[HUG ] SV: Re: SWC or 40mm?

It is the 'travel light' part of the SWC which is the elegant thing.  Earlier 
this year, I walked around Singapore with my young nice - she is a teenager, - 
as tourists, you know.  She photographing with one of these Chinese made shiny 
digital one arm wonders - Panasony, or what they are called.  Me with my 
905SWC.  Just as lignt & compact and far better.  Singapore, that is close to 
33 - 34 degrees C and cloze to 100% humidity.  This is no place for carrying 
around 203EF w/40 mm.  And.  The SWC has this 'Leica discreteness' that is very 
comfortable in these security consious times.

Tom of Oslo

From: Bob Adler [rgacpa@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 2009-01-03 01:19:08 CET
> To: hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [HUG ] Re: SWC or 40mm?
> 
> Michiel,
> From a personal, and not a technical point of view (no pun intended), I 
> prefer the 40 because:
> 1. It can be used on different bodies,
> 2. you can pack it with your body and use other lenses too, whereas the 38 
> requires you carry it attached to the body and, if you want a different focal 
> length, you must carry another body.
> 3. The 2mm difference didn't outweigh 1. and 2. above.
> That said, if I were going to travel very light, an SWC would be very nice to 
> have in my arsenal with other light equipment.
> Finally, being unfamiliar with the SWC, I do like to use filters (for BW, 
> polarizing and ND) and I'm not sure if the SWC can be outfitted. Others may 
> know about this, but I don't.
> Boils down to what you want to use it for IMO. H optics are superb and you 
> won't go wrong optically either way (again, IMO).
> Good luck with a fun decision,
> Bob
> 
>  Bob Adler
> Palo Alto, CA
> http://www.raflexions.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Michiel Fokkema <michiel.fokkema@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: HUG <hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, January 2, 2009 9:11:19 AM
> Subject: [HUG ] SWC or 40mm?
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I wonder if there is a difference in the performance between the swc and 
> the 40mm?
> I guess the 38 should be better because it is a symmetrical design were 
> the 40mm is retrofocus. But the swc is more expensive. Is the extra cost 
>   justified by the better performance, if there is any?
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Michiel Fokkema
> 
> =============================================================================================================
> To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your 
> account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you 
> subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
> 
> 
>

Other related posts: