CFV 50

[yaya]

I will check with the dealer in Amsterdam

If you're in Amsterdam you can speak to the Leaf dealer they may have some interesting offers on refurbished 28/ 33/ 40MP backs, all of which can be used vertically on a V Blad

[carloalberto]

I'm a long term client at Eyes On in Amsterdam; from when they were Capi Lux Vak.

Right now I'm in Jaipur, India and when I get back in the summer I'll drop by to see them. Maybe arrange a demo.

[Dustbak]

When you are in the Netherlands you are best off contacting Pro-Spirit instead of the one in Amsterdam. Eyesonmedia is fine but they are no longer doing Hasselblad but P1 & Leaf.

[Paul Barker]

No wonder the CFV is so cheap if it's so flawed that you can't mount it vertically!

With a 90 deg prism fitted, there is really no problem shooting in portrait format with a Hasselblad 500. This is absolutely nothing new, and nothing to do with digital backs either. Since at least 1960, we have had 16-frame 645 film magazines for the V-system, so it has always been a 645 camera if you wished to use it that way. And it is no more awkward to hold in portrait format than any other MF camera. There is a motordrive with right-hand grip and incorporated shutter release as well for hand-held work. If you don't want a motordrive you can fit an 'L' grip.

Sure, for hand held with a prism you could work like that. But, for me, the whole point of staying with the V series was to be able to keep the camera upright and use a WLF, or prism, that's the beauty of the camera for me. It's true a 503CW is no more awkward to hold vertical with the winder and prism (although I wouldn't want to do it with my 555ELD) than a modern Maimiya or 'blad but it has a nicer balance with everything the right way up. Back in the days of film, I don't think I ever meet anyone who had a 645 back for a 'blad. I may have framed a shot upright or landscape but again keeping the camera upright and shooting square is a great way to work and so much more flexible (much nicer to crop a rectangle form a square, than chopping a square out of an oblong as well).

A lot of my work is table top lifestyle and food, for the most part shot on camera stands with tripod heads. 70% of the shots are upright. One problem with turning the camera with a prism on it's side (and it's the same frustrating problem with 35mm type cameras), is that I often need to tilt the camera 15-20 degrees from vertical. No problem tilting to the right, but I can't tilt to the left because the tripod head stops at vertical. The only solution is to get something like a RRS camera rotator contraption, but it's a bodge and I would still end up with backache bending down to look through the viewfinder! Invariably, if a camera is mounted vertically, I'm always standing on the wrong side and have to walk round to see the shutter/aperture, or menu screen. It's so much nicer just to look down. So give me a rotating back every time.

So viva upright cameras, WLF and roll on square chips!

All IMHO, you milage may vary. 

[Peter Devos]

When you are in the Netherlands you are best off contacting Pro-Spirit instead of the one in Amsterdam. Eyesonmedia is fine but they are no longer doing Hasselblad but P1 & Leaf.

I can also advise Pro-Spirit, now also know as Frits and Phill. They are really commited to make your job better and do advice you in a non-pushing way. Good company to work with!!!

[John R Smith]

A lot of my work is table top lifestyle and food, for the most part shot on camera stands with tripod heads. 70% of the shots are upright. One problem with turning the camera with a prism on it's side (and it's the same frustrating problem with 35mm type cameras), is that I often need to tilt the camera 15-20 degrees from vertical. No problem tilting to the right, but I can't tilt to the left because the tripod head stops at vertical. The only solution is to get something like a RRS camera rotator contraption, but it's a bodge and I would still end up with backache bending down to look through the viewfinder! Invariably, if a camera is mounted vertically, I'm always standing on the wrong side and have to walk round to see the shutter/aperture, or menu screen. It's so much nicer just to look down. So give me a rotating back every time.

So viva upright cameras, WLF and roll on square chips!

Paul

All of these are perfectly fair and valid points. I very rarely work off a tripod (although I know I should do so more often), but if I did more still-life and portrait work I would have the same priorities as you do. But that is just the beauty of the V-System - because it is a proper, open system, you do have a choice. For this type of work one of Yair's brilliant Leaf backs with the rotating sensor will be just the ticket, you can get it in a V-mount, and it wil be far better suited to your purpose than the CFV-50. Horses for courses, naturally.

What rather irked me, and why I made my comment which you quote, was this notion that somehow the 'Blad 500 was more difficult to shoot in portrait format on 645 with a prism than an H-System or a Phase, which was just nonsense. I do it all the time - the trick is not to change your grip as you rotate the camera smoothly clockwise, keeping the RH index finger on the shutter release. The wrists rotate, everything else stays locked in place.

As to a square sensor, well there has been endless discussion about this on so many forums. I am sure that you will never see one for MF because it would be impossibly expensive in the small quantities anyone could sell.

John

[Paul Barker]

For this type of work one of Yair's brilliant Leaf backs with the rotating sensor will be just the ticket, you can get it in a V-mount, and it wil be far better suited to your purpose than the CFV-50.

Yes, you're not wrong John, it would be better than a CFV. However, I'm not so keen on the 2:3 proportion on that 10R, I much prefer 4:3. The 12R would be great, but overkill for what I need, as well as being well out of my current budget. Another problem with Leafs on a 555ELD is the battery doesn't fit. When Yair gave me a demo a few years ago, he did say they were developing a slimmer battery, but when I popped into Peartree last year, was told this hadn't happened.

My next back may well be a Leaf as I do like them, for use on 503 and view cameras. But due to nutty upgrade prices, I suspect I'll get a refurb ap II 7 or 75s for the same money and keep my P1.

I'm glad Fujiblad keep developing backs for Vs, but not making it rotatable seems such a missed opportunity on the V platform. I was initially surprised, but then again not, as I guess they design everything landscape for the Hs. The ability to use a back on a 200 would be appealing though.

Cheers

[DeeJay]

Viewfinders, you must be joking. For the 500 and 200 series cameras there are -

Waistlevel finder and magnifier

90 degree prisms

45 degree prisms

Magnifying Hood (Chimney Finder)

Frame Sports Finders

And a zillion interchangeable screens.

One of the very nicest 45 deg prisms is the old NC2, with a wonderful large exit pupil.

John

Hi there John,

Can you please tell me if the Chimney Finder shows 100% of the viewfinder? Is it as bright as using a WLF? It certainly has a good use with digital backs. Or does it just give you a bright patch in the middle and a dark vignette?

Thanks,

[John R Smith]

Hi there John,

Can you please tell me if the Chimney Finder shows 100% of the viewfinder? Is it as bright as using a WLF? It certainly has a good use with digital backs. Or does it just give you a bright patch in the middle and a dark vignette?

Thanks,

My chimney finder (which naturally is a vintage item) is very good indeed. There is no vignetting, you get a 100% view, it is just as bright as the WLF and the eyepiece has a decent size exit pupil and a variable diopter adjustment (which means that I can use it without wearing my spectacles). And yes, it works just fine with a digital back.

John

[Paul Barker]

My chimney finder (which naturally is a vintage item) is very good indeed. There is no vignetting, you get a 100% view, it is just as bright as the WLF and the eyepiece has a decent size exit pupil and a variable diopter adjustment (which means that I can use it without wearing my spectacles). And yes, it works just fine with a digital back.

I did try a chimney, but found it didn't magnify enough. The older ones are 2.5x. The later ones were 3x and what with ageing eyesight and having just bought a diopter for the WLF, have been thinking about a chimney again. During ebay searches, I came across this from Hartblei:

 http://www.hartblei.kiev.ua/hartblei-hasselblad-magnifying-hood-finder-52-x-52.html

4x is closer to the WLF, but he 52x52 doesn't sound big enough and not sure to what it's referring too. It looks like it might be worth a try, for the money. I may drop them a line...

[John R Smith]

Yes, Paul's correct, magnification is a problem. It is with the prisms, too, as they are just 3x. In fact, the WLF is best in this respect, at 4x magnification. This has only really become an issue in recent years, with the advent of digital backs and their forensic treatment of focus.

But it all depends on your intended use, as well. I always use the chimney finder on a tripod for still-life and close up work, and because I use the longer lenses for this (120 and 150mm) they are a lot easier to focus with, especially close in. You certainly would not want to use the chimney finder with the Distagon wide-angles for landscape or architecture, where spot focus was critical.

The best screens are also essential, of course. For digital you must use the latest Acute Matte screens, and some folks find the ones with the split prism helpful.

John

[DeeJay]

I didn't realize the mag was less than a WLF.

Something like this or more would be good at 5.5x But I wonder if you see 100%

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/132741-REG/Hasselblad_72534_Magnifying_Hood_4x4_DPS.html

[DeeJay]

I did try a chimney, but found it didn't magnify enough. The older ones are 2.5x. The later ones were 3x and what with ageing eyesight and having just bought a diopter for the WLF, have been thinking about a chimney again. During ebay searches, I came across this from Hartblei:

 http://www.hartblei.kiev.ua/hartblei-hasselblad-magnifying-hood-finder-52-x-52.html

4x is closer to the WLF, but he 52x52 doesn't sound big enough and not sure to what it's referring too. It looks like it might be worth a try, for the money. I may drop them a line...

Have just been googling about these. It seems the 52x52 is the coverage area. So you don't see 100%. So that 5.5x mag you only see 4cm square image. The 5.5x Blad one is called a "hasselblad magnifying hood 4x4 dps"

[John R Smith]

I didn't realize the mag was less than a WLF.

Something like this or more would be good at 5.5x But I wonder if you see 100%

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/132741-REG/Hasselblad_72534_Magnifying_Hood_4x4_DPS.html

The 72534 is no good with recent digital backs. It was intended for use with the old 16 MP square sensors. And that is the field of view - 40x40mm.

John

[Paul Barker]

Have just been googling about these. It seems the 52x52 is the coverage area. So you don't see 100%.

Well, as my chip is 48mm I guess that might be worth a punt. I have 3 Acute Matte  screens, grid with split, cross hair with split and microprism and plain cross hair. I find the splits, grids and microprism just get in the way of the image, so much prefer plain.

The other Hasselblad one worth looking out for is the Hasselblad Magnifying Hood HM-2:

http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?op=detailsdisc&sku=HSMH2

Slightly higher mag at 3.3x.

[jmd56]

Hasselblad makes a mint on all its products. Actual hard costs are likely near 10% of SRP.
Their business model reminds me of DeBeers, given they don't make a lot of each product,
and it seems to me to create something of an artificial supply shortage. I have to give
them credit for having the huevos to put $17K SRP on a CFV-50 that i doubt costs them more
than $2k in parts to make.

I recently was comparing cost per good picture via film or CCD, and came to the conclusion
that with today's high digital back systems (CFV-39, etc), a digital back is basically like
prepaying all my film costs for the next 5-10 years. Granted, the desire to avoid the
develop and scan "insanity" :-) makes me think of taking the plunge, but its not like
my solar array, which while it is like prepaying for electricity, it comes with a much
more generous tax credit and guaranteed after tax ROI in the form of elec savings
that increase with the rate of inflation....basically.

much tougher to take a great pic with the solar array though :-)

[JV]

a digital back is basically like prepaying all my film costs for the next 5-10 years.

it depends on how much you shoot obviously but if you shoot a lot within 1-2 years you will rather quickly get to the point where MFD becomes cheaper than MFF

[Nick-T]

Hasselblad makes a mint on all its products. Actual hard costs are likely near 10% of SRP.
Their business model reminds me of DeBeers, given they don't make a lot of each product,
and it seems to me to create something of an artificial supply shortage. I have to give
them credit for having the huevos to put $17K SRP on a CFV-50 that i doubt costs them more
than $2k in parts to make.

What a lot of nonsense.

Where are you getting these numbers from?

Nick-T

[torger]

The sensor, KAF-50100, costed back at the release 2008 $3500 in quantity. With those kind of component prices a back will not be cheap.

Here in Sweden the price of a CFV-50 is exactly the same as a Phase One P45+ (39 megapixel), so you get more pixels per dollar with the hasselblad :-). A bit unfortunate though is that Hasselblad has not designed the back to do long exposures, which I guess the sensor itself is capable of.

[torger]

Hi everyone. Thank you for for sharing your expertise in this informative thread. I'm from the old generation coming from film and have a good selection of Hasselblad V bodies and lenses. I'm retired with no way to amortize or easily afford a new digital back. The suggestion to buy used from a wealthy amateur or similar source sounds very practical. Can any one of point me in the right direction where to begin looking? Is the CV 50 used on offer anywhere yet? Or is it still too new? How much would I save on the new price? Or is a CV 39 the only option? I live in Europe so the US market is impractical, both for the high import duties and taxes I would have to pay and, I guess, for future service facilities should they become necessary.

cfv-39 and cfv-50 still carry high prices second hand. Hasselblad backs are tough to come by second hand too, phase one is the easiest, then leaf. "For sale" forums here and getdpi.com are places to look, as well as ebay. Buying pre-owned from a dealer is for the nice feel of safety, but the prices are often not very good. It depends how much that safety is worth to you.

Buying second hand is a risk, if something breaks it will cost you. These things are expensive to repair. I have not looked into what the actual cost is if you buy from a dealer though, repairs are not free I think... and you can surely make at least one €3000 repair for the price difference. If you are used to buying second hand gear and taking the risks it means I think you should consider that as an option.