hasselblad Sat, 14 Feb 1998 Volume 1 : Number 100 In this issue: Re: SWC or 40 mm Distagon ? Re: SWC or 40 mm Distagon ? Re: SWC or 40 mm Distagon ? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998 11:21:26 GMT From: buchi@dci.de (Michael Buchstaller) To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: SWC or 40 mm Distagon ? Message-ID: <34ef2ca2.46304413@mail.dci.de> Thank you all for the response to my question, in the list and by private mail - thanks ! When i analyze the opinions of the people who told their thoughts about the subject, there seems to be about 50 % of them who believe that the SWC is absolutely superior to the Distagon, in terms of sharpness in the edges and the overall look of the images. The other half believes that the 40FLE is so very much improved in comparison to the old 40 lens that it comes very close to the Biogon=B4s performance, so that the difference is neglectable. As i told you in my first posting when i asked which lens to get, i want to do product photography with it - not just ordinary catalog photography, but creative shots where i want to use the superwide=B4s special look in these pictures. I recently borrowed a Monolta 35 mm camera with a 17 mm superwide lens from a friend, and i was really impressed about the possibilities with it. But i think for what i want to do with it, i cannot use the "sports finder" on the SWC, because i have to go very close to the subject, and i want to see what the camera sees, so with the SWC i would also have to get the screen back that could be mounted on the camera instead of my normal 12 or A12 back. Is it really so that the 40FLE is so good that i should consider getting one, or should i get the SWC and screen back ? I personally would prefer the Distagon, because when i change the focusing screens or eventually get a metered prism, i could use it with my 500CM, too. BTW: Anybody out there who wants to sell his/her 40FLE ? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998 05:16:56 -0800 From: Michael Tiemann To: buchi@dci.de, hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: SWC or 40 mm Distagon ? Message-ID: <199802131316.FAA13887@cygint.cygnus.com> Is it really so that the 40FLE is so good that i should consider getting one, or should i get the SWC and screen back ? I answered this question for myself by renting each for a weekend. While this was more expensive than all the free advice I could have gotten, it also led me to make a decision that surprised me: for all the things I liked about the SWC, the 40FLE worked far better for my purposes, so I bought the 40FLE. Michael ------------------------------ Date: 13 Feb 98 18:00:41 +0800 From: "Patrick Bartek" To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Cc: buchi@dci.de Subject: Re: SWC or 40 mm Distagon ? Message-ID: <34E48A49.MD-0.198.bartek@skylink.net> On Fri, 13 Feb 1998 11:21:26 GMT, Michael Buchstaller wrote: > Thank you all for the response to my question, in the > list and by private mail - thanks ! [snip] > Is it really so that the 40FLE is so good that i should consider > getting one, or should i get the SWC and screen back ? > I personally would prefer the Distagon, because when i change > the focusing screens or eventually get a metered prism, i could > use it with my 500CM, too. If you need "exact" framing, get the 40FLE. I've used the screen back on the SWC with the 45 degree prism. What a major pain in the ass! And there is always the chance that you'll drop and break something expensive, while switching to the film back. Plus, with a 40 and 500CM, you have the convienence of using just about any make Polaroid holder you want. The SWC won't take one and the SWCM only takes the Hassie holder and not the NPC. Later... -- Patrick Bartek (NoLife Polymath Group) bartek@skylink.net http://www.skylink.net/~bartek ------------------------------ End of hasselblad V1 #100 ************************* ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing list is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, or affiliates.