Anyone shooting a Hassy 503CW with the CFV39 back?

[kuau]

Just curious to see if anyone is shooting this combo and what your feeling are about the setup?

I really am liking my Pentax 645D, as you can tell by my post from my Yosemite trip, yet.. I am still struggling with the whole Pentax FA lens situation.

I realized that I need a AF MF camera, but when I saw someone in Yosemite shooting the 503CW with the PM45 viewfinder and the CFV50 back, he let take a look though the camera, Yes I know it's manual focus, but it has a really nice micro split prism focus screen with the 2x magnifier built into the finder I was able to MF the camera no problem and this fellow had a nice kit of CFE/CFI Zeiss lenses which I am sure are better then the 645 FA Pentax glass I have been using.

I don't know just curious I guess.

I'm just on the fence with the lack of availability of Pentax Glass since the FA lens have been discontinued, and all thats left is "old" new stock, it's all either in Japan, or elsewhere, there are no new "old" lenses in the states, so I am kind of stuck on e-bay looking at used glass which some is good and some is not.

The 645D body is really a beauty IMHO, everything I would want in a MFD body, except Live view, but that's not pentax fault., It handles great, solid build, works in very cold temperature, 2 second timer with mirror lock up, no need to use a cable release, you name it's got it... except a BIG ??? for lenses.

where as hasselblad is still selling the CFE/CFI glass, etc, but the 503 body is very limited can't even compare the 645d, but it sure felt nice and looked nice, very retro.. Kind of cool I though. After owning the H3d39, which I loved until I took it out in cold weather, I still liked the feel of the 503...


Steven

 

[Jeffg53]

I wonder how well the Zeiss glass would work on the 645D. I had an adapter which let me attach Zeiss lenses to my 645NII. You get focus confirmation but no AF.

 

[tetsrfun]

but when I saw someone in Yosemite shooting the 503CW with the PM45 viewfinder and the CFV50 back, he let take a look though the camera....
*******
Did he happen to talk about the image quality of the 503-CFV50 combination? I haven't seen a much written about the CFV-50. When the CFV39 came out there seemed to be increased frustration with getting consistent focus with the "V" cameras. If you are considering going "retro" digital, I would seriously consider the 203 FE over a 503CW, if for no other reason, than the ability to use both lens shutter and focal plane lenses; esp the 110 f/2 FE.

Steve

 

[BradleyGibson]

I've not used the Pentax 645D, so I can't offer a comparison.

I had the CFV-39 on a 203FE modified for digital, which can also operate just like a 500-series with C/CF/CFi/CFE glass.

I used a Maxwell screen with a diagonal split recticle, and had no problems with accurate focus on static subjects, but subjects which were moving erratically were a challenge. To be fair, all other MF AF I've tested wasn't much better, but the 645D may or may not be better.

Where MF AF was better than manual focusing for me was in relatively low light. I had to "go back and forth" a few ti es to be sure I had focus, while AF would have locked on. Of course, even AF will fail if light levels are too low--I just found there to be a level at which manual focusing was a challenge even for static objects, but AF (or AF confirmation) would have helped.

The 645D is such a strong camera by all accounts, I have to believe the current lens situation must only be temporary. But if you do make the jump, the Zeiss program for Hasselblad was/is extensive, and you won't have any issues with lens detail at any focal length, given the stellar glass available.

 

[Paratom]

I was evaluating the Pentax 645D and the question about glass and soe discussion about AF reliability was one of the reasons why I finally went for the S2.
I am sure some of the existing Pentax glass is very good, however I would expect that one needs be be patient and spend quiete some time to find out which lenses work how good and which dont plus check eventually about sample variation. On the other side I have to say I am impressed with some images posted from the Pentax 645D.

Before the S2 (and with the S2 the AF is more accurate than I could focus manually the S2-but I also dont have a microprism screen) I used a Hy6.

Here the question how accurate I could focus manually depends on the lens (and lens speed). The 110 I could focus relativly accurate, because of f2.0 leads to a very bright viewfinder and the shallow DOF (which you see in the viewfinder) also helps focusing.
A 150mm f4.0 I found not so easy to focus manually.

I have no experience with the Hassy V System.
If you go that way I would also prefer 203 or 205 because I love the 110/2.0 Zeiss.(I know it from using the Rollei version on the Hy6)

The point is that slightly inaccurate focus can destroy all advantages of a good lens.

Other thing is: which focal length do you like/need? What subjecs you plan to shoot (do you have time or do you want to be a little quicker)? Is the weatherproof body wanted/needed or not? How much time are you willing to spend with lens testing?

 

[fotografz]

I tend to agree, the whole 500/200 series of V Hasselblads are very seductive in look and feel. Still one of the most beautiful cameras ever made ... especially compared to what choices there are left today. Very versatile system with a zillion accessories readily available, and lenses from a 30 fisheye to 350mm +

I used both a 503CW and 203FE with a huge range of lenses that are all fully coupled with no stop-down metering ... and the 203FE had the meter built-in. My back was the 16 meg CFV-II, so I never tried the 39 or 50 meg versions. I used that kit is all sorts of weather including brutal Michigan winters. Most would not recommend this, but it was never a problem, not even once (I never had a 45º prism finder fog up either). Of course, I also have never had any issue with using a H camera in bad weather either, so take that with a grain of salt.

Not only are the CFVs designed to look like the V film backs with the chrome piping and matching finish, the CFV backs are the ONLY fully coupled digital backs for the V series cameras ... all others require a sync cord from the lens to the DB ... and, as always, any use of a sync cord creates a weak link in the imaging chain ... and no other DB can be used on a 200 series camera in a fully functional manner.

All that said, the one limitation of the V kit with a CFV/39 or 50 Back is that it is not readily useable in portrait mode with the rectangular 645 type sensors of the 39/50 backs. The CFV back does not rotate on its mount like many other DBs ... nor does it have an internal rotating sensor like some of the Leaf backs. However, many long time users of the V cameras prefer square cropping anyway, and the CFVs in concert with Phocus software provides that.

-Marc

 

[kuau]

Thanks for all the replies.
In regards to MF oN the 645d for me almost impossible, there is no split prism focusing screen for that camera, I do nor have 20/20 vision even corrected, I have 20/30 in left eye and 20/35 in right eye. My only success in MF on the 645 d is at infinity LOL.

The af Is quite good on the 645d is just the lens situation, huge variation in copies and very hard to find new old copies with a return policy.

Marc,
Besides have more shutter speed option on the 203fe, what other advantages were there
I usually shoot very slow from 1 second to maybe 125 At base iso always on a tripod mlu, etc. I do like standard to longer lenses but would also like a 50mm and maybe the 40, but I was told you have to get the If version which is very expensive. So if I did do the switch i would probably go 50, 80, 120, ,180, and maybe the 250.

I know the hard thing is to shoot vertical. Not impossible i was rold by Paul C at hasselblad, he recommended using the hc-3 finder for vertical.

Oh well I wish i could find some where in the states that rents a Cfv 39 back to try for myself.

Any ideas.

Steven

 

[jlm]

i used the 205TCC, has a meter built in and a few other options, like zone metering, which i never used.

i found the 40if to be quite simply amazing, same with the 110FE

i also used the CFV39, and while i didn't do it, if going back i would frame for sq. it is a pia to shoot portrait and such a treat to never have to rotate the body! i was just too pixel greedy, not wanting to lose them. i always had an eye for the sq format anyway

i also could not find an L bracket made for the V body, so i had to rig something up, as i prefer the L to rotating the tripod head.

with the 45 prism (and the E has a meter), you can see ok in portrait (the rubber eye cup needs to rotate and any finder display is rotated). the waist-level finder is wierd when rotated, but offers the most magnification. Go square, since most of the problems go away.

you might contact Son Pham, a member here who seems to always have some blad gear for sale

 

[D&A]

Steven just pointed me to this thread adn at the moment, only on my cell phone so hard to type much...

Steven is right...on the Pentax 645D, MF is poor...not only due to no split image microprism..but even if one wants to use the FA conformation light, it is extremely slow to respond while MF the lens...and often there is a delay in it coming on. SO the whole experience of MF with the 645D is not good as an alternative to using other brand lenses (in MF) As for its AF performance, it's exceptionally good, fairly quick and responsive with the ability to AF fine tune with different lenses (and keep each one in the bodies memory bank). Even "continuous" Af isn't bad, all things considering. There are optional screens for the 645D but none are split image/microprism types as far as I know...just different grid lines.

Dave (D&A)

 

[kuau]

Jlm,
Did you have to send in your 205tcc to use with the cfv39 for modification?
Yeah that 40mm if is suppose to be the bomb.

Does anyone know who the regional rep is for hasselblad that covers Utah ?

Steven

i used the 205TCC, has a meter built in and a few other options, like zone metering, which i never used.

i found the 40if to be quite simply amazing, same with the 110FE

i also used the CFV39, and while i didn't do it, if going back i would frame for sq. it is a pia to shoot portrait and such a treat to never have to rotate the body! i was just too pixel greedy, not wanting to lose them. i always had an eye for the sq format anyway

i also could not find an L bracket made for the V body, so i had to rig something up, as i prefer the L to rotating the tripod head.

with the 45 prism (and the E has a meter), you can see ok in portrait (the rubber eye cup needs to rotate and any finder display is rotated). the waist-level finder is wierd when rotated, but offers the most magnification. Go square, since most of the problems go away.

you might contact Son Pham, a member here who seems to always have some blad gear for sale

 

[jlm]

yes, hasselblad needs to do a minor mod to the 205 body; i think they disable the auto reading of film iso from a film back, or something like that

 

[tetsrfun]

I know the hard thing is to shoot vertical. Not impossible i was rold by Paul C at hasselblad, he recommended using the hc-3 finder for vertical.
*******
The portrait orientation is not a major problem with the 503CW using a winder and RM-2 90 degree view finder. This combination works quite well both hand-held and "fixed". The 203 FE can also be used in a similar fashion but with more "issues". However, sounds like from the type of shooting that you do, portrait orientation, especially hand-held, is not a major consideration. Shooting, at a slow pace from a tripod, the PM45 is usable in portrait, it's just a little "odd". ( A couple of quick snaps of a possible configuration with the 503)

IMO, the issues shooting the 203 FE in portrait, don't out way the advantages of shutters and lens selection. However, several of the people who have already commented have vastly more experience than I do.

Steve

 

[kuau]

Steve, what L bracket are you using in the photo?
This is the exact setup I was considering with the winder

Another topic has anyone shot the 40mm CFE with the 39mp back?
Not the more expensive and much better and twice the price 40mm CFE IF

Would love to see a side by side comparison.

Steven

 

[tetsrfun]

Steve, what L bracket are you using in the photo?
This is the exact setup I was considering with the winder

Another topic has anyone shot the 40mm CFE with the 39mp back?
Not the more expensive and much better and twice the price 40mm CFE IF

Would love to see a side by side comparison.

Steven

It's an RRS MC-L plate. It's has a ridge that needs to be ground off (Dremel, etc.). Event though it's not camera specific, it works well. Other solutions may be available but this works. I mostly use this plate for doing shifts with a Flexbody.

http://reallyrightstuff.com/ProductDesc.aspx?code=MC-L&type=0&eq=&desc=MC-L:-Universal-L-Plate

Steve

 

[Leigh]

Another topic has anyone shot the 40mm CFE with the 39mp back?

I shoot a 40mm CF FLE with the CFV-39 on a 555ELD body and love it.

No focus problems with any of my lenses from 40mm through 500mm.

- Leigh

 

[kuau]

Well I finally got from Hasselblad a 503CW + CFV-39 to test out for a few days.
I also have a 40mm CFE, no IF, :-( ,
120mm CFI, and 150mm CFI lenses to test out.

I am trying to figure out what is the purpose of the second focus knob in front of the 40mm CFE lens? What is it used for and how should it bet set?
There is a infinity mark, 2, 0.9 and 0.5m markings and there also seems to be an indent setting between infinity and 2

Steven

 

[tetsrfun]

"I am trying to figure out what is the purpose of the second focus knob in front of the 40mm CFE lens? What is it used for and how should it bet set?
There is a infinity mark, 2, 0.9 and 0.5m markings and there also seems to be an indent setting between infinity and 2"
*******
That ring adjusts the internal floating elements. Estimate the distance and set the FLE adjustment and then focus with the focusing ring. Hasselblad.com has all of the product manuals on line for PDF download.

Steve

 

[Leigh]

I am trying to figure out what is the purpose of the second focus knob in front of the 40mm CFE lens? What is it used for and how should it bet set?

That's the Floating Lens Element (FLE) adjustment.

It has three detented positions. Just set it for the range appropriate to the subject distance.

- Leigh

 

[kuau]

Well after taking a closer look at all my images I took with my 503cw + CFV-39 back,
Even with careful attention to capture sharpening, I see no benefit in IQ over my Pentax 645D. I was unable to get a good result from f8-f16 on the 40mm CFE lens, very soft corners. The 120 Macro and 150mm performed very good but not much better then my Pentax equivalents.

I was wondering since there are so many Phase One / Mamiya shooters on this forum, Guy, and Jack in particular, How well does the Mamiya/Phase 45mm AF and 35mm AF perform in terms of corner sharpness when stopped down f8-f16 when shooting landscapes towards infinity?
Does the latest Phase One DF body offer any kind of micro af adjustment for each lens?
as does my Pentax 645D?

Let me get strait to my point. In terms of shooting experience the Pentax 645D is like butter, very smooth, simple to use, etc. The down side is well actually the "BIG DOWN SIDE" is lenses. On the wide side, I have yet to see a good sample of Pentax FA35mm, there FA45mm plain out sucks, so that leaves me with there 45-85mm FA zoom, not to bad at 45mm when stopped down to F11-F16, yet thats as wide as there is besides there new to be released 25mm lens, which for me is to wide 20mm equivalent.
Lastly, Pentax doe snot even make FA lenses anymore for years now.

So since I did not have access to the Hasselblad 40mm CFE / IF lens which is suppose to be much better, but also a 7-8K lens, forget about it.So there goes a 28mm equivalent lens.

I assume on the Phase / Mamiya end of things the 35mm AF is like 24-28mm lens depending on which back you are using crop or FF MFDB and the 45mm AF lens is more like a 35mm lens. I really don't want anything wider then 28mm equivalent that's wide enough for me for MF

I know what probably most of you are going to say, if you want to go past 35mm equivalent on MFD, you need to go with a tech view camera, Don't get me wrong would love to, but the entry level into a good system is way out of reach for me.

Any suggestions?

Steven

 

[woodyspedden]

Well after taking a closer look at all my images I took with my 503cw + CFV-39 back,
Even with careful attention to capture sharpening, I see no benefit in IQ over my Pentax 645D. I was unable to get a good result from f8-f16 on the 40mm CFE lens, very soft corners. The 120 Macro and 150mm performed very good but not much better then my Pentax equivalents.

I was wondering since there are so many Phase One / Mamiya shooters on this forum, Guy, and Jack in particular, How well does the Mamiya/Phase 45mm AF and 35mm AF perform in terms of corner sharpness when stopped down f8-f16 when shooting landscapes towards infinity?
Does the latest Phase One DF body offer any kind of micro af adjustment for each lens?
as does my Pentax 645D?

Let me get strait to my point. In terms of shooting experience the Pentax 645D is like butter, very smooth, simple to use, etc. The down side is well actually the "BIG DOWN SIDE" is lenses. On the wide side, I have yet to see a good sample of Pentax FA35mm, there FA45mm plain out sucks, so that leaves me with there 45-85mm FA zoom, not to bad at 45mm when stopped down to F11-F16, yet thats as wide as there is besides there new to be released 25mm lens, which for me is to wide 20mm equivalent.
Lastly, Pentax doe snot even make FA lenses anymore for years now.

So since I did not have access to the Hasselblad 40mm CFE / IF lens which is suppose to be much better, but also a 7-8K lens, forget about it.So there goes a 28mm equivalent lens.

I assume on the Phase / Mamiya end of things the 35mm AF is like 24-28mm lens depending on which back you are using crop or FF MFDB and the 45mm AF lens is more like a 35mm lens. I really don't want anything wider then 28mm equivalent that's wide enough for me for MF

I know what probably most of you are going to say, if you want to go past 35mm equivalent on MFD, you need to go with a tech view camera, Don't get me wrong would love to, but the entry level into a good system is way out of reach for me.

Any suggestions?

Steven

Steve

I would think you could get a 40 CFE/IF for around $5K. They were bundled with the 503 body and the 22Mpx back for $12K total!

The CFE/IF version was rated better than the CFE versions so it would be worth your getting a demo copy to try if you are still interested in that combination.

Although I loved the price of the 645D body the lenses were not where I wanted to go. So I opted for the high priced spread and bought the S2 and have never looked back. The S2 lenses are addictive IMHO and you can imagine keeping them forever. The body, of course, will ultimately be replaced with a higher resolution sensor but at least for my money the 37Mpx is more than sufficient for my work.

Woody