hasselblad Wed, 15 Nov 2000 Volume 1 : Number 1049 In this issue: New Digital Hasselblad Re: New Digital Hasselblad Re: Extension Tubes digital option Re: Extension Tubes Re: Extension Tubes Re: New Digital Hasselblad Re: Extension Tubes Re: digital option Re: digital option Re: New Digital Hasselblad Re: digital option ND Graduated Resin Filters Questions Re Hasselblad Moon Photos Choosing between 120CFi and 150CF Re: Questions Re Hasselblad Moon Photos Re: New Digital Hasselblad ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 04:39:04 -0600 From: "Len Paris" To: "Hasselblad@Kelvin. Net" Subject: New Digital Hasselblad Message-ID: <000b01c04e27$1bcec280$9bbdb318@belvil1.il.home.com> New to me, anyway. Take a look. http://www.hasselblad.com/press/detail.cgi?new/969464191.txt Len --- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 10:48:49 -0500 From: "LEO WOLK" To: Subject: Re: New Digital Hasselblad Message-ID: <01c04e52$6177cd60$b13d570c@fofyplfq> A Hasselblad digital camera that takes Canon EOS lenses, now that's the way to guarantee that the Hasselblad system NEVER becomes obsolete! Leo. -----Original Message----- From: Len Paris To: Hasselblad@Kelvin. Net Date: Tuesday, November 14, 2000 5:39 AM Subject: New Digital Hasselblad >New to me, anyway. Take a look. > > >http://www.hasselblad.com/press/detail.cgi?new/969464191.txt > >Len ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 11:32:14 -0600 From: Lynda Botez To: Subject: Re: Extension Tubes Message-ID: on 11/4/00 9:31 AM, Q.G. de Bakker at qnu@worldonline.nl wrote: > > Yes, there is light loss that you must compensate. You can calculate how > much you need to calculate using the following formulae: > > Magnification = total amount of extension / focal length of lens used. > > Diaphragm compensation factor = 1 / (Magnification + 1) > > Shutterspeed compensation factor = (Magnification + 1)^2 > > Compensation in stops (EV) = log(Shutterspeed comp. factor) / log(2) How about giving us an example (for the mathematically impaired)? Thanks -Lynda ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 09:48:07 -0400 From: Darren Modricker To: Subject: digital option Message-ID: I spoke with a Hasselblad sales rep at the photo expo in NY regarding the release of the new digital camera they are coming out with in partnership with Foveon and he was clueless on it. Has anyone talked with Hasselblad regarding this? Anything to report"? Thanks Darren Modricker ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 10:57:15 EST From: Cmrausr@aol.com To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Extension Tubes Message-ID: <7e.ceba902.2742badb@aol.com> In a message dated 11/14/00 10:44:32 AM, botez@home.com writes: >> Yes, there is light loss that you must compensate. You can calculate >how >> much you need to calculate using the following formulae: >> clipped >How about giving us an example (for the mathematically impaired)? >Thanks > >-Lynda Lynda, There is a complete set of easy to understand tables in the Hasselblad Manual, that provides complete information for all lenses, and tube combinations. You can just copy them, keep them with the tubes, and have all the info you need for most situations. Scott Stewart (also math impaired) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 07:58:59 -0800 From: "Peter Klosky" To: , Subject: Re: Extension Tubes Message-ID: Lynda, Your idea of showing sample calculations is a good one. Myself, I've = found that the chart in the Wildi book is very easy to use, and has all = these calculations already done. I use that as a starting point, then = expose a test roll, bracketing and recording the details at each point. Peter >>> botez@home.com 11/06/00 12:32PM >>> on 11/4/00 9:31 AM, Q.G. de Bakker at qnu@worldonline.nl wrote: >=20 > Yes, there is light loss that you must compensate. You can calculate how > much you need to calculate using the following formulae: >=20 > Magnification =3D total amount of extension / focal length of lens = used. >=20 > Diaphragm compensation factor =3D 1 / (Magnification + 1) >=20 > Shutterspeed compensation factor =3D (Magnification + 1)^2 >=20 > Compensation in stops (EV) =3D log(Shutterspeed comp. factor) / log(2) How about giving us an example (for the mathematically impaired)? Thanks -Lynda ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 19:49:24 +0100 From: "Q.G. de Bakker" To: "LEO WOLK" , Subject: Re: New Digital Hasselblad Message-ID: <000d01c04e6b$9cefc3c0$50dcf1c3@qnu99> LEO WOLK wrote: > A Hasselblad digital camera that takes Canon EOS lenses, now that's the way > to guarantee that the Hasselblad system NEVER becomes obsolete! The DFinity, from Hasselblad's point of view, is intended to take Hasselblad lenses (whatever they are...). The Canon lenses are only a "however" side-note. Note the "optimized" v.s. "work well" in the press statement. ;-) Supplying lenses however is the length and breadth of Hasselblad's contribution (now who does make those 'Hasselblad' lenses?) to this entire product. Oh yes, besides putting their name, and price tag, on it of course... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 20:30:46 +0100 From: "Q.G. de Bakker" To: Subject: Re: Extension Tubes Message-ID: <001601c04e71$64346440$50dcf1c3@qnu99> Lynda Botez wrote: > > Yes, there is light loss that you must compensate. You can calculate how > > much you need to calculate using the following formulae: > > > > Magnification = total amount of extension / focal length of lens used. > > > > Diaphragm compensation factor = 1 / (Magnification + 1) > > > > Shutterspeed compensation factor = (Magnification + 1)^2 > > > > Compensation in stops (EV) = log(Shutterspeed comp. factor) / log(2) > > > How about giving us an example (for the mathematically impaired)? I'd be glad to. Suppose you're using the 'good old' 80 mm lens and put it on a 16 mm extension tube. Suppose that you don't use the lens' extension, i.e. the lens is set to focus at infinity. Magnification on film then is total extension/focal length = 16/80 = 1/5 = 0.2, i.e. the object appears at 1/5 life-size on film. Now next thing to do is measure light. Say the meter tells us that f/8 at 1/125 second gives correct exposure. We now have a choice: either we open up the aperture to compensate for light loss, or we lengthen exposure time to do the same. Only one of these two is required. To find out how much more the aperture should be opened, or the exposure time lengthened, we must use the appropriate formula. To find the f-number to use to get proper exposure on film, we must apply our formula saying that the correction factor is 1/(magnification + 1) = 1/(1 + 0.2) = 0.8333. So in our example, we will have to multiply the chosen f-number, 8, by 0.8333, giving us 6.667, which is almost exactly half way between f/5.6 and f/8. Using this f-number and the chosen shutterspeed will give correct exposure. If we chose to leave the aperture at f/8, and change shutterspeed instead, we must use the formula saying that the correct correction factor is (magnification + 1)^2 = (0.2 + 1)^2 = 1.44. Our chosen shutterspeed is 1/125 second, which is 0.008 second. Multiply this by the correction factor found (1.44) and we'll get the correct time of 0.01152 second. Convert this back to fractional values by simply dividing this into 1 = 1 / 0.01152 = 1/86.806 second. The correct shutterspeed would be approx. 1/80th of a second. This is not on our shutterspeed ring, and therefore can't be set, but if it would be right between 1/60 and 1/125 second. You will often find that you would have to use shutterspeeds that can't be set, unless you're getting into the multiple second range. Most of the compensation therefore must be done changing aperture. Yet you can combine the two changing shutterspeeds to the nearest possible value, and then changing aperture to take care of the remainder. Since it helps just knowing the amount of compensation needed in stops, or Exposure Values (EV) (specially helpful when changing shutterspeeds to take the whole number part of the change in stops needed, and changing aperture to take care of the remaining fractional part) we can calculate the compensation needed in stops by taking the log of the shutterspeedfactor and dividing this by the log of 2. In our example, the shutterspeed factor was 1.44, so compensation needed in stops/EV would be log(1.44)/log(2) = 0.526. So our measured f/8 at 1/125 sec. must either be f/6.667 at 1/125 sec., or f/8 at 1/86 sec. Important thing to remember is that lenses have extensions too. So using the 80 mm from our example with the 16 mm extension tube would give a different result if the lens was not set to focus at infinity. The total amount of barrel extension of the 80 mm lens is approx. 8 mm. You will have to add the amount of barrel extension used to the length of the tube(s) and/or bellows. It's quite noteworthy that for instance a 250 mm lens, with its built-in 31 mm extension (approx.) will require an exposure compensation of 0.34 stops when used at its closest focussing range of 2.5 meters. And even more when we compensate for it being a rather asymmetrical lens: compensation required is over 0.5 stops using no extra tubes or bellows at all! The 8 mm extension used when focussing the 80 mm at its near limit still needs an compensation of log((1 + 8/80)^2) / log(2) = 0.275 stops! By the way: Hasselblad nor Zeiss supply data about the total amount of extension built-in their lenses, but you can measure these quite easily, as the amount the length of your lens changes from settings at infinity and near focussing limits. Unless the lens uses internal focussing or floating elements. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 20:32:40 +0100 From: "Q.G. de Bakker" To: Subject: Re: digital option Message-ID: <001d01c04e71$ab9c6bc0$50dcf1c3@qnu99> Darren Modricker > I spoke with a Hasselblad sales rep at the photo expo in NY regarding > the release of the new digital camera they are coming out with in > partnership with Foveon and he was clueless on it. > > Has anyone talked with Hasselblad regarding this? Anything to report"? It's on the press release section of the Hasselblad site for some time now. http://www.hasselblad.se/press/readdir.cgi Go there and read the messages from time to time. Great way to keep up with the Hasselblad news. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 21:13:36 +0100 From: "Eduard Crombie" To: "Q.G. de Bakker" , Subject: Re: digital option Message-ID: <00f401c04e77$64b48200$0100a8c0@beiaard> Hi, Q.G. Take a look also at: http://www.hasselblad.com/press/detail.cgi?new/969464191.txt Eduard ----- Original Message ----- From: Q.G. de Bakker To: Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2000 8:32 PM Subject: Re: digital option > Darren Modricker > > > I spoke with a Hasselblad sales rep at the photo expo in NY regarding > > the release of the new digital camera they are coming out with in > > partnership with Foveon and he was clueless on it. > > > > Has anyone talked with Hasselblad regarding this? Anything to report"? > > It's on the press release section of the Hasselblad site for some time now. > > http://www.hasselblad.se/press/readdir.cgi > > Go there and read the messages from time to time. Great way to keep up with > the Hasselblad news. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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. > > To change your subscription status, go to: http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad > Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm > Searchable archives can be found at http://www.listquest.com/arts/index.html > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 16:11:03 -0500 From: "LEO WOLK" To: "Q.G. de Bakker" , Subject: Re: New Digital Hasselblad Message-ID: <01c04e7f$655423c0$f93d570c@fofyplfq> My point is that this is another ill-concieved attempt (ala: Xpan) on Hassleblad's part to capitalize on their "Good Name". This MAY WELL BE the finest digital camera produced (to date), but it is in NO WAY, SHAPE, or FORM a Hasselblad. The fact that the camera takes Canon EOS lenses just proves my point. So now Hasselblad is going to contract with some Japanese lens manufacturer (Tamron, Sigma, ?) to make lenses in Canon EOS mount that are "optimized" for it's digital camera? My guess is that Foveon tried to "pitch" the camera to Canon, and they wouldn't have any part of it, and Foveon had to "go shopping" for a new partner. Hasselblad was the only one desperate enough to put their name on it. I think projects like this only serve to "dilute" the Hasselblad brand name, and are indicative of managment's lack of commitment to their core business. This sort of reminds me of what happened to Salvidor Dali before his death. He was so greedy toward the end that he was putting his signature on just about anything, even (it's widely rumored) signing blank canvases. All this does is cast a shadow of doubt over his entire body of work, and turns one of the most influential artists of the 20th century into a tired old hack. Signed, A Traditionalist...... Leo. -----Original Message----- From: Q.G. de Bakker To: LEO WOLK ; hasselblad@kelvin.net Date: Tuesday, November 14, 2000 1:49 PM Subject: Re: New Digital Hasselblad >LEO WOLK wrote: > >> A Hasselblad digital camera that takes Canon EOS lenses, now that's the >way >> to guarantee that the Hasselblad system NEVER becomes obsolete! > >The DFinity, from Hasselblad's point of view, is intended to take Hasselblad >lenses (whatever they are...). The Canon lenses are only a "however" >side-note. Note the "optimized" v.s. "work well" in the press statement. ;-) > >Supplying lenses however is the length and breadth of Hasselblad's >contribution (now who does make those 'Hasselblad' lenses?) to this entire >product. >Oh yes, besides putting their name, and price tag, on it of course... > > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 13:04:03 -0800 From: Mark Rabiner To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: digital option Message-ID: <3A11A8C3.51A5EAF5@rabiner.cncoffice.com> whatever happen d to my perceived friendship between Hasselblad and Nikon; didn't they go in on ads together and have golf tournaments or something? mark rabiner :) http://spokenword.to/rabiner/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 17:33:40 EST From: Texford1@aol.com To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: ND Graduated Resin Filters Message-ID: <10.4e0979f.274317c4@aol.com> I have the Hasselblad proshade 6093T and I am looking for a drop in neutral density graduated filter (0 -2 ) to work with it, I believe the size is 4 x 4 any ideas or recommendations. Thanks Mike ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 15:08:30 -0800 From: "Joel Rosenau" To: Subject: Questions Re Hasselblad Moon Photos Message-ID: <006901c04e8f$cddd5be0$0100a8c0@nops1.bc.wave.home.com> Dear Sirs: I am interested in knowing your thoughts on the pictures produced by the Hasselblad cameras on the 1969 moon landing. The shadows are softened to the point that I am baffled. Does anyone in your group have thoughts on how the astronauts got their light readings so perfect without washouts in bright areas or blackness on the shadowy side of figures? I am not certain which model of Hasselblad they used, but it must have been very excellent at reading and averaging out the light. Also, how came the shadows to be softened, as if with refracted light? The shadowed side of the astronaut's face is more lit up than other nearby shadows. It looks to me like a case of auxiliary light. Could I have your opinion? There is a small example of the picture on the web site http://www.grade-a.com/moon/ Could you reply or pass this on to someone else who can? My mind is boggled by, but entertaining the possibility that the Moon Landing of Apollo 11 was a hoax! Thanks in advance for your time, Joel Rosenau Retired teacher ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 18:30:10 -0500 From: "Peter Shier" To: Subject: Choosing between 120CFi and 150CF Message-ID: <000001c04e92$d5608c40$f700a8c0@northamerica.corp.microsoft.com> I have a 501CM body with 50CFi and 80CF lenses. I am choosing a lens for portraits and trying to decide between the 120CFi and the 150CF. I have them both for a trial and did some test shots. They are both superb. Beyond what I can see (which is really all that matters) I looked at the MTF data on the Hasselblad site as well as on photodo.com. Hasselblad's data shows the 120 to be sharper at the edges both at F4 and F8 at all lpm measurements whereas the Hasselblad data is the other way around. (BTW, the folks at photodo say their testing is done using Hasselblad's equipment operated by a guy from Hasselblad named Per Norlund. Kind of strange that the results are different). So, my question is posed not in order to receive a definitive answer but I would really appreciate the benefit of your experience if you have used both lenses. Thanks, Peter Shier ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 00:02:05 EST From: BobR38@aol.com To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Questions Re Hasselblad Moon Photos Message-ID: Joel, I think there was a movie about this Space Program being a hoax, but it is unlikely that it was because there are moon rock samples and an American Flag on the Moon. Bob R. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 00:22:38 EST From: BobR38@aol.com To: bigleo@worldnet.att.net, hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: New Digital Hasselblad Message-ID: < I think projects like this only serve to "dilute" the Hasselblad brand name, and are indicative of managment's lack of commitment to their core business. > Leo, I have to agree with you on this statement. From what I have learned about this digital venture with Foveon, I also feel Hasselblad is not being true to its untarnished and prestigeous name. The only way they should have gone ahead with this project was if Foveon had agreed to just provide the digital ingenuity, but conformed to the tried and TRUE traditional Hasselblad system (with the lenses also, of course) moving into the new design. Bob R. ------------------------------ End of hasselblad V1 #1049 ************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. To change your subscription status, go to: http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm Searchable archives can be found at http://www.listquest.com/arts/index.html