Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: John R Smith on October 18, 2010, 06:32:33 am
-
To return just for a moment to the original topic, which was essentially about using the wrong camera for the right job, or the right camera for the wrong job (a bit like using a chisel as a screwdriver, really).
Normally I photograph landscape, architecture, townscapes, harbours and a bit of still-life. Subjects which don’t move around too much, and for which the limitations of MF are not really a problem. However, in the past I have also done quite a bit of what you might grandly term environmental portraiture – people at work or just doing things. I used to shoot those kinds of subjects back in the ‘80s using a Rollei 2.8F, which was the camera I happened to have, rather than perhaps the best tool for the job.
This summer I got the urge to do some more of these “people” shots, perhaps because I was just plain bored with my landscapes and needed a change of pace. However, I do not own a 35mm DSLR, or a compact camera, or really anything much except my beloved old Hasselblad 500 kit. So needs must, and I spent some time attending our local shows, rallies, and horse trials doing what we used to call “candid” photography. These events are huge fun, all held in the open with all sorts of stalls, bands, animals, old cars and crazy things going on. So this is a bit like street photography, only it’s in a field, not a street. All these pictures were shot on the ‘Blad 500 with the 80mm Planar and the CFV-39 digital back.
Now I would be the very first to admit that I would have been better off using a smaller-format DSLR for this job. Or for my taste, probably a Leica M9. The ‘Blad is heavy, cumbersome, slow to focus, prone to camera-shake if you rush, and it is very hard to melt into the background when you are toting this thing around your neck. I missed quite a few opportunities because I simply wasn’t fast enough. But there are some unexpected advantages to balance the downsides, which don’t necessarily apply to all MF cameras, admittedly.
• A surprising number of people approached me and asked about the camera, and I got into all sorts of interesting conversations as a result. A 1960s ‘Blad with the silver CZ lenses seems to attract attention rather like a classic car.
• I was using the waist-level finder, rather than a prism. One interesting result of this is that, unlike using a 35mm camera, you are shooting at about three feet from ground level. I like the way this gives the pictures a kind of “child’s-eye view”, which you can see most clearly in the beer-tent shot.
• The WLF has another advantage. People don’t seem to feel so threatened by someone who is looking down into a little screen as they do by having a lens poked at them at eye-level. Consequently, it can be easier to get close to the action without spooking people or making them embarrassed.
I have always owned a MF camera of one sort or another, ever since I started in photography. Whereas I have owned 35mm cameras on and off, but never enjoyed them much, so I suppose that I am biased. In the days of film, there was such a huge quality advantage to MF that for me there was no contest. With high-end digital these days, the performance gap is so much less that I think I just carry on with it out of stubbornness really, and because I get a great deal of pleasure out of my old Zeiss glass.
John
-
Very nice pictures, John; I was also tickled to see the use of the word 'candid' as in 'street'! I had completely forgotten that that was the word we all used to use for those reportage shots of life going on, in a non-newsy way.
(If Fred is reading this, that's a better word than 'street shots' or just 'street'! It has provenance.)
Rob C
-
Lovely shots and nice tones too! I am curious about the method, did you scan from prints or negs? How did you apply the sepia look?
-
Glad you enjoyed the pictures, folks. All these shots are digital, not film, using the CFV back. These start out as colour RAWs, of course, which I import into Lightroom. They are then converted to B/W using my own home-brewed profiles, which emulate the spectral response of various B/W film stocks. After that, it's lots of the usual levels, burning and dodging, just like it used to be in the darkroom. For these web pictures, I exported the finished images to JPG and applied Lightroom's own split-toning on the way out, where I set the highlights to sepia and the shadows to a sort of purple hue.
Hmm, it just struck me that our younger members might not really know what a 'Blad 500 looks like, so here is one of my cameras, along with the period case and my trusty Weston meter.
John
-
Interesting post.
one of the photographer Alberto Garcia Alix.
Qustion: does tha Blad 500 accepts digital backs? or better asked: do digital backs accept the Blad 500?
-
Qustion: does tha Blad 500 accepts digital backs? or better asked: do digital backs accept the Blad 500?
Fred
As I understand it you can fit almost all MF digital backs to the 'Blad 500, including Phase, Leaf, (with the correct mounts) and of course Hasselblad's own CFV 16, 39 and 50 megapixel offerings. Your choice is really limited only by cost.
John
-
I wouldn't immediately think of a Hasselblad either as the most appropriate tool for street photography. That being said, on the website of Leaf I read a testimonial of Lois Greenfield who shoots dance with a Hasselblad 500CM and a Leaf Valeo 22 digital back. If you can shoot dance with a Hasselblad I guess street photography should be feasible as well...
-
Jv, yes those are not a-priori the right tools, but as they provoque different reaction to people, they are trully interesting.
I read an interview with Lois Greenfield. She actually does not try to capture the moment. She tries to shoot just before the moment occurs. I guess it takes a lot of experience to shoot that way. By anticipating the moment she can use the gear she feels most comfortable with.
-
I read an interview with Lois Greenfield. She actually does not try to capture the moment. She tries to shoot just before the moment occurs. I guess it takes a lot of experience to shoot that way. By anticipating the moment she can use the gear she feels most comfortable with.
Actually, you have to do this with the 'Blad. No choice. There is a considerable shutter lag between pressing the release and the moment of exposure (shutter close, aperture stop-down, mirror-up, barn-doors open, shutter fires). This can cause you a lot of grief with subjects which are in motion. All this stuff makes a great szhu-clunk noise, though.
John
-
John, that's some great stuff. I certainly appreciate the 500/CFV combination. But with that said, i am also glad to be shooting the H3DII. Makes life rather simple. Which i appreciate now in this stage of my career.
Now the big question, if offered a new MFDB combo from Hasselblad, would you still prefer to shoot the 500/CFV?
-
Anytime you have an enjoyable experience, like taking a 1956 T-Bird out for a spin, you can't really put a price tag on that. Life is short, own and use what you love. MFD provides a classic experience, everything is big and bold, fun to use, fun to touch and turn... harkens back to yesteryear, rare even as you don't see them everywhere.
However, when the pressure is on and you must come home with something, when you have a schedule and therefore not all day, or even tomorrow, when you're not working alone, when patience is thin for those all around you... that is when you want a machine this is technologically invisible, built to work fast, not get in your way, hammer out whatever is asked of it.
Perhaps given the second situation you might feel inclined to choose a different tool. Entire articles have been written saying one tool can do them all. Well, I guess that is a matter of opinion. :)
-
John, that's some great stuff. I certainly appreciate the 500/CFV combination. But with that said, i am also glad to be shooting the H3DII. Makes life rather simple. Which i appreciate now in this stage of my career.
Now the big question, if offered a new MFDB combo from Hasselblad, would you still prefer to shoot the 500/CFV?
Brendan
You've put me on the spot. Really, I think that if I was offered that option I would ask for the money instead and use it to get all my 500 kit CLA'd. But the reason for that choice is quite foolish, because I know that an H series camera would be easier to use in almost every respect. It's just that I hate the look and feel of the thing - it seems plastic and cheap to my taste. Whereas the old 500 is solid metal and chrome, the lenses are satin alloy with a heavy brass core, and it all feels like a camera should to me. So, sadly, I know that I would get no pleasure out of owning an H-system 'Blad, much though I admire it. And I can put my old 500 on the table and enjoy just looking at it while I have a cup of tea and a reflective cigarette.
John
-
I own a H1/P30+ combination and recently also acquired a CFV back for my 503CW. I extensively used my H1 the past year and I find it quite hard now to go back to a camera without auto focus and without exposure meter. Speed is also a major consideration and when you are paying for model time the H1 is just a lot faster. IMHO it is just a better camera. The price for the coolest look goes the V-series though...
-
Yeah, it's quite interesting to me. I certainly agree the quality and look was better in the 500 series. I don't think anyone would argue otherwise.
People are really loyal to the 500 series and the fact that they modeled the CFV backs to look like the bodies to me, means that Hasselblad understands this as well. I think it's great they continue this lineage.
I wish they'd bring some of that look back to the H5 series - when it's released.
-
I own a H1/P30+ combination and recently also acquired a CFV back for my 503CW. I extensively used my H1 the past year and I find it quite hard now to go back to a camera without auto focus and without exposure meter. Speed is also a major consideration and when you are paying for model time the H1 is just a lot faster. IMHO it is just a better camera. The price for the coolest look goes the V-series though...
Oh boy, i thought it was metered, i did know about AF though, of course. Wow... that makes things rather difficult for those youngin's like myself. :) I bet the quality is still fantastic though.
-
1. "Yes Rob, I read and don't really get it: what would be the more appropriated word then?"
Use 'candid' if you are dealing/talking with older guys, because we all know what it means, which is 'truthful, without posing'. Street (today's sense) used to be called candid photography - truthful, unposed photography, whether in the street, in a factory or in a railway station, anywhere at all, even in hospital.
2. "I even use mobiles phones, like this one of the photographer Alberto Garcia Alix."
You lucky man; you move in exalted circles!
Rob C
-
Hmm, it just struck me that our younger members might not really know what a 'Blad 500 looks like, so here is one of my cameras, along with the period case and my trusty Weston meter.
John
Made my mouth water; however, I do still have two Westons... I had a peep at the 'blad site the other day; the used prices are still pretty well up there! You never know...
Keith, if I didn't know better, I would despair for your soul! However, your bone specialist will probably breathe a sigh of relief!
Rob C
-
you inrigue me guys! there are dozens of blads here that nobody wants any more for 800 euros complete and in perfect conditions...
-
So how do you shoot a 500/cfv combo in portrait orientation without a prism? As I understand, the back can't be mounted that way.
-
A lot of 500 series cameras are out there for sale, and for good reasons in our digital age, no AF, most have no metering and honestly the V glass isn't all up to snuff for 40, 60, 80 megapixel backs. Sure it's Zeiss blah blah but the 50mm lenses show softness in corners. There is a reason new lenses and some new formulas along with new lens software corrections are the norm.
But yes from pure romanticism and a nostalgic point, many 500 series, 200 series, Rollei 6000 series cameras are wonderful to experience and shoot film or digital backs, but for commercial photography, there are more appropriate cameras as other people have pointed out that benefit the pace, quality and newer features which help working, paid photographers get the job done. This is all a very real conversion here, but fun walking around shooting and I'm-here-to get-the-top-shots-for-my-client type of work are very different and don't demand the same.
I wouldn't put the Hasselblad V and the Rollei 6000 series cameras in the same category. The rollei is way more advanced in almost every possible way and at least the schneider glass is of newer design optically and quite excellent. Actually the rollei 6008AF still stands up quite well against most of the newest MF cameras.
-
I wouldn't immediately think of a Hasselblad either as the most appropriate tool for street photography. That being said, on the website of Leaf I read a testimonial of Lois Greenfield who shoots dance with a Hasselblad 500CM and a Leaf Valeo 22 digital back. If you can shoot dance with a Hasselblad I guess street photography should be feasible as well...
The waist-level finder helps wit candid photography,m and I intend to shoot a lot of dance and gymnastics with an H4D-60 or CFV-50/555ELD, some with a shutter beam and/or Sinar P3.
-
No no John, I would not contemplate this Blad for com works, but maybe for candid and knowing a different experience.
To confess, I've always had a weird unexplained bad feeling with the 500 series, and therefore avoided them. But in my life, I've been learning that things that provoque such feelings can be very surprising and I've been caught many times saying "why didn't I knew this before?". So...
Is focussing really that nightmare with the backs on the 500?
-
So how do you shoot a 500/cfv combo in portrait orientation without a prism? As I understand, the back can't be mounted that way.
This is a problem, admittedly. When you are shooting film in 6x6 format, the image is square and you do not have to rotate the camera. But the CFV back is effectively 645 and the back is fixed, which is fine if you are using a prism, but using the WLF restricts you to landscape format. However, one of the joys of the old 500s is the huge range of V-System accessories which go along with it, and I have most of them (one reason I am not too keen on the H-System). The little gizmo which helps out here is the Sports Finder, which clips onto the accessory shoe on the L/H side of the camera. Various masks for different focal lengths and formats slot into a frame which you squint through at eye level. So for portrait shots -
* You focus using the WLF magnifier.
* Trigger the mirror pre-release.
* Fold down the WLF.
* Pop-up the Sports Finder.
* Rotate the camera, bring it to eye-level, frame and shoot.
When you have all finished falling about laughing, knowing now that Smith is in fact (as you suspected) completely unhinged, I would add that (with practice) this does actually work quite well. And yes, I do have the usual set of prisms, but they add a lot of weight to the camera, so I tend to use them only when I am working from a tripod.
This shot was taken using the sports finder, for example.
John
-
?
Rob, I'm probably being particularly thick, but I didn't understand the bone specialist reference.
EDIT
The light just went on...lugging around two systems.
There, I was being particularly thick!
Back problems... I think I got mine from fashion: not so much a matter of weight of equipment, as that damned awkward shooting position that's somewhere between a squat and a sitting-on-a-stool height. My Rowi of the day was usually set at that low position, but I didn't have three useable legs to copy its easy life.
Rob C