hasselblad Mon, 2 Feb 1998 Volume 1 : Number 88 In this issue: Re: 250 Sa and multicoating Re: The difference between A12 and 12 backs Negative Carriers Re: Bellows Re: Negative Carriers Re: Negative Carriers ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 1 Feb 98 10:11 MST From: sog@rmi.net (Stephen O Gombosi) To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: 250 Sa and multicoating Message-ID: Dave Munroe: >Stephen O Gombosi wrote: > >[re: single coating layer on 250 Sa] > >> So why does the new 350 Sa CFE have the T* coating? > >Good question. My guess is that, unlike the 250 Sa, the 350 might >not be corrected for the 700-1000 nm infrared part of the spectrum >(hence the spectral range isn't as broad). Just a guess. Nope, the literature on the lens says it's corrected for exactly the same spectral range as the 250. If it weren't, it would "merely" be an apochromat ;-). Steve ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Feb 1998 19:35:58 -0500 From: "LEO WOLK" To: Subject: Re: The difference between A12 and 12 backs Message-ID: <01bd2f72$87a72fa0$cada430c@fofyplfq> Andy, I know this is off the subject of the HUG, but I used to buy tubes from...someplace in Arizona, actually. They stocked ALL of the old power tubes, most NOS, including KT88's etc. On some they carried modern tubes manufactured in Eastern Block countries where some of this equipment is in everyday use! If you really need me to follow up, I might be able to find one of their old catalogues. I thing it was called Radio Parts, or some such. Later, Leo. -----Original Message----- From: Andy Peters To: 'hasselblad@kelvin.net' Date: Wednesday, January 28, 1998 12:59 PM Subject: RE: The difference between A12 and 12 backs >...If only I could get power tubes for my mid-60's Ampeg guitar amps... -andy Andy Peters Senior Electrical Engineer National Optical Astronomy Observatories 950 N Cherry Ave Tucson, AZ 85719 internet: apeters@noao.edu voicenet: (520) 318-8191 faxnet: (520) 318-8303 pagenet: (520) 446-2557 sneakernet: Room 208 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Feb 1998 18:31:39 -0800 From: Kim the Star & Mark To: "'Hasselblad'" Subject: Negative Carriers Message-ID: <01BD2F3F.A480EE00@ghana-169.ppp.hooked.net> I have had my blad for just over a two month, I had a questions with regards negative carriers, I am using Omega D5 (4x5) enlargers colour and b+w, always with a = diffuser light source. I have been using a glassless carrier, can I get the sharpness that I am = looking for with such a setup. I have been stopping the enlarger lens = down to f16. Or would I be better advised to get a glass carrier and put up with the = problem of spotting which is really annoying particular with C prints. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Feb 1998 21:38:43 -0500 From: "LEO WOLK" To: Subject: Re: Bellows Message-ID: <01bd2f83$ad8c0d60$90da430c@fofyplfq> The one thing I haven't seen anyone mention is that the 135 S-Planar can't be used (by itself) with extension tubes. For focusing it requires either the Variable Extension Tube or the Bellows, as it doesn't have it's own helical. Leo. -----Original Message----- From: Les Alvis To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Date: Wednesday, January 28, 1998 10:13 AM Subject: Re: Bellows > >I recently acquired a 135mm S-Planar and a couple of extension tubes for >use with my 500 C/M. Now I am looking at buying a bellows. The options >are the old manual bellows with the dual cable releases or the later auto >bellows. The price of a used manual bellows seems to be about half that >of a used auto bellows. > >Thanks, > >Les Alvis > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Feb 1998 21:58:26 -0500 From: Dan Cardish To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Negative Carriers Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19980201215826.008d5a00@pop.microtec.net> At 06:31 PM 01-02-98 -0800, you wrote: >I have had my blad for just over a two month, > >I had a questions with regards negative carriers, > >I am using Omega D5 (4x5) enlargers colour and b+w, always with a diffuser light source. > >I have been using a glassless carrier, can I get the sharpness that I am looking for with such a setup. I have been stopping the enlarger lens down to f16. > >Or would I be better advised to get a glass carrier and put up with the problem of spotting which is really annoying particular with C prints. > To get the best sharpness, you are better off using glass in your negative carriers. Having said that, I personally use glassless carriers in a Saunders enlarger with an old Schnieder Componon stopped down to either f8 or f11, depending on exposure times. Either f stop gives me corner to corner sharpness. I hate having to worry about dust on the glass. Dan C. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Feb 1998 00:02:13 -0500 From: Joe McCary To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: Negative Carriers Message-ID: <2.2.32.19980202050213.00bd37c4@pop.erols.com> I have printed images from Hasselblad on a D-2 for decades and they have the sharpness you would expect. F-16 seems a bit excessive to me, try differnt prints and see how they look. Joe At 06:31 PM 2/1/98 -0800, you wrote: >I have had my blad for just over a two month, > >I had a questions with regards negative carriers, > >I am using Omega D5 (4x5) enlargers colour and b+w, always with a diffuser light source. > >I have been using a glassless carrier, can I get the sharpness that I am looking for with such a setup. I have been stopping the enlarger lens down to f16. > >Or would I be better advised to get a glass carrier and put up with the problem of spotting which is really annoying particular with C prints. > > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >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. > > Joe McCary Photo Response http://www.erols.com/mccary ------------------------------ End of hasselblad V1 #88 ************************ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.