hasselblad Sun, 27 May 2001 Volume 1 : Number 1239 In this issue: Re: 203FE? Re: Non-shutter lenses Re: FAQ: 120 vs. 220 Tradeoffs Re: Non-shutter lenses Buying New 503CW - Is This Normal QC?? RE: 203FE? Re: Buying New 503CW - Is This Normal QC?? RE: Buying New 503CW - Is This Normal QC?? batteries in Europe Re: Buying New 503CW - Is This Normal QC?? Re: 203FE? Lens angle of view table Long dimension Re: FAQ: 120 vs. 220 Tradeoffs RE: Lens angle of view table Long dimension Re: Lens angle of view table Long dimension RE: Lens angle of view table Long dimension Re: batteries in Europe Re: test Re: FAQ: 120 vs. 220 Tradeoffs Re: batteries in Europe Re: Lens angle of view table Long dimension Re: Lens angle of view table Long dimension Re: Lens angle of view table Long dimension ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 11:18:26 +0200 From: "Q.G. de Bakker" To: Subject: Re: 203FE? Message-ID: <000a01c0e5c4$d35fde40$4ae1f1c3@qnu350> Austin Franklin wrote: > Hasselblad discontinued the FE series 80, and the CFE is the standard > replacement. I believe it would have been simple to just have the body read > the shutter speed of the CFE shutter (they already have an encoder on the > aperture, so why not on the shutter speed too?), when using the shutter in > the lense. Then it would operate in Manual Mode just like it does with the > FE lense. But it does do so! Exactly like FE lenses. There is no lens shutter you can use in FE lenses, is there? ;-) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 11:20:46 +0200 From: "Q.G. de Bakker" To: "Stein" , Subject: Re: Non-shutter lenses Message-ID: <001101c0e5c5$270daea0$4ae1f1c3@qnu350> Stein wrote: > Easy solution to the slow shutter speed. Cap the lens with your hat, > open the rear curtains, flap your hat, and then close the curtains. Works > with my 1880 Beck lens on a field camera and if it is at a banquet you have > time to fire off a hand flash to illuminate the diners before you close > down. Use a black hat. Unless you're using daylight balanced film in artificial light. Then you should, of course, use a blue hat. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 11:28:17 +0200 From: "Q.G. de Bakker" To: , Subject: Re: FAQ: 120 vs. 220 Tradeoffs Message-ID: <001e01c0e5c6$33ac7780$4ae1f1c3@qnu350> Mark Rabiner wrote: > > You will still be able to get a 35 mm back from Hasselblad. They were > > offered as a special order item. Just ask info@hasselblad.se . > > > I remember having a family argument with my dad on a cross country road trip in > the late 60's. > I was saying the Hasselblad I'd get one day (I was a late teen) would be better > than his Contarex bulls eye as i could just shoot 35mm if i ever wanted to with > it with it's 35mm back. (That i had indubitably heard of) He of course tried to > tell me how a camera designed for a medium format image circle might not be so > great in a 35mm image circle but I'd hear none of it. > This was definitely the 60's this discussion had to have taken place as in the > 70's no more family road trips. Funny though how the first Hasselblad back that took 35 mm film appeared in the 1980s ;-) Richard Nording mentions in Forum 1 / 2001 an earlier attempt by Hasselblad, modifying 70 mm backs to take 35 mm film. But he also mentions this attempt was abandoned and only 2 prototypes were made. And that was in 1974. Could it be that you were thinking of getting a (gasp) Bronica? ;-) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 16:20:24 +0200 From: Michael Buchstaller To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Non-shutter lenses Message-ID: >How about pre-releasing, and then removing and quickly replacing the >lens cap? hmmm... could not do exactly what one wants id they have till those transparent lens caps..... ;-) -Michael Buchstaller ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 08:19:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Justin Goh To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Buying New 503CW - Is This Normal QC?? Message-ID: <20010526151959.55092.qmail@web12405.mail.yahoo.com> Greetings to All, Hi, I'm new to this list and looking forward to gather useful informations from all of you. 'Hope you can help me with my questions as this is quite urgent. I'll be buying the 503CW body plus 80 mm CFe lens and A12 magazine in the next 2 days since this is a promotion and I'll be getting an extra A12 magazine for free. The promo will be ending at the end of this month. Firstly, I was decided ealier this day to buy the whole package but when I checked the Reflex Mirror of the 3 bodies I was comparing, all the bodies' reflex mirrors were somewhat dirty, there's a small (approx 1-2mm in size) spots that looks like a smudge on one body, while the others has some kind of a small scratch on it which can't be seen unless you look closely under a strong light like a flourescent lamp. The focusing screens have a bit of very tiny scratch (approx. 1 to 2 scratches) on it as well for the 2 bodies while the other one has a fair bit of dust on it. My other observation is that when you cock the shutter, it feels very smooth for the two bodies as if there's no resistance (that's with the lens!). And I'm afraid the gears might not be engaged properly which may result to a malfunction in the future. My question is: Are All these observations of mine normal?? I want to justify my buying a Hasselblad since this is going to be my first MF camera and I want to justify the cost I'm paying for. I didn't buy this morning as I was disappointed with the dirt I saw and I always want my equipment clean when I first get it. Can anybody explain why this is so? Or, can this be just for this batch?? Really appreciate your immediate responses. In a hurry to buy, Mark __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 11:27:21 -0400 From: "Austin Franklin" To: "Q.G. de Bakker" , Subject: RE: 203FE? Message-ID: > > Hasselblad discontinued the FE series 80, and the CFE is the standard > > replacement. I believe it would have been simple to just have the body > read > > the shutter speed of the CFE shutter (they already have an > encoder on the > > aperture, so why not on the shutter speed too?), when using the > shutter in > > the lense. Then it would operate in Manual Mode just like it does with > the > > FE lense. > > But it does do so! Exactly like FE lenses. > There is no lens shutter you can use in FE lenses, is there? ;-) You're not reading what I wrote. I specifically said they could have made it such that "WHEN USING THE SHUTTER IN THE LENSE", it would operate the same in manual mode as the FE lense (or CFE with shutter disabled). ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 14:42:02 -0400 From: Evan J Dong To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Buying New 503CW - Is This Normal QC?? Message-ID: <20010526.144236.-373651.1.evanjoe685@juno.com> Mark, I suggest that you go to another dealer and have him show you his inventory of 503CW. As you mentioned about the smudges or dirt in the reflex mirror, I have never enocunter that in a brand new camera, UNLESS your dealer is showing you a camera that has been man handled by his customer. If that is the case, I suggest to go to different dealer till you are satified with you are buying into. That is a big investment, and I sure as hell want to get my money's worth. Exactly where are you located? I would suggest to go to a big dealer who has a large inventory of equipment to sell. Regarding the shutter cocking with the lens on, that also depends on how long the dealer has it on his shelf before it is actually opened and tested. On some camera there is some minor resistance and on others there isn't any. Regarding that area, I would worry too much. Just look out for the noticable things that you discovered. Evan Dong On Sat, 26 May 2001 08:19:59 -0700 (PDT) Justin Goh writes: > Greetings to All, > Hi, I'm new to this list and looking forward to gather > useful informations from all of you. 'Hope you can > help me with my questions as this is quite urgent. > I'll be buying the 503CW body plus 80 mm CFe lens and > A12 magazine in the next 2 days since this is a > promotion and I'll be getting an extra A12 magazine > for free. The promo will be ending at the end of this > month. Firstly, I was decided ealier this day to buy > the whole package but when I checked the Reflex Mirror > of the 3 bodies I was comparing, all the bodies' > reflex mirrors were somewhat dirty, there's a small > (approx 1-2mm in size) spots that looks like a smudge > on one body, while the others has some kind of a small > scratch on it which can't be seen unless you look > closely under a strong light like a flourescent lamp. > The focusing screens have a bit of very tiny scratch > (approx. 1 to 2 scratches) on it as well for the 2 > bodies while the other one has a fair bit of dust on > it. My other observation is that when you cock the > shutter, it feels very smooth for the two bodies as if > there's no resistance (that's with the lens!). And I'm > afraid the gears might not be engaged properly which > may result to a malfunction in the future. My question > is: Are All these observations of mine normal?? I want > to justify my buying a Hasselblad since this is going > to be my first MF camera and I want to justify the > cost I'm paying for. I didn't buy this morning as I > was disappointed with the dirt I saw and I always want > my equipment clean when I first get it. Can anybody > explain why this is so? Or, can this be just for this > batch?? Really appreciate your immediate responses. > In a hurry to buy, > Mark > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices > http://auctions.yahoo.com/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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. > > Please turn off HTML mail features prior to posting to this list. > Use text mode only. > > 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 ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 12:23:31 -0700 From: "Rod Leavitt" To: Subject: RE: Buying New 503CW - Is This Normal QC?? Message-ID: Mark: After this promotion, there will be another---or this one will be continued. Don't feel as though you *have* to purchase in the next 2 days if you cannot get to another dealer soon. Also, you might consider mail order from a large authorized dealer: one that might have a higher turnover. R -----Original Message----- From: Evan J Dong [mailto:evanjoe685@juno.com] Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2001 11:42 AM To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Buying New 503CW - Is This Normal QC?? Mark, I suggest that you go to another dealer and have him show you his inventory of 503CW. As you mentioned about the smudges or dirt in the reflex mirror, I have never enocunter that in a brand new camera, UNLESS your dealer is showing you a camera that has been man handled by his customer. If that is the case, I suggest to go to different dealer till you are satified with you are buying into. That is a big investment, and I sure as hell want to get my money's worth. Exactly where are you located? I would suggest to go to a big dealer who has a large inventory of equipment to sell. Regarding the shutter cocking with the lens on, that also depends on how long the dealer has it on his shelf before it is actually opened and tested. On some camera there is some minor resistance and on others there isn't any. Regarding that area, I would worry too much. Just look out for the noticable things that you discovered. Evan Dong On Sat, 26 May 2001 08:19:59 -0700 (PDT) Justin Goh writes: > Greetings to All, > Hi, I'm new to this list and looking forward to gather > useful informations from all of you. 'Hope you can > help me with my questions as this is quite urgent. > I'll be buying the 503CW body plus 80 mm CFe lens and > A12 magazine in the next 2 days since this is a > promotion and I'll be getting an extra A12 magazine > for free. The promo will be ending at the end of this > month. Firstly, I was decided ealier this day to buy > the whole package but when I checked the Reflex Mirror > of the 3 bodies I was comparing, all the bodies' > reflex mirrors were somewhat dirty, there's a small > (approx 1-2mm in size) spots that looks like a smudge > on one body, while the others has some kind of a small > scratch on it which can't be seen unless you look > closely under a strong light like a flourescent lamp. > The focusing screens have a bit of very tiny scratch > (approx. 1 to 2 scratches) on it as well for the 2 > bodies while the other one has a fair bit of dust on > it. My other observation is that when you cock the > shutter, it feels very smooth for the two bodies as if > there's no resistance (that's with the lens!). And I'm > afraid the gears might not be engaged properly which > may result to a malfunction in the future. My question > is: Are All these observations of mine normal?? I want > to justify my buying a Hasselblad since this is going > to be my first MF camera and I want to justify the > cost I'm paying for. I didn't buy this morning as I > was disappointed with the dirt I saw and I always want > my equipment clean when I first get it. Can anybody > explain why this is so? Or, can this be just for this > batch?? Really appreciate your immediate responses. > In a hurry to buy, > Mark > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices > http://auctions.yahoo.com/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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. > > Please turn off HTML mail features prior to posting to this list. > Use text mode only. > > 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 ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. Please turn off HTML mail features prior to posting to this list. Use text mode only. 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: Sat, 26 May 2001 14:59:46 -0500 From: chriscasey To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: batteries in Europe Message-ID: <20010526145946.B1305@ev1.net> I'm about to go to France to wedding & do some photography there. I wanted to take my rechargables, but what are (if any) the issues with plugging in battery chargers in over there? I have Ni-Cad as well as a Lumedyne Digital Battery. I'd like to charge them before the wedding, but I don't want to just plug them into an outlet converter & have them melt or catch on fire or blow up or whatever... thanks Chris ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 12:52:40 -0700 From: David Gerhardt To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Buying New 503CW - Is This Normal QC?? Message-ID: <200105261952.PAA29388@barry.mail.mindspring.net> --Apple-Mail-1877716769-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii I agree 100% with Rod's comment below. Hasselblad (at least in the US) has ALWAYS had a great bargain that will run out in a few months... to be replaced by the next bargain. Don't be rushed into a purchase that should last a lifetime. -David Gerhardt (davidgerhardt@mindspring.com) On Saturday, May 26, 2001, at 12:23 PM, Rod Leavitt wrote: > Mark: > > After this promotion, there will be another---or this one will be > continued. > Don't feel as though you *have* to purchase in the next 2 days if you > cannot > get to another dealer soon. --Apple-Mail-1877716769-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/enriched; charset=us-ascii I agree 100% with Rod's comment below. Hasselblad (at least in the US) has ALWAYS had a great bargain that will run out in a few months... to be replaced by the next bargain. Don't be rushed into a purchase that should last a lifetime. Gill = Sans3535,4747,8787-David Gerhardt American = Typewriter(davidgerhardt@mindspring.com) On Saturday, May 26, 2001, at 12:23 PM, Rod Leavitt wrote: Mark: After this promotion, there will be another---or this one will be continued. Don't feel as though you *have* to purchase in the next 2 days if you cannot get to another dealer soon. = --Apple-Mail-1877716769-1-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 13:07:04 -0700 From: David Gerhardt To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: 203FE? Message-ID: <200105262006.QAA06476@blount.mail.mindspring.net> --Apple-Mail-1262210886-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii Not to beat a dead horse, but: If you think of the 200 series cameras as primarily FOCAL PLANE cameras, with the "option" of using the "shuttered" lenses, you will find the cameras make more sense. The fact that they COULD have been improved (or added more features, or reduced the price) may be true; but obscures how well they work as they were intended. If you want to feel sorry for some people that had to replace lenses, think about the Canon 35mm crowd, when Canon went to EOS lenses. The fact that Nikon & Hasselblad allow me to use lenses made from the '60's up to the new millenium AT ALL, explains why I have Nikons & Hasselblads (rather than Canons & Rolleis). (ps; this thread also illustrates how difficult it is to express ideas clearly over email ;-) for the record, Austin, I agree that your suggestion would have improved the camera. My only point was that I didn't EXPECT the camera to have that extra feature, and so it doesn't detract from my satisfaction with the 203 as a tool. Nor would it stop me from highly recommending the 203 over a 500 series camera... especially at only $3200!) -David Gerhardt (davidgerhardt@mindspring.com) On Saturday, May 26, 2001, at 08:27 AM, Austin Franklin wrote: >> But it does do so! Exactly like FE lenses. >> There is no lens shutter you can use in FE lenses, is there? ;-) > > You're not reading what I wrote. I specifically said they could have > made > it such that "WHEN USING THE SHUTTER IN THE LENSE", it would operate the > same in manual mode as the FE lense (or CFE with shutter disabled). > --Apple-Mail-1262210886-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/enriched; charset=us-ascii Not to beat a dead horse, but: If you think of the 200 series cameras as primarily FOCAL PLANE cameras, with the "option" of using the "shuttered" lenses, you will find the cameras make more sense. The fact that they COULD have been improved (or added more features, or reduced the price) may be true; but obscures how well they work as they were intended. If you want to feel sorry for some people that had to replace lenses, think about the Canon 35mm crowd, when Canon went to EOS lenses. The fact that Nikon & Hasselblad allow me to use lenses made from the '60's up to the new millenium AT ALL, explains why I have Nikons & Hasselblads (rather than Canons & Rolleis).=20 (ps; this thread also illustrates how difficult it is to express ideas clearly over email ;-) =20 for the record, Austin, I agree that your suggestion would have improved the camera. My only point was that I didn't EXPECT the camera to have that extra feature, and so it doesn't detract from my satisfaction with the 203 as a tool. Nor would it stop me from highly recommending the 203 over a 500 series camera... especially at only $3200!) Gill = Sans3535,4747,8787-David Gerhardt American = Typewriter(davidgerhardt@mindspring.com) On Saturday, May 26, 2001, at 08:27 AM, Austin Franklin wrote: But it does do so! Exactly like FE lenses. There is no lens shutter you can use in FE lenses, is there? ;-) You're not reading what I wrote. I specifically said they could have made it such that "WHEN USING THE SHUTTER IN THE LENSE", it would operate the same in manual mode as the FE lense (or CFE with shutter disabled). --Apple-Mail-1262210886-2-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 13:32:31 -0700 From: Mark Rabiner To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Lens angle of view table Long dimension Message-ID: <3B1012DF.312676A3@rabiner.cncoffice.com> I'm made a color A3 PDF 31k chart and uploaded it for people. It goes from half frame to 8x10 inch formats. Take a look if you have Acrobat Reader. It should print well. Lens angle of view table Long dimension http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/pdfs/LensangleofviewtableLong.pdf If there are focal lengths that you use which are missing please fill me in. Remember. These are not diagonal angles if view but horizontal or long side as the cinematographers know are more valuable. I'm made sure to include the focal lengths for Leica M and R and Hasselblad but i also looked up all the sites of the usual suspects to get the focal lengths of interest. Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 13:47:31 -0700 From: Mark Rabiner To: "Q.G. de Bakker" Cc: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: FAQ: 120 vs. 220 Tradeoffs Message-ID: <3B101663.F00357D6@rabiner.cncoffice.com> > > Richard Nording mentions in Forum 1 / 2001 an earlier attempt by Hasselblad, > modifying 70 mm backs to take 35 mm film. But he also mentions this attempt > was abandoned and only 2 prototypes were made. And that was in 1974. > Could it be that you were thinking of getting a (gasp) Bronica? ;-) I'd never heard of a Bronica those days! I must have gotten my little adolescent paws on some brochure that was not meant for the general public. But i would have noticed if it was being called a special order item. Did someone say it was NOW a special order item? You'd think NASA or somebody would have ordered one and then they could just make more. If made in small amounts they'd have to charge a lot more but feed us a bone!! If Bronica and Mamiya and Pentax and god knows who else can make more on 35mm backs why cant' Hasselblad? Why not extend the use of the camera who would it hurt? Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 17:00:30 -0400 From: "Austin Franklin" To: , Subject: RE: Lens angle of view table Long dimension Message-ID: > I'm made a color A3 PDF 31k chart and uploaded it for people. > It goes from half frame to 8x10 inch formats. > Take a look if you have Acrobat Reader. It should print well. > Lens angle of view table Long dimension > http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/pdfs/LensangleofviewtableLong.pdf > If there are focal lengths that you use which are missing please > fill me in. > Remember. These are not diagonal angles if view but horizontal or > long side > as the cinematographers know are more valuable. > I'm made sure to include the focal lengths for Leica M and R and > Hasselblad but > i also looked up all the sites of the usual suspects to get the > focal lengths of interest. I didn't believe AOV was directly related to focal length...that it was loosely related, but that different lense designs, of the same focal length, would have different AOVs... ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 14:11:55 -0700 From: Mark Rabiner To: Austin Franklin Cc: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Lens angle of view table Long dimension Message-ID: <3B101C1B.D62A8D4C@rabiner.cncoffice.com> Austin Franklin wrote: > > > I'm made a color A3 PDF 31k chart and uploaded it for people. > > It goes from half frame to 8x10 inch formats. > > Take a look if you have Acrobat Reader. It should print well. > > Lens angle of view table Long dimension > > http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/pdfs/LensangleofviewtableLong.pdf > > If there are focal lengths that you use which are missing please > > fill me in. > > Remember. These are not diagonal angles if view but horizontal or > > long side > > as the cinematographers know are more valuable. > > I'm made sure to include the focal lengths for Leica M and R and > > Hasselblad but > > i also looked up all the sites of the usual suspects to get the > > focal lengths of interest. > > I didn't believe AOV was directly related to focal length...that it was > loosely related, but that different lense designs, of the same focal length, > would have different AOVs... There's a formula for it that i got on serval places on the internet an my wife could deal with on her advanced HP calculator. The numbers agreed with the numbers give out by Hasselblad which gives out both the diagonal and horizontal AOV angles. And on other charts. Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 17:20:46 -0400 From: "Austin Franklin" To: , Subject: RE: Lens angle of view table Long dimension Message-ID: > > I didn't believe AOV was directly related to focal length...that it was > > loosely related, but that different lense designs, of the same > focal length, > > would have different AOVs... > > There's a formula for it that i got on serval places on the > internet Well, explain this: 15mm Distagon Contax Zeiss = AOV 110 diagonal 16mm Distagon Contax Zeiss = AOV 180 diagonal 18mm Distagon Contax Zeiss = AOV 100 diagonal... Yes, the 16 is a fisheye...but that's why I said I think it's related also to lense design, and even at that, any formula will only be an approximation... I don't know, I'm just asking. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 14:51:22 -0700 From: "Joe Codispoti" To: Subject: Re: batteries in Europe Message-ID: <078901c0e62e$01dd5360$e6d9efd1@joe> Chris, All EU countries have adapted an electrical standard of 220-240V. In order to recharge your flash/camera/shaver batteries, you will need a voltage converter from 230V to 115V which, I presume, is the voltage of your recharging unit. The voltage converter is available as a kit, along with the appropriate plug converters in the travel section of several department store. I have such a kit and have used it in several European countries with no problems. Joe Codispoti ----- Original Message ----- From: "chriscasey" To: Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2001 12:59 PM Subject: batteries in Europe > I'm about to go to France to wedding & do some photography there. I > wanted to take my rechargables, but what are (if any) the issues with > plugging in battery chargers in over there? I have Ni-Cad as well as a > Lumedyne Digital Battery. I'd like to charge them before the wedding, > but I don't want to just plug them into an outlet converter & have them > melt or catch on fire or blow up or whatever... > > thanks > > Chris > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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. > > Please turn off HTML mail features prior to posting to this list. Use text mode only. > > 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: Thu, 24 May 2001 07:02:13 -0700 From: Patrick Bartek To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: test Message-ID: <01052407030500.00526@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, 23 May 2001, Eduard Crombie wrote: > test sent on 23/05/01 at 20:17 > > I'm having mail server problems. Just checking if services are acting. > Sorry. Seems to be working. -- Patrick Bartek NoLife Polymath Group bartek@intermind.net ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 01:03:05 +0200 From: "Q.G. de Bakker" To: , Subject: Re: FAQ: 120 vs. 220 Tradeoffs Message-ID: <002601c0e638$08393da0$d9d8f1c3@qnu350> Mark Rabiner wrote: > I'd never heard of a Bronica those days! I must have gotten my little adolescent > paws on some brochure that was not meant for the general public. But i would > have noticed if it was being called a special order item. Did someone say it was > NOW a special order item? It was a while ago. Perhaps it still is (there may have been some left on a shelf). > You'd think NASA or somebody would have ordered one and then they could just > make more. Why would NASA want such a back? Come to think of it, are there still emulsions available only in 35 mm format that we would miss, without a suitable replacement in 120 format? > If made in small amounts they'd have to charge a lot more but feed us a bone!! > If Bronica and Mamiya and Pentax and god knows who else can make more on 35mm > backs why cant' Hasselblad? Why not extend the use of the camera who would it hurt? Hasselblad. Why manufacture items that don't sell? Besides, if we would want to use 35 mm film in a panoramic format, there is another product now they would rather have us buy. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 01:05:24 +0200 From: "Q.G. de Bakker" To: Subject: Re: batteries in Europe Message-ID: <002f01c0e638$59debae0$d9d8f1c3@qnu350> Joe Codispoti wrote: > All EU countries have adapted an electrical standard of 220-240V. > In order to recharge your flash/camera/shaver batteries, you will need a > voltage converter from 230V to 115V which, I presume, is the voltage of your > recharging unit. > The voltage converter is available as a kit, along with the appropriate plug > converters in the travel section of several department store. > I have such a kit and have used it in several European countries with no > problems. And should you forget to bring one, they are readily available in Europe too. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 17:35:19 -0700 From: Jim Brick To: mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com, hasselblad@kelvin.net Cc: Mark Rabiner Subject: Re: Lens angle of view table Long dimension Message-ID: <200105270038.RAA20751@spoon.alink.net> At 01:32 PM 5/26/01 -0700, Mark Rabiner wrote: >I'm made a color A3 PDF 31k chart and uploaded it for people. >It goes from half frame to 8x10 inch formats. >Take a look if you have Acrobat Reader. It should print well. >Lens angle of view table Long dimension >http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/pdfs/LensangleofviewtableLong.pdf >If there are focal lengths that you use which are missing please fill me in. >Remember. These are not diagonal angles if view but horizontal or long side > as the cinematographers know are more valuable. >I'm made sure to include the focal lengths for Leica M and R and Hasselblad but >i also looked up all the sites of the usual suspects to get the focal lengths of interest. > > >Mark Rabiner Thanks Mark for a very useful chart. I have several from various sources but this one at least has the standard lens focal lengths so that you don't have to interpolate the chart. And the AOV is not exactly something that folks worry about one way or the other. They mainly want to know, for instance, what lens do I have to buy for my 6x7 to equal the 35mm lens on my 35mm camera. I was asked this very question on Friday by Angela. Answer... 65mm. Thanks again for a very useful tool. Jim ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 21:15:34 -0700 From: Mark Rabiner To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Lens angle of view table Long dimension Message-ID: <3B107F66.27ADB8EB@rabiner.cncoffice.com> Austin Franklin wrote: > > > I'm made a color A3 PDF 31k chart and uploaded it for people. > > It goes from half frame to 8x10 inch formats. > > Take a look if you have Acrobat Reader. It should print well. > > Lens angle of view table Long dimension > > http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/pdfs/LensangleofviewtableLong.pdf > > If there are focal lengths that you use which are missing please > > fill me in. > > Remember. These are not diagonal angles if view but horizontal or > > long side > > as the cinematographers know are more valuable. > > I'm made sure to include the focal lengths for Leica M and R and > > Hasselblad but > > i also looked up all the sites of the usual suspects to get the > > focal lengths of interest. > > I didn't believe AOV was directly related to focal length...that it was > loosely related, but that different lense designs, of the same focal length, > would have different AOVs... > A fisheye would not follow the formula they said. Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 21:17:59 -0700 From: Mark Rabiner To: Jim Brick Cc: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Lens angle of view table Long dimension Message-ID: <3B107FF6.4799A615@rabiner.cncoffice.com> > > Thanks Mark for a very useful chart. I have several from various sources > but this one at least has the standard lens focal lengths so that you don't > have to interpolate the chart. And the AOV is not exactly something that > folks worry about one way or the other. They mainly want to know, for > instance, what lens do I have to buy for my 6x7 to equal the 35mm lens on > my 35mm camera. I was asked this very question on Friday by Angela. > Answer... 65mm. > > Thanks again for a very useful tool. > > Jim Thanks Jim! Thats exactly it. That's why we made the chart. http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/pdfs/LensangleofviewtableLong.pdf Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/ ------------------------------ End of hasselblad V1 #1239 ************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. Please turn off HTML mail features prior to posting to this list. Use text mode only. 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