hasselblad Wed, 6 Jun 2001 Volume 1 : Number 1249 In this issue: 50mm for weddings Re: 150, 160 or 180 for wedding candids? Re: 50mm for weddings Re: 150, 160 or 180 for wedding candids? Re: 150, 160 or 180 for wedding candids? Re: 150, 160 or 180 for wedding candids? Bellows problem with 501CM ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 00:42:00 -0700 From: David Weininger To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: 50mm for weddings Message-ID: > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --MS_Mac_OE_3074546520_1829606_MIME_Part Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit > Do you avoid getting full lengths of people with the 50 though > because they are > crumpled into midgets? I do. People did compain being made any > shorter than they > already are. I try getting them from the waist or knees up even > if I'm using the > 50 and that doesnt happen. In very cramped spaces. > I wonder if that would happen with the 60 which i don't have yet? Your too high relative to the subject. When using the 50 or any wide lens up close, squat down and you'll actually make your subjects taller. David Weininger --MS_Mac_OE_3074546520_1829606_MIME_Part Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable 50mm for weddings > Do you avoid getting full lengths of people with the 50 though
> because they are
> crumpled into midgets? I do. People did compain being made any
> shorter than they
> already are. I try getting them from the waist or knees up even
> if I'm using the
> 50 and that doesnt happen. In very cramped spaces.
> I wonder if that would happen with the 60 which i don't have yet?

Your too high relative to the subject. When using the 50 or any wide lens u= p close, squat down and you'll actually make your subjects taller.

David Weininger --MS_Mac_OE_3074546520_1829606_MIME_Part-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 01:14:45 -0700 From: Mark Rabiner To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: 150, 160 or 180 for wedding candids? Message-ID: <3B1C94F5.BA20F0A7@rabiner.cncoffice.com> I agree with you guys saying that a whole wedding could be shot with a 60 and it would be just fine. I can see doing it. A little easier than doing it with an 80 perhaps. I've done a few with an 80 on a Rolleiflex TLR 2.8 Zeiss planar. Seldom if ever during these weddings did the thought occur to me that a different angle of view coming out of my camera would be beneficial. I shot them painlessly! Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA Sometimes the 80 sees wide, sometimes it sees long, but it always sees something. http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 01:23:14 -0700 From: Mark Rabiner To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: 50mm for weddings Message-ID: <3B1C96F1.51F4BA2E@rabiner.cncoffice.com> > if I'm using the > 50 and that doesnt happen. In very cramped spaces. > I wonder if that would happen with the 60 which i don't have yet? Your too high relative to the subject. When using the 50 or any wide lens up close, squat down and you'll actually make your subjects taller. David Weininger I use the waist level finder and do shoot from the waist. So that's up. The famous Rolleiflex angle is also the angle of any camera used with a waist level finder. I shoot from the belt. I set my lens at five feet and walk up to my subject until i am five feet away glancing down at the groudglass at my waist to put them in there - i pop the shutter. My Norman 200C flash gets me f16 or better at 100ws. I don't miss my focus. It's 4.25 to 6 feet! Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 22:42:29 +0800 From: "Stein" To: Subject: Re: 150, 160 or 180 for wedding candids? Message-ID: <008901c0edcd$bf9893a0$70b237cb@oemcomputer> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick Bartek" To: Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2001 12:16 AM Subject: Re: 150, 160 or 180 for wedding candids? > On Sun, 03 Jun 2001, Mark Rabiner wrote: > > > > > > > > > > In short, I still prefer the 50 and 80 for candids, although anything from > > > 50 to 180 can easily be used. I guess I always prefer to be too wide, as > > > it's really frustrating to see a shot happen and miss it because you > > > couldn't back up fast enough (or there isn't time or room to back up). > > > > > > Do you avoid getting full lengths of people with the 50 though because they are > > crumpled into midgets? I do. People did compain being made any shorter than they > > already are. I try getting them from the waist or knees up even if I'm using the > > 50 and that doesnt happen. In very cramped spaces. > > I wonder if that would happen with the 60 which i don't have yet? > > When I shoot weddings, which I rarely do anymore, the 60 makes a > perfect "normal" lens for general use, full and 3/4 lengths, as well as > group shots -- no wide angle distortion at all, if you keep the lens > more or less level. > > Also for those "walking-down-the-aisle" shots, I get nice full lengths > from about 8' to 10' away with the 60. That distance gives me more than > enough time to step out of the way and back into the aisle for the next > group in the procession without interferring with the rhythm of the > ceremony. > > > [snip] > > > > Mark Rabiner > > -- > Patrick Bartek > NoLife Polymath Group > bartek@intermind.net > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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 te xt 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: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 22:48:57 +0800 From: "Stein" To: Subject: Re: 150, 160 or 180 for wedding candids? Message-ID: <009d01c0edce$bf7a8ee0$70b237cb@oemcomputer> Dear Friends, Pat Bartek mentioned popping in and out of an empty pew as the procession comes down the aisle to get the set-distance shots. Good idea. But have you tried the old trick of stringing a length of piano wire from one one pew to the other ( pick a dim section of the aisle ) and just focussing on this? Eventually all the members of the bridal party will be there, one on top of the other, and you can get them in one shot before they disentangle themselves. And the teenagers in the family generally get the blame. Uncle Dick ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 09:04:18 -0700 From: Jim Brick To: "Stein" , Subject: Re: 150, 160 or 180 for wedding candids? Message-ID: <4.1.20010605090217.020b8c50@xsj02.sjs.agilent.com> At 10:48 PM 6/5/01 +0800, Stein wrote: >Dear Friends, > > Pat Bartek mentioned popping in and out of an empty pew as the >procession comes down the aisle to get the set-distance shots. Good idea. >But have you tried the old trick of stringing a length of piano wire from >one one pew to the other ( pick a dim section of the aisle ) and just >focussing on this? Eventually all the members of the bridal party will be >there, one on top of the other, and you can get them in one shot before they >disentangle themselves. And the teenagers in the family generally get the >blame. > > Uncle Dick Gee Unkle Dick, why didn't wedding photographers think of that years ago. What a good way for them to get out of the wedding business. Jim ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 10:24:23 -0700 From: "Fowle Foto" To: "Hasselblad Mailing List" Subject: Message-ID: I have a simple trick that works like magic at receptions were it is dark and hard to focus quickly. I shoot a 501c/m with 50mm, 45 prism and a Metz 60CT-4. I set the lens and flash at f11, prefocus at 10 feet and let the depth of field work for me. If you look at the lens everything from about 6 feet to infinity will be in focus. This way if something happens quickly and I don't have time to focus properly, I can just grab the camera point and shoot. Bill Fowle Photographer (fowlefoto@gobc.com) Fowle Foto...Photography with a difference! (http://www.gobc.com/fowlefoto/) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 01:41:18 EDT From: Gdoces@aol.com To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Bellows problem with 501CM Message-ID: <8b.794d8c6.284f1c7e@aol.com> Today I attempted for the first time to put the "round" bellows extension (item #40223) on my 501CM only to discover that I could not "lock" the bellows onto the camera body. I can't figure out what the problem is. Normally, the bellows is inserted into the front of the camera body so that the marking on the bellows are properly aligned, turn counter-clockwise and the bellows should be locked on. It fit properly but would not turn to the locked position. All of my lenses attach to this camera without any problem. Any suggestions or ideas as to what is the problem? ------------------------------ End of hasselblad V1 #1249 ************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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