Hasselblad SWC is cool

[raid]

This is good to know, Roger. I believe you.
When a design cannot be improved upon, then it is a darned good design. It is such "online comments" that I learn from.

 

[bigeye]

All the SWC lenses are the same 8/5 design; coatings improved with time. I would take any one of them.

It's alledged that Zeiss couldn't get the original glass formula (w/lead & arsenic) for the SWC 905. People debate 903 vs 905 over this.

My experience is that if you pick up a Hasselblad lens, it will be wonderful and you're wasting time debating. (Pretty much same for Leica lenses.)

- Charlie

 

[Rangefinderfreak]

Well, for Digital backs SWC is CRAP. Rear element too near the sensor. And this is what HASSELBLAD says on their info for CFV backs too ! This is the reason I did my own wide 35mm, besides being much cheaper and fun too!

 

[raid]

All the SWC lenses are the same 8/5 design; coatings improved with time. I would take any one of them.

It's alledged that Zeiss couldn't get the original glass formula (w/lead & arsenic) for the SWC 905. People debate 903 vs 905 over this.

My experience is that if you pick up a Hasselblad lens, it will be wonderful and you're wasting time debating. (Pretty much same for Leica lenses.)

- Charlie

I picked a model that I could afford paying for. It is the chrome lens model.
Without such " boring discussions", RFF would not be having so many members.

 

[raid]

Well, for Digital backs SWC is CRAP. Rear element too near the sensor. And this is what HASSELBLAD says on their info for CFV backs too ! This is the reason I did my own wide 35mm, besides being much cheaper and fun too!

I bought an M9.
I felt guilty about leaving film behind.
I corrected my error by buying a real film classic camera, the SWC.

Digital MF is not what I am after.
I want to use my MF cameras like Leicas. Hand held and for street photofraphy and for travel. The enjoyment that fuels my love for photography comes first.

 

[Godfrey]

Well, for Digital backs SWC is CRAP. Rear element too near the sensor. And this is what HASSELBLAD says on their info for CFV backs too ! This is the reason I did my own wide 35mm, besides being much cheaper and fun too!

I want film for 6x6. Can't get 6x6 sensors, and I can't afford such things anyway.

 

[MikeL]

 

[Vics]

Wow, Mike! One of the best things about living in Santa Rosa is that view of the Golden Gate!

 

[Matthew Runkel]

The post in this thread by Kornelius Fleischer of Zeiss provides useful information about the recomputed lens used in the 905.

http://photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/001nEo?start=10

Elsewhere he indicates that all of the most recent Zeiss lenses for Hasselblad had been redesigned with new glass types.

http://photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/008pv2

 

[Roger Hicks]

The post in this thread by Kornelius Fleischer of Zeiss provides useful information about the recomputed lens used in the 905.

http://photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/001nEo?start=10

Elsewhere he indicates that all of the most recent Zeiss lenses for Hasselblad had been redesigned with new glass types.

http://photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/008pv2

Thanks for the reference. Incidentally, Herr Fleischer (now Herr Mueller) left Zeiss and was working for Leica last time I heard.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Godfrey]

The post in this thread by Kornelius Fleischer of Zeiss provides useful information about the recomputed lens used in the 905.

http://photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/001nEo?start=10

Elsewhere he indicates that all of the most recent Zeiss lenses for Hasselblad had been redesigned with new glass types.

http://photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/008pv2

That confirms my impressions stated up-thread — for the testing I did between 903 and 905 models, there was no visible difference at the level of resolution testing I was able to achieve.

I always forget that the folks at Hasselblad and Zeiss intended the SWC at least in part as a dedicated copy camera ... That's where the groundglass back and focusing loupe come into their own. 🙂

 

[Godfrey]

Ok, you folks are messing wit' me haid.
And making me want things. Damn you all. ;-)

Just punched the BIN buttons for a rather pretty looking SWC. From the model log and serial numbers listed, it's a chrome T* SWC body made 1978 and a chrome A12 back made the same year. Should be here in a week.

I'm itching to load it and do some shooting. I think I'll load the Baldix for tomorrow morning's walk, in anticipation.

G

 

[semrich]

I can't imagine any reason you would be unhappy with your decision, the negatives always blow me away with the detail and lack of distortion and converging or diverting verticals if you keep the bubble in the center of the finder.

 

[raid]

It was not published in Die Bild Zeitung!

It was not published in Die Bild Zeitung!

Thanks for the reference. Incidentally, Herr Fleischer (now Herr Mueller) left Zeiss and was working for Leica last time I heard.

Cheers,

R.

Now we know where it was published.

 

[raid]

Ok, you folks are messing wit' me haid.
And making me want things. Damn you all. ;-)

Just punched the BIN buttons for a rather pretty looking SWC. From the model log and serial numbers listed, it's a chrome T* SWC body made 1978 and a chrome A12 back made the same year. Should be here in a week.

I'm itching to load it and do some shooting. I think I'll load the Baldix for tomorrow morning's walk, in anticipation.

G

Congratulations on this purchase. I bet that you will not regret it.
How do you check year of make based on the serial number of the SWC?

 

[FrankS]

Here's how, Raid: http://www.hasselbladhistorical.eu/HT/HTDating.aspx

 

[raid]

Here's how, Raid: http://www.hasselbladhistorical.eu/HT/HTDating.aspx

Thanks, Frank.
I am looking everywhere on my SWC for the serial number.

 

[gdmcclintock]

Should I sell my SWC?

 

[raid]

Why would you sell it? If you do not use it, then I would sell it.

 

[gdmcclintock]

I haven't been able to adapt to the wide angle!