button focusing) The 907X lacks also flash TTL, GPS.
Shooting on a tripod, the 907x becomes a winner compared to the X1D.
Using the electronic shutter isn't bad at all, it requires just a learning curve to be steady during the 1/3 second sensor reading time. it's also not compatible with flash, most domestic LED lightings, moving subjects.
The problem shooting digital on a V system camera (and prism finder you have to use with non square format) is that it becomes extremely heavy compared to the X1D or 907X.
@@jean-claudemuller3199 I think the main distinction with the electronic shutter is whether you’re shooting handheld portraits versus landscapes. If the latter it seems like much less of a problem. I’d say my biggest disappointment is the small sensor size. I suppose some day we will get a 6x6 :)
@@NicholasAndre1 I was a medium format film shooter for over 20 years and I would newer wish going back to this bigger image sizes and their lack of depth of field for landscapes. Even with the smaller 33x44 digital it's never possible getting ultimate landscapes sharpness over the whole image depth without focus bracketing. The Hasselblad 33x44 50 Mpix files are so clean in color, lack of artefacts, sharpness that they are able to be blown up to 200 Mpix with even a detail quality increase.
My wishes would be a new 33x44 50 Mpix backlited Cmos with global shutter.
@@NicholasAndre1 can you expand on the e-shutter bit? What’s the main issue?
Who do you modify the Zeiss Distagon 40 mm into
a softfocus optic by placing your hand on the front lens ?
I'm holding that lens in my hands right now. I haven't cleaned it for a while, and it's completely blemish-free. Besides, with the filter ring on there it's near impossible to put my hand on it while working with it. No soft-focus effect here.
@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird
Axle grease on the lens works well. So, too, some sandpaper for a more permanent soft focus.... Just kidding. As a kid, though, I learned about simply fogging the lens with my breath for a few seconds of soft effect. Each shot would, of course be a surprise.
@@rocketmanpm I like that technique. Doesn't leave any surprises for the next time you're shooting with that lens.
What do you think of the 120 macro lens?
The Hasselblad 120? I have the CF version (the one in the video) and I really like it. It doesn't have mojo like the 110, but then I don't want a macro lens to have too much mojo. It's clinical without being too cold; it works really well close-up, which is great (again, important for a macro lens) Definitely worth the purchase and I have used it a lot over the years.
The new CFV II 50C does come with the chrome edges to perfectly match the bodies you have.
It's nice the did it in both the all-black and the chrome version.
@@UnderexposedwithAlastairBird the chrome version has a better LCD, and is not part of the 50 year Moon Edition.
You never show the controls on the back of the camera.
Also it’s a good idea to do a dry run to avoid running into snafus when you present.
Doing a dry run is always beneficial. Sometimes we just don't have the time, though. Missed the control shot, too. Next time we'll be more thorough.
For your information only, Speedotron is still in business!!
The wrong step, first take off the A12 backand put it aside.
Uncover the digital back and mount it to the camera body.
I'm sure with a bit of practice I would get faster.
203 fe built for me...500 cm, for vintages lenses ...with .
500c /m do had many lenses with ...200fe are good ...smarter than 500...
Do you not know the system to find the age of the Hasselblad gear?
Have a drink; do not be nervous.
Please, delete all your bloopers.
My bloopers are part of my charm! And I'm aware of know how to date my Hasselblad bodies. VHPICTURES. Lenses are a different story, unless there is a system that I'm not aware of?
Soft lens.
Which one? The 110f2 or the 40mm? At 100% both appear to be tack sharp. Amazingly so, actually.