lifeandmylens wrote:
A few questions have come up. Any thoughts on Lomography 800 (cheaper portra 800?) or Cinestill 50D?
And I want to start using a ND filter if using say 800 speed film outdoors in daylight. So let's say I use a 3 stop ND with a m7 that has a meter in it. I know If I use my handheld meter there is a function for a ND filter so that's easy to meter with that. Without using the handheld meter, what's the easiest workflow to use an ND outside, and quickly take it off to shoot inside (without forgetting to change the setting)? Set the ISO to 100 outside, and 800 outside? Or I could use exposure compensation. The m7 allows for 2 stops. ...Show more →
The M series internal meter meters through the lens and in this case filter attached. The easiest is simply by using the internal meter and adjusting aperture/exposure time accordingly at constant ISO 800. When you take the ND filter off indoors, the internal meter will give you the adjusted reading.
retrofocus wrote:
The M series internal meter meters through the lens and in this case filter attached. The easiest is simply by using the internal meter and adjusting aperture/exposure time accordingly at constant ISO 800. When you take the ND filter off indoors, the internal meter will give you the adjusted reading.
Thank you, that’s amazing. I’m an idiot . I should’ve tried it before asking. I’ve used an ND on my M3 using a handheld meter, but haven’t tried yet on my m7.
lifeandmylens wrote:
Thank you, that’s amazing. I’m an idiot . I should’ve tried it before asking. I’ve used an ND on my M3 using a handheld meter, but haven’t tried yet on my m7.
Not a bad question though especially when using rangefinder cameras without internal meter or actually very strong ND filters where through-the-lens-metering is no longer valid. In these cases adjusting the ISO is a good idea or simply by calculating it how much longer exposure is needed for the applied ND stops at the same aperture.
Looking to get another A12 back for my Hasselblad 501cm. The current back I have has matching s/n insert. My question is whether that matters at all? The backs with matching s/n inserts are twice the price. I'd be using this to have film already loaded into the spare back.
lifeandmylens wrote:
A few questions have come up. Any thoughts on Lomography 800 (cheaper portra 800?) or Cinestill 50D?
And I want to start using a ND filter if using say 800 speed film outdoors in daylight. So let's say I use a 3 stop ND with a m7 that has a meter in it. I know If I use my handheld meter there is a function for a ND filter so that's easy to meter with that. Without using the handheld meter, what's the easiest workflow to use an ND outside, and quickly take it off to shoot inside (without forgetting to change the setting)? Set the ISO to 100 outside, and 800 outside? Or I could use exposure compensation. The m7 allows for 2 stops. ...Show more →
I really like Lomo 800. Depending on who you listen to, it is either Kodak or Fuji..
Cinestill 50d looks good to me but I’m wondering if it is affected with light leaks like their 800T.
I've never owned any Hasselblad cameras, at one point I was keenly interested but after using other medium format cameras, I was happy enough with them.
Having gotten that out of the way, I've never given much credence to matched backs and inserts for the Hasselblad 6x6ers. Moreover, if a component-based system doesn't perform nearly equally whatever components you use, then I would say the manufacturer has a design or manufacturing (quality control) issue.
lifeandmylens wrote:
Looking to get another A12 back for my Hasselblad 501cm. The current back I have has matching s/n insert. My question is whether that matters at all? The backs with matching s/n inserts are twice the price. I'd be using this to have film already loaded into the spare back.
Biggest issue with used A12 backs is from my experience broken light seals. It is not anywhere disclosed if the light seals in the A12 back are still okay, recently replaced, or no longer working. To get a good A12 back in working condition is a gamble. In one of my purchased A12 backs - from a reputable online reseller who got it from someone trading it in - the light seals were fully removed to use them likely in another back. You can order new light seals but replacing them can be a bit tedious (carefully open the back and avoid that the springs fall out!). When you first use a purchased A12 back, make sure to run first a cheaper film through it to determine that the seals are still okay.
All my backs have fitting S/N with the insert part. I would be careful with mismatched S/N insert because you never know where they come from - maybe in some cases from A24 backs with no longer available 220 films. There are also variations in backs depending on when they were produced which have different handles etc. Since prices for these backs have significantly increased over the past few years, some sellers might simply put pieces together to sell them for an uptick. So yes, I would make sure the S/N of insert and back match.
sirimiri wrote:
Having gotten that out of the way, I've never given much credence to matched backs and inserts for the Hasselblad 6x6ers. Moreover, if a component-based system doesn't perform nearly equally whatever components you use, then I would say the manufacturer has a design or manufacturing (quality control) issue.
This is incorrect for this specific case. Hasselblad cartridges were made for over 50 years and there are quite a number of iterations between different back versions - even between the same cartridge type for example for A12 (120 film) or A24 (220 film). The flange distance between A12 and A24 backs is actually different since A24 film does not use paper backing on the negative strip and is therefore thinner. So yes, it plays a role when a cartridge was made and for what kind of film to be used (120 or 220). There are also other backs which are used for other than 6x6 formats, for example smaller ones like A16 backs.
It has nothing to do with a design fault, it is rather due to variance during this long production time and backs for different purposes. To ensure that the back works flawlessly, it is best to get one with matching S/N numbers (with no light leaks either as mentioned by me earlier).
retrofocus wrote:
This is incorrect for this specific case. Hasselblad cartridges were made for over 50 years and there are quite a number of iterations between different back versions - even between the same cartridge type for example for A12 (120 film) or A24 (220 film). The flange distance between A12 and A24 backs is actually different since A24 film does not use paper backing on the negative strip and is therefore thinner. So yes, it plays a role when a cartridge was made and for what kind of film to be used (120 or 220). There are also other backs which are used for other than 6x6 formats, for example smaller ones like A16 backs.
It has nothing to do with a design fault, it is rather due to variance during this long production time and backs for different purposes. To ensure that the back works flawlessly, it is best to get one with matching S/N numbers (with no light leaks either as mentioned by me earlier). ...Show more →
Thanks so much. This is exactly what I was looking for. I'll stick to s/n matching inserts and good seals.
lifeandmylens wrote:
Thanks so much. This is exactly what I was looking for. I'll stick to s/n matching inserts and good seals.
S/N match can be checked after the purchase, but you can never be sure about the light seal quality. Only a seller who has used the back before and knows it is working well will be able to confirm. Resellers / online stores won't be able to determine this - they won't open the cartridge to check on the seals.
retrofocus wrote:
This is incorrect for this specific case. Hasselblad cartridges were made for over 50 years and there are quite a number of iterations between different back versions -
Thanks for the helpful detail. For the record, I did not suggest mixing and matching different versions of film back components. Only that a "focus" if you will on matched serial numbers is probably unwarranted and just one of those things that get repeated.
lifeandmylens wrote:
Thanks so much. This is exactly what I was looking for. I'll stick to s/n matching inserts and good seals.
I bought my spare A12 back for the same reason to load other film ready to use in there. But in 2018 I got mine in EX+ condition for $150 - now they go for up to double this price, crazy!
retrofocus wrote:
I bought my spare A12 back for the same reason to load other film ready to use in there. But in 2018 I got mine in EX+ condition for $150 - now they go for up to double this price, crazy!
More like triple for EX+ and matching s/n! It’s ridiculous.
lifeandmylens wrote:
More like triple for EX+ and matching s/n! It’s ridiculous.
I am glad that I started my back-to-film journey in 2015 when I was handed a large Beseler enlarger in nearly mint condition plus enlarger lens and had no idea what to do with it. I became curious about darkroom printing and started shooting first with 35 mm film and then later with medium format and even large format. From 2017 to 2021 I shot in the majority with film. In recent years the film revival hype also affected me negatively with higher prices for film and chemicals. Now I focus mainly on shooting with my Leica M film cameras, less often with medium format, and my large format camera sits for decoration. Digital is playing again a bigger role in my photography. I would no longer do the same journey and vesting in film gear by now as I did > 8 years ago since prices are IMO unreasonable for used camera gear which I purchased years ago.
retrofocus wrote:
I am glad that I started my back-to-film journey in 2015 when I was handed a large Beseler enlarger in nearly mint condition plus enlarger lens and had no idea what to do with it.
Man there were a few years there where nearly any gear that was heretofore (theretofore? ) highly-priced medium format gear, was available seemingly everywhere, at prices that were catnip to amateur film users who previously could never afford or would never pay the prices that the medium format market required. Ditto for some really quality darkroom equipment.
I wish I'd bought one of those quality Leica enlargers back then.
sirimiri wrote:
Man there were a few years there where nearly any gear that was heretofore (theretofore? ) highly-priced medium format gear, was available seemingly everywhere, at prices that were catnip to amateur film users who previously could never afford or would never pay the prices that the medium format market required. Ditto for some really quality darkroom equipment.
I wish I'd bought one of those quality Leica enlargers back then.
One of my best deals ever so far was getting a whole mint darkroom with huge Beseler 45 MXT and diffuser plus Swiss Alpina 4x5 large format bellow camera and 4 Schneider Kreuznach lenses plus 21" steel-frame enforced dry-mount press (I never found one of them online anywhere!) for $700 on Craigslist locally in 2017. All together with current pricing would be easily in the $10K range now. It took me three trips by car to move all this gear.
retrofocus wrote:
...plus 21" steel-frame enforced dry-mount press ...for $700 on Craigslist locally in 2017. All together with current pricing would be easily in the $10K range now. It took me three trips by car to move all this gear.
Wow, 21" you don't see that for a reasonable used (shipped) price these days,ever.
Three trips, grinning ear to ear and of course stopping for lunch a good diner or roadhouse joint, reveling in your good fortune and that good gear is going to a good home
I swear, somebody - say Leica - bring back a non film-scratching range of cameras and lenses and you will sell more than you expect.
sirimiri wrote:
Wow, 21" you don't see that for a reasonable used (shipped) price these days,ever.
Three trips, grinning ear to ear and of course stopping for lunch a good diner or roadhouse joint, reveling in your good fortune and that good gear is going to a good home
I swear, somebody - say Leica - bring back a non film-scratching range of cameras and lenses and you will sell more than you expect.
+1. I befriended with the seller, and he told me later that there was a professor from a nearby college interested in the equipment before I contacted him. But the potential buyer bailed out after he found out that the college didn't like to have darkroom-based chemicals handled on site. I heard the same reason at a community college where I was teaching part-time for a while - they also closed down their darkroom to avoid hassle with chemicals.
. I should’ve tried it before asking. I’ve used an ND on my M3 using a handheld meter, but haven’t tried yet on my m7. 
) highly-priced medium format gear, was available seemingly everywhere, at prices that were catnip to amateur film users who previously could never afford or would never pay the prices that the medium format market required. Ditto for some really quality darkroom equipment.