Anybody Shooting With A Swc ?

[mfogiel]

I have come to rangefinders after doing a full circle with various cameras, which started with Hasselblads. I adore the SWC, and have been always upset for the question of distance guessing, as this camera (lens) is so good, it truly deserves to be used with the focal plane properly set. For slow work I use the RMFx adapter, but really is a PITA.
I've thought many times in the past to use a portable rangefinder device to use with the SWC when on a stroll, but somehow never could set my hands on a decent one .

Now that I have some 35mm rangefinder cameras, I thought to use it more frequently, utilizing the other camera (maybe with a 50mm lens to make a combo) also as a distance setting tool for the wider shots with SWC.

Has anybody tried a similar thing, are there any tricks and tips useful to know?

Thanks.

 

[dazedgonebye]

An SWC is way beyond my budget...but I do have a Graflex XLSW. That's 6x9 with a 47mm Super-Angulon f8 lens.
Set to 6 ft and f16, focus is a non issue.
Have you experienced out of focus issues with your SWC stopped down?

 

[Olsen]

Previously, I have stated here that I want to be burried with my Hasselblad SWC905. It is my absolutely best camera (1Ds II, FE203, 500C/M, MP, M8, ZI etc.). When applying aparture 22 the DOF reaches from 58 cm to infinity. Even at aparture 11 it reaches from 'well a meter to infinity'. So, in daylight situations this is a small problem. In low light, usually indoor, when larger apartures are neccessary, distances are easier to measure up by judgement.

So, I use the DOF boundary lines more to set the focusing distance than trying to measure up any exact distance to a certain subject in the motive. Well, this is not a perfect method. The larger aparture, - and shorter distance, the more accurate the focusing has to be. But, look at the distance scale of your SWC and you see that it is really close up that you have to be accurate. Say, at distances at a meter or shorter. I rarely use the SWC for that kind of photography.

More of an issue is to keep the camera streight so that the lines, like the horizon, corners and door sills, are streight. Also this is well controlled with the excellent water pass in the viewfinder.

All this makes the Hasselblad SWC905 a joy to use. And the result? Far, far better, sharper, streighter than anything from, say, Leica.

 

[loneranger]

Oh yes, I shot with the SWC (903) for a long time, a joy to use. You can get abstract compositions, because of the field of view.
I recently sold it, after a several years of use, for more than I bought it for.
Why did I sell it, basically because I found I could do almost everything as the SWC with a Mamiya+43mm lens.
Advantages of the Mamiya:
larger negative, can always crop to 6x6 if you really want the square format
lighter camera and lens combo
aperture priority
Lens as sharp if not sharper
Advantages of the SWC:
Closer focusing distance
mechanical shutter which will probably never fail
Overall, I do not regret my decision, with the money I sold the SWC for, I could buy a mamiya with two lenses with money to spare.

 

[mfogiel]

Thanks for your feedback. If I manage to shoot at f11 or above, the dof makes it up and some, but I often like to shoot in lower light, that's where the question came from. I have found it easier to set the air bubble ok when using the SWC on a monopod, but it always slows you down and makes you more apparent. The fun situations, are like in this shot (slightly cropped but still quite wide) of people looking at the map of northern Italy below their feet - and this is the type of set up where a precise distance setting would come handy.

 

[SimonPG]

For slow work I use the RMFx adapter, but really is a PITA.

I am unsure of what the RMFx adapter is, but you can get a ground-glass adapter (maybe the RMFx adapter you refer to) for critical focus work. Otherwise there should be no issue with razor sharp images when zone focusing. But always use one smaller f stop than the DOF markers indicate, to be very sure.

It's always worth keeping in mind that the manufacturer wasn't stupid when it did not provide a rangefinder for focusing on the SWC.

Frankly I prefer the old C type lens arrangement of the earlier SWCs that has the moving aperture indicators that the CF and later lenses' screen printed lens barrel markings.

 

[Tom Harrell]

I have a SWC. When I want to take some serious landscape photos that is what I reach for. As stated earlier the SWC should be kept level to prevent distortion.

Regards,
Tom