hasselblad Tue, 15 Jan 2002 Volume 1 : Number 1470 In this issue: Re: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Re: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Re: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Re: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Re: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens re: flare reduction CB >> CT* >C ?? Re: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens RE: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Re: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens RE: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens EUROS Re: [HUG] EUROS Re: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Re: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens New User Question Re: [HUG] New User Question RE: [HUG] New User Question ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 09:54:21 -0800 From: "Joseph Codispoti" To: Subject: Re: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Message-ID: <00af01c19d24$7f593220$9865fea9@joe> In response to Peter Rosenthal Peter, Regarding the filter-for-protection issue, there are two well entranched camps resolutely diploying all arguments to support or negate the usefulness of such a devise. I tend to agree with your reasoning that where the broken filter may have damaged the lens, the cause of the broken filter might have damaged the lens directly anyway. I agree with you also that cleaning lenses inproperly is a cause for scratches and damaged coatings. There are plenty of professionals who fail to see the value of proper cleaning. I disagree, however that frequent cleaning is not good for a lens. Modern coatings, unlike the old Planars', are very tough. Cleaning a lens with a brush instead of cloth and liquid may be sufficient in most cases (a clean brush causes no damage), but a clean lens is much preferable to a dirty one for obvious reasons. Joe Codispoti ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 09:52:43 -0800 From: george day To: Subject: Re: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Message-ID: Second. I use dust-off (discharged lightly and held rather far from the front element) and, until recently, sterilized cotton, brushes and breath. Not to sound like a billboard, but I picked up Joe's brush and cleaner, and, wow -- great stuff. My wife and I spent most of yesterday hiking and at the beach. I came home with three lenses that had a considerable amount of sea spray on them: 50 and 110 FE and 90/2 Leica M. Pricey stuff to mess up. A few careful minutes later, all were very, very clean -- as were my fogged eyeglasses. Effective stuff. On 1/14/02 9:54 AM, "Joseph Codispoti" wrote: > > In response to Peter Rosenthal > > > Peter, > > Regarding the filter-for-protection issue, there are two well entranched > camps resolutely diploying all arguments to support or negate the usefulness > of such a devise. I tend to agree with your reasoning that where the broken > filter may have damaged the lens, the cause of the broken filter might have > damaged the lens directly anyway. > > I agree with you also that cleaning lenses inproperly is a cause for > scratches and damaged coatings. > There are plenty of professionals who fail to see the value of proper > cleaning. > I disagree, however that frequent cleaning is not good for a lens. Modern > coatings, unlike the old Planars', are very tough. Cleaning a lens with a > brush instead of cloth and liquid may be sufficient in most cases (a clean > brush causes no damage), but a clean lens is much preferable to a dirty one > for obvious reasons. > > Joe Codispoti > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 13:11:14 -0500 From: "Dr. Elliot Puritz" To: Subject: Re: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Message-ID: <000f01c19d26$da94fdc0$3fc59d42@f6bq001> Hi George...did I miss something? What is/are Joe's brush and cleaner? Elliot ----- Original Message ----- From: george day To: Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 12:52 PM Subject: Re: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens > Second. I use dust-off (discharged lightly and held rather far from the > front element) and, until recently, sterilized cotton, brushes and breath. > > Not to sound like a billboard, but I picked up Joe's brush and cleaner, and, > wow -- great stuff. My wife and I spent most of yesterday hiking and at the > beach. I came home with three lenses that had a considerable amount of sea > spray on them: 50 and 110 FE and 90/2 Leica M. Pricey stuff to mess up. A > few careful minutes later, all were very, very clean -- as were my fogged > eyeglasses. Effective stuff. > > On 1/14/02 9:54 AM, "Joseph Codispoti" wrote: > > > > > In response to Peter Rosenthal > > > > > > Peter, > > > > Regarding the filter-for-protection issue, there are two well entranched > > camps resolutely diploying all arguments to support or negate the usefulness > > of such a devise. I tend to agree with your reasoning that where the broken > > filter may have damaged the lens, the cause of the broken filter might have > > damaged the lens directly anyway. > > > > I agree with you also that cleaning lenses inproperly is a cause for > > scratches and damaged coatings. > > There are plenty of professionals who fail to see the value of proper > > cleaning. > > I disagree, however that frequent cleaning is not good for a lens. Modern > > coatings, unlike the old Planars', are very tough. Cleaning a lens with a > > brush instead of cloth and liquid may be sufficient in most cases (a clean > > brush causes no damage), but a clean lens is much preferable to a dirty one > > for obvious reasons. > > > > Joe Codispoti > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > 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 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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 > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 10:45:20 -0800 From: "Joseph Codispoti" To: Subject: Re: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Message-ID: <00e301c19d2b$9e936960$9865fea9@joe> From: "Dr. Elliot Puritz" To: > Hi George...did I miss something? What is/are Joe's brush and cleaner? > > Elliot For complete info visit www.clearsightusa.com Joseph Codispoti ClearSight USA P.O. Box 150, San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 USA www.clearsightusa.com joecodi@clearsightusa.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 13:59:56 -0500 From: henryp@bhphotovideo.com To: Subject: Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20020114135942.04aa55c0@bnhpop1.bhphotovideo.com> At 03:01 AM 01/14/2002, you wrote: > > This message is in MIME format. sigh... <> hp ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 14:05:11 -0500 From: Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video To: Subject: Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20020114140149.04aa0870@bnhpop1.bhphotovideo.com> At 03:01 AM 01/14/2002, you wrote: > I've seen thousands, maybe tens of >thousands of lenses with damage because of no filter. I'm not just talking >about impact damage to glass as has been described, but cleaning damage, and >no protection from impact. I have also seen PLENTY of shattered filters which did no damage whatever to the lens they died to protect. In many cases, had there been no filter the lens's front element would have suffered the fate the filter spared it. I know a NYC cop who wears a bullet-proof vest. He got hit once. The vest had bullet holes in it, and he had some pretty interesting back-n-blue marks, but wearing the vest was better than not wearing the vest. I also used to shoot in high schools and colleges. Try cleaning the results of a fraternity cafeteria food fight off your front element while running to cover the next event on your schedule. -- regards, Henry Posner Director of Sales and Training B&H Photo-Video, and Pro-Audio Inc. http://www.bhphotovideo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 12:24:32 -0800 From: george day To: Subject: Re: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Message-ID: FYI, the product is 'clearsight' -- at http://www.clearsightusa.com/. Email Joe and he'll hook you up. On 1/14/02 9:52 AM, "george day" wrote: > Second. I use dust-off (discharged lightly and held rather far from the > front element) and, until recently, sterilized cotton, brushes and breath. > > Not to sound like a billboard, but I picked up Joe's brush and cleaner, and, > wow -- great stuff. My wife and I spent most of yesterday hiking and at the > beach. I came home with three lenses that had a considerable amount of sea > spray on them: 50 and 110 FE and 90/2 Leica M. Pricey stuff to mess up. A > few careful minutes later, all were very, very clean -- as were my fogged > eyeglasses. Effective stuff. > > On 1/14/02 9:54 AM, "Joseph Codispoti" wrote: > >> >> In response to Peter Rosenthal >> >> >> Peter, >> >> Regarding the filter-for-protection issue, there are two well entranched >> camps resolutely diploying all arguments to support or negate the usefulness >> of such a devise. I tend to agree with your reasoning that where the broken >> filter may have damaged the lens, the cause of the broken filter might have >> damaged the lens directly anyway. >> >> I agree with you also that cleaning lenses inproperly is a cause for >> scratches and damaged coatings. >> There are plenty of professionals who fail to see the value of proper >> cleaning. >> I disagree, however that frequent cleaning is not good for a lens. Modern >> coatings, unlike the old Planars', are very tough. Cleaning a lens with a >> brush instead of cloth and liquid may be sufficient in most cases (a clean >> brush causes no damage), but a clean lens is much preferable to a dirty one >> for obvious reasons. >> >> Joe Codispoti >> >> >> >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> 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 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 15:59:22 EST From: DBaker9128@aol.com To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: re: flare reduction CB >> CT* >C ?? Message-ID: <14.20cdf27d.2974a0aa@aol.com> --part1_14.20cdf27d.2974a0aa_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mr. Monaghan wrote: "My impression from the press releases was that the newer lenses were mainly using superior baffling (and lens mount flare spot reductions?) to reduce or minimize off-axis hot spot (sun..) flare. I don't recall if the coatings were improved significantly over T* or not?" Yes, I understand the same as you. I have pasted in two URLs which (I believe you refer to) that talks more about the subject of the CB/CFi/CFE lenses performing better than the C, CT*, and CF lenses in high stray light environments. http://www.hasselblad.com/press/detail.cgi?old/920654927.txt http://www.hasselblad.com/articles/flare.html Doug from Tumwater --part1_14.20cdf27d.2974a0aa_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mr. Monaghan wrote:
"My impression from the press releases was that the newer lenses were mainly using superior baffling (and lens mount flare spot reductions?) to reduce or minimize off-axis hot spot (sun..) flare. I don't recall if the coatings were improved significantly over T* or not?"

Yes, I understand the same as you. I have pasted in two URLs which (I believe you refer to) that talks more about the subject of the CB/CFi/CFE lenses performing better than the C, CT*, and CF lenses in high stray light environments.

http://www.hasselblad.com/press/detail.cgi?old/920654927.txt

http://www.hasselblad.com/articles/flare.html

Doug from Tumwater --part1_14.20cdf27d.2974a0aa_boundary-- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 14:55:48 -0800 From: Mark Rabiner To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Message-ID: <3C4361F5.62AC6EEA@markrabiner.com> Peter Rosenthal wrote: > > "Your 50 FLE isn't the first lens I've seen damaged by a broken filter. As a > matter of fact, the O-N-L-Y front elements I've ever seen damaged were > damaged by a broken filter. This reporting ups the count to five. Five by a > broken filter, zero with no filter." > > Eeeeeee Gads!!!! > > I can't let this go by without comment! While no doubt well > intentioned, this stuff borders on irresponsible. While the only damage Jim > Eeeeeee Gads!!!! I'd call walking around with a UV filter on irresponsible and ridiculous Peter. I know lots of professional photographers and none of them do it. In 30 years of serious or professional photography I've never damaged a front element or heard of any of my friends doing so. Old soft coatings from the 30's and 40's maybe. But my friends are not collectors. Modern coatings are incredibly durable. I noticed no mention of lens hoods in your post. I love the way you say you don't want to pull rank or anything but you seen thousands of yada yada yada. You are a camera repairman Peter. Jim Brick is a consummate photographer and graduate of Brooks. He doesn't see glass go by he USES them. Putting a UV filter over a quality Zeiss lens is like putting a sticky plastic slip cover over an exquisite couch. The couch lasts forever but who the hell wants to sit on it? Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA http://www.markrabiner.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 18:09:41 -0500 From: "Austin Franklin" To: Subject: RE: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Message-ID: > Putting a UV filter over a quality Zeiss lens is like putting a sticky > plastic slip cover over an exquisite couch. > The couch lasts forever but who the hell wants to sit on it? Mark, A UV filter does NOT degrade the image quality AT ALL, unless you are in a situation where flare is an issue. Even Erwin has agreed with that. I DO use UV filters, and I find it far far easier to clean the front of a UV than to clean the front element. It's MY preference, and since it doesn't degrade the image quality AT ALL, why begrudge someone their preference? Austin ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 15:30:49 -0800 From: Mark Rabiner To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Message-ID: <3C436A29.85C8C776@markrabiner.com> Austin Franklin wrote: > > > Putting a UV filter over a quality Zeiss lens is like putting a sticky > > plastic slip cover over an exquisite couch. > > The couch lasts forever but who the hell wants to sit on it? > > Mark, > > A UV filter does NOT degrade the image quality AT ALL, unless you are in a > situation where flare is an issue. Even Erwin has agreed with that. > > I DO use UV filters, and I find it far far easier to clean the front of a UV > than to clean the front element. It's MY preference, and since it doesn't > degrade the image quality AT ALL, why begrudge someone their preference? > > Austin > Because it reeks of cut rate cheap second class dilettantism - but other than that no reason at all really! :) And what situation is flare NOT and issue? I dot know about you but when i shoot people I've got the sun behind them when ever possible. And i may be shooting with the sun behind me, and then quick as a bunny flip around and shoot into the sun. Do i say "hold everything" and quickly unscrew my trusty UV filter at that moment? Who are your role models Austin? Henri Cartier Bresson? Robert Frank? Helmut Newton? Ansel Adams? Richard Avedon? I guarantee you not one of them uses a stupid UV filter. Use a lens hood. You are protected quite well enough. Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA http://www.markrabiner.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 19:06:17 -0500 From: "Austin Franklin" To: Subject: RE: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Message-ID: > And what situation is flare NOT and issue? Well, heck, Mark...it IS an SLR, now isn't it? > And i may be shooting with the sun behind me, > and then quick as a bunny flip around and shoot into the sun. I want to see that! > Do i say "hold everything" and quickly unscrew my trusty UV filter at > that moment? If need be, why yes... > Who are your role models Austin? It's their images I admire, what equipment they used to achieve their results, now does that really matter? > Henri Cartier Bresson? Robert Frank? Helmut Newton? Ansel Adams? > Richard Avedon? > I guarantee you not one of them uses a stupid UV filter. Well, of course not...mine are smart! > Use a lens hood. You are protected quite well enough. Not from dust and dirt! But I do use one as well. Regards, Austin ------------------------------ Date: 14 Jan 2002 17:42:15 -0700 From: Matthew Midnight Gaylen To: hasselblad Subject: EUROS Message-ID: <946391285midnight@montrose.net> That's a lot of Euros. How many Euros in a dollar? Thanks, -- Prints... If you want to go digital without using film there are plenty options too. In fact, i don't know any manufacturer of digital backs that doesn't offer Hasselblad as camera platform, even Rollei! CreoScitex's Leaf C-Most (6.6 MegaPixel, approx. Euro 10,250); Heidelberg's Colorcam (6.3 MP, Euro 22,000); Imacon's two types of Flexframe (6 and 16 MP, Euro 23,000 and 27,500); Jenoptik's Eyelike (6.3 MP, Euro 19,000); Kodak's Pro Back Plus (16 MP, Euro 28,000); Megavision's S3 and S4 (6 and 16 MP, Euro 18,000 and 21,500); Mosaic Imaging's Luma (6 MP, Euro 20,800); PhaseOne's Lightphase and H20 (6 and 16 MP, Euro 22,000 and 26,500); Rollei's Gamma C6 (6 MP, Euro 22,500); and Sinar's Back 23 and Back 44 (6 and 16 MP, Euro 28,500 and 20,900/27,500). --=20 Prints, The Artist Formerly Known as Midnight ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 18:45:07 -0600 From: "Christopher Williams" To: "Matthew Midnight Gaylen" , Subject: Re: [HUG] EUROS Message-ID: <000d01c19d5d$e2a26f20$59fa490c@computer> One Euro is .88 cents I think. Chris Williams ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matthew Midnight Gaylen" To: "hasselblad" Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 6:42 PM Subject: [HUG] EUROS That's a lot of Euros. How many Euros in a dollar? Thanks, -- Prints... If you want to go digital without using film there are plenty options too. In fact, i don't know any manufacturer of digital backs that doesn't offer Hasselblad as camera platform, even Rollei! CreoScitex's Leaf C-Most (6.6 MegaPixel, approx. Euro 10,250); Heidelberg's Colorcam (6.3 MP, Euro 22,000); Imacon's two types of Flexframe (6 and 16 MP, Euro 23,000 and 27,500); Jenoptik's Eyelike (6.3 MP, Euro 19,000); Kodak's Pro Back Plus (16 MP, Euro 28,000); Megavision's S3 and S4 (6 and 16 MP, Euro 18,000 and 21,500); Mosaic Imaging's Luma (6 MP, Euro 20,800); PhaseOne's Lightphase and H20 (6 and 16 MP, Euro 22,000 and 26,500); Rollei's Gamma C6 (6 MP, Euro 22,500); and Sinar's Back 23 and Back 44 (6 and 16 MP, Euro 28,500 and 20,900/27,500). -- Prints, The Artist Formerly Known as Midnight ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 18:52:53 -0800 From: george day To: Subject: Re: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Message-ID: I can just see Richard Avedon doing a "bunny flip" with an 8x10 and a bevy of assistants manipulating reflectors, flags, booms, etc. Yep, that's how all photographers work all the time, alright. Of course, UV filters actually do have an optical function, beyond mere protection. But let's not get into that. On 1/14/02 4:06 PM, "Austin Franklin" wrote: > >> And what situation is flare NOT and issue? > > Well, heck, Mark...it IS an SLR, now isn't it? > >> And i may be shooting with the sun behind me, >> and then quick as a bunny flip around and shoot into the sun. > > I want to see that! > >> Do i say "hold everything" and quickly unscrew my trusty UV filter at >> that moment? > > If need be, why yes... > >> Who are your role models Austin? > > It's their images I admire, what equipment they used to achieve their > results, now does that really matter? > >> Henri Cartier Bresson? Robert Frank? Helmut Newton? Ansel Adams? >> Richard Avedon? >> I guarantee you not one of them uses a stupid UV filter. > > Well, of course not...mine are smart! > >> Use a lens hood. You are protected quite well enough. > > Not from dust and dirt! But I do use one as well. > > Regards, > > Austin > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 19:48:53 -0800 From: Jim Brick To: hasselblad@kelvin.net, Subject: Re: [HUG] Re: Lewis and his scratched lens Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20020114194023.03e92870@pop.alink.net> At 06:52 PM 1/14/2002 -0800, george day wrote: >Of course, UV filters actually do have an optical function, beyond mere >protection. But let's not get into that. Perhaps on 50 year old lenses, made before they incorporated all of the UV inhibiting filters into both the glass and the glue between the elements. The single purpose for UV filters is for camera store profit. I have taught numerous Leica workshops for Leica USA. I was told, by the sponsoring stores, that telling participants to not by UV filters is a big no-no. That it adds significantly to the bottom line of every lens sold. So instead of telling them to not buy UV filters, I told them to use only "useful" filters. Filters that would definitely enhance their photograph. Then I showed the class all of the great filters that I do use. Polarizer, warming, cooling, ND, split ND, split color grad, etc. The participants spent a huge amount of money buying all of these filters, and no UV filters. Everyone was happy. This is no B.S. !!! Jim ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 22:34:11 -0600 From: "Spike" To: Subject: New User Question Message-ID: I have an old 500C with a silver Carl Zeiss 80mm lense. Can anyone tell me more about this lense? I've heard of the term Bay 50, 60..that supposedly describes the connection. Which of these is mine? I 'd like to get some filter for B/W work, but have no idea how to get one. Thanks ahead for replying. Spiky ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 22:35:47 -0600 From: "Christopher Williams" To: , Subject: Re: [HUG] New User Question Message-ID: <000501c19d7e$1bf58580$11ee490c@computer> Spiky, You have a Bay 50 lens. The silver is before the T* lenses? I could be wrong. I have a black T* lens. Filters or hoods ain't cheap for Hassy. Get 'em used. You can also use the Cokin filter system for Hasselblad. Check www.keh.com Or the dreaded www.ebay.com Chris Williams www.zoeicaimages.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Spike" To: Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 10:34 PM Subject: [HUG] New User Question > > > I have an old 500C with a silver Carl Zeiss 80mm lense. Can anyone tell me > more about this lense? I've heard of the term Bay 50, 60..that supposedly > describes the connection. Which of these is mine? I 'd like to get some > filter for B/W work, but have no idea how to get one. > > Thanks ahead for replying. > Spiky > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 20:53:56 -0800 From: Mike Kirwan To: spiky@houston.rr.com, hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: RE: [HUG] New User Question Message-ID: Spiky: Started out with a similar system and I believe your lens has a B50 fitting I found Hasselblad and 3rd party B50 filters quite pricey. So I bought a B50 to 52mm adaptor for $18.00 and used my existing B&W and Hoya filters, worked just fine and still use it today. Mike -----Original Message----- From: Spike [mailto:spiky@houston.rr.com] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 8:34 PM To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: [HUG] New User Question I have an old 500C with a silver Carl Zeiss 80mm lense. Can anyone tell me more about this lense? I've heard of the term Bay 50, 60..that supposedly describes the connection. Which of these is mine? I 'd like to get some filter for B/W work, but have no idea how to get one. Thanks ahead for replying. Spiky ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ------------------------------ End of hasselblad V1 #1470 ************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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