Hasselblad SWC

[jett]

I guess this is technically a scale focus but I usually associate Hasselblads with SLRs....

Anyways I am fancying this camera. I like Ultra Wide angle lenses but i'm a little dissapointed with 35mm prints so MF sounds nice and this camera/lens combination comes to mind. I do not know much about this camera except that keh.com sells them for about 2k. I'm attracted to this over the 40 FLE because I do not have a Hasselblad and this lens/combination is smaller and quieter (I think). I like small cameras.

1. Which models should I get? Is there a primer on SWC's online?
2. I know this is scale focus but I am interested in focusing at the focus limit (0.3m). Now this is complete guesswork with the viewfinder but I believe it is possible to focus with the ground glass. Is an accessory or is it "standard" In otherwords, if I were to order one of those from keh.com (which I am not in the position to atm) then would I be able to use the ground glass?
3. Well retrofocus designs have improved but although I would prefer this combination it may be more practical, easier, and cheaper to go with a 40 FLE (1k-1.5k), how does this lens rate? It isn't going to be as small or quiet but more versatile overall. The close-focus limit is 0.5m but that is close enough.

 

[raid]

1. Which models should I get? Is there a primer on SWC's online?


Older models have a chrome lens. They are "supposedly" an edge sharper due to some materials that now are forbidden in the modern lenses. Old model is also cheaper If you have lots of money, get the latest model.


2. I know this is scale focus but I am interested in focusing at the focus limit (0.3m). Now this is complete guesswork with the viewfinder but I believe it is possible to focus with the ground glass. Is an accessory or is it "standard" In otherwords, if I were to order one of those from keh.com (which I am not in the position to atm) then would I be able to use the ground glass?

The ground glass will fit any SWC. It is less useful than you think, since you have to mount the camera on a tripod; remove the standard film back; mount the ground glass; focus; remove the ground glass; mount back the film back; take the photo.


3. Well retrofocus designs have improved but although I would prefer this combination it may be more practical, easier, and cheaper to go with a 40 FLE (1k-1.5k), how does this lens rate? It isn't going to be as small or quiet but more versatile overall. The close-focus limit is 0.5m but that is close enough


The SWC is a small package, compared with a standard Hasselblad with a wide angle lens.

 

[Godfrey]

I guess this is technically a scale focus but I usually associate Hasselblads with SLRs....

Anyways I am fancying this camera. I like Ultra Wide angle lenses but i'm a little dissapointed with 35mm prints so MF sounds nice and this camera/lens combination comes to mind. I do not know much about this camera except that keh.com sells them for about 2k. I'm attracted to this over the 40 FLE because I do not have a Hasselblad and this lens/combination is smaller and quieter (I think). I like small cameras.

1. Which models should I get? Is there a primer on SWC's online?
2. I know this is scale focus but I am interested in focusing at the focus limit (0.3m). Now this is complete guesswork with the viewfinder but I believe it is possible to focus with the ground glass. Is an accessory or is it "standard" In otherwords, if I were to order one of those from keh.com (which I am not in the position to atm) then would I be able to use the ground glass?
3. Well retrofocus designs have improved but although I would prefer this combination it may be more practical, easier, and cheaper to go with a 40 FLE (1k-1.5k), how does this lens rate? It isn't going to be as small or quiet but more versatile overall. The close-focus limit is 0.5m but that is close enough.

We had a spirited thread on the Hasselblad SuperWide recently:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=126780&highlight=superwide

Briefly:

Q1: See http://www.hasselbladhistorical.eu/hs/hstable.aspx for a concise history of the SWC and other Hasselblad models. There's lots of other information on that site as well.

They're all great, but I prefer the design of the DoF indication with the Synchro-Compur shutter. I wanted the T* lens coatings, so that put me into the range from 1973 to 1981 SWC or SWC/M. I went for a pristine clean 1978 body and managed to get two similarly pristine 1978 A12 film backs for it.

Q2: For critical focus close up, first realize that the lens mount markings are very accurate so for static setups (copy stand, etc) you can use a measuring tape. Of course, you can't frame with a measuring tape...

The ground glass backs are easily available. Most KEH.com SWC bodies do not include them, but they have plenty in stock. Early ones use a pretty dim ground glass and run around $100, late model ones have the Hasselblad AcuteMatte focusing screen and run $250-400. They all work on all SWC models. You'll also need a magnifier or finder (same as the finders that work on the standard V system bodies) to work with the ground glass. I got a very ugly but totally serviceable chimney style magnifying finder for $30, and a remarkably clean 45° old-type prism finder for $70.

Q3: The Biogon 38mm f/4.5 lens is quite special. While the Distagon 40mm is a very good lens as well, it is FAR bulkier, not as sharp at edges and corners, and not quite as well-corrected for rectilinears, and, of course, requires the bulkier, heavier V system SLR bodies to work with it. There are a couple of versions of the Distagon 40 too, if I'm not mistaken.

The photos I see taken with the Distagon 40 are excellent, but they have a different look and feel compared to the Biogon 38 photos. I prefer the SWC for my use.

Well, perhaps not so brief ...

G

 

[jett]

I don't have lots of money. I wouldn't want to spend much more than $2k. I'd probably sell my entire SLR system, some MF gear, and some RF gear.

I actually would want to use this for portraits. I know it is an odd combination but I am in LOVE with Jeanloup Sieff.

I shoot portraits with 35mm and 120 (Rolleiflex) but I find myself only printing my Rolleiflex negatives. I can perhaps use a tape measure if/when I want to work faster and see how well the framing is...

I don't care about T* coating, I don't think. I don'tt plan on using this for landscape or color so i don't forsee myself needing a flare - fighter. I'll look into the models but one of my concerns is reliability and repairability.

-If I get an older model and it busts then am I out of luck with repairs?

 

[Godfrey]

1. Which models should I get? Is there a primer on SWC's online?

Older models have a chrome lens. They are "supposedly" an edge sharper due to some materials that now are forbidden in the modern lenses. Old model is also cheaper If you have lots of money, get the latest model. ...

That's not quite accurate:

The SWC Zeiss Biogon 38mm lens was updated with respect to the barrel construction in 1956, went to a black finish in 1969, was given T* antireflection lens coatings in 1973, was fitted to the newer CF Prontor shutter barrel in 1985, remained unchanged from 1988-2001 in the 903SWC model but with better light reflection control in the body interior finish, and *finally* was recalculated for the new environmentally friendly optical glass in 2001 with the 905SWC model.

That was 32 years after the change from silver to black finish on the lens. 🙂

According to the guys at Hasselblad, the recalculation for the 905SWC version of the Biogon lost a tiny bit of resolution on center but picked up better resolution at corners and edges, making the lens a more even performer overall, particularly for work at the near limits as a copy camera. When I had the 903SWC and my friend had the 905SWC, we did a test in the field: it was impossible to see any difference in what the lenses produced. We could only see a slight difference when we shot an Air Force resolution target.

G

 

[raid]

What you are saying is correct, Godfrey. I gave the "short version" of it all.
I said also that if money was not a problem, he should go for the newer model.

 

[Godfrey]

I don't have lots of money, I wouldn't want to spend much more than $2k. I'd probably sell my entire SLR system (really not that much...maybe $600-$900 tops lol) and some MF gear.

I actually would want to use this for portraits, I know it is an odd combination but I am in LOVE with Jeanloup Sieff but I'm not so thrilled about 35mm for portraits so this camera seems like a logical but pricey alternative. A tripod would be OK..

The SWC works well for environmental portraiture. You have to be careful about angling the camera to the subject to prevent foreshortening, and of course it is an ultrawide FoV so you're going to include a lot of context at typical portrait distances, and you have to be careful of wide-angle distortion if you're looking for a beauty shot.

But with 6x6 format, you can crop A LOT and still have superb quality.

G

 

[hausen]

I shouldn't read this thread. Have always wanted an SWC and 2 days ago pushed the button on a Linhof PC612 instead of the SWC. Strange to want either a 6x12 or SWC but I am primarily a landscape guy and went the 612 route.

 

[Godfrey]

What you are saying is correct, Godfrey. I gave the "short version" of it all.
I said also that if money was not a problem, he should go for the newer model.

As new, or better still, as good condition as you can afford is worth paying for.

I would say that budgeting $2000 can get a nice condition camera from the '70s, SWC or early SWC/M, if you work at it and hunt around a bit. Mine was nominally a bit more than that (I got a discount from the seller): with an A12 back and lens shade, it would otherwise have run about $2300.

G

 

[jett]

thanks. I skimmed the thread and there is ton of useful information. I'll have to look more into it but it looks doable given my budget...anyone wants to trade a Nikon F + 20mm f3.5 UD for this thing? jk.

 

[sleepyhead]

To the original poster: yes, it's scale focus, but that isn't really any problem if you're at least OK at guessing distances below say 2 meters. Depth of field and the great sharpness of the lens makes extreme focus accuracy unnecessary.

I agree with Godfrey (above), I think the best overall SWC model is the SWC/M with the original Biogon optics, but in the "CF"-style barrel/shutter, good coatings, and a bayonet B60 filter size.

I have one of these in black with a black film back, and I gotta say, it is a nice camera to use, and it looks different in a cool way.

 

[jett]

How is repairability? Where can I send one of these to incase something goes wrong? The default camera repair place seemed to be Essex but ofcourse they are no longer in business 🙁

 

[ChrisN]

David Odess in the USA is the go-to man for Hasselblad repairs:

http://www.david-odess.com/repair.html

 

[ChrisN]

I shouldn't read this thread. Have always wanted an SWC and 2 days ago pushed the button on a Linhof PC612 instead of the SWC. Strange to want either a 6x12 or SWC but I am primarily a landscape guy and went the 612 route.

I suspect the 612 (a format I often crop to) will be a totally different beast in use. I think there is still room, nay, a need, for an SWC in your photography. 🙂

 

[Godfrey]

...
I agree with Godfrey (above), I think the best overall SWC model is the SWC/M with the original Biogon optics, but in the "CF"-style barrel/shutter, good coatings, and a bayonet B60 filter size.
...

The real advantage to the CF version lens is the easy availability of lens hood and filters, at reasonable prices. Finding a good set of filters and hood proved both an expensive and a challenging entertainment for the Compur shutter model.

G

 

[Todd.Hanz]

For most people 38mm will probably be a bit wide for portraiture, that being said...I love shooting portraits with my 50/4 mm...would love to see what the 38mm does!

and some architecture...

Todd

 

[sleepyhead]

Does anyone know if Harry Callahan used a Hasselblad SWC for some of his square cityscape pictures?

I was just looking at one (see link)
http://www.geh.org/ne/str085/htmlsrc9/m197202800004_ful.html#topofimage

and it looks very possible it was taken with a SWC.

 

[S.H.]

I tried an old one once, I really did not like the finder (I wear glasses). And I'm accustomed to old cameras with dodgy finders, but for some reason, this one did not impress me.

So I'd advise to try one before you sink 1500-2000$ in it, its ergonomics are special imho.

 

[raid]

The chrome lens model is a bargain for what you an get for the money spent. I used 5-6 expired rolls of film to practice with my SWC to shoot hand held and close distance focus.

 

[Godfrey]

Does anyone know if Harry Callahan used a Hasselblad SWC for some of his square cityscape pictures?

I was just looking at one (see link)
http://www.geh.org/ne/str085/htmlsrc9/m197202800004_ful.html#topofimage

and it looks very possible it was taken with a SWC.

You guessed correctly. I can't recall where I read it, but I remember reading that Harry Callahan made many of his photographs using a Rolleflex TLR and a Hasselblad SWC. Possibly in an interview with him from years back, or something like that.

G