[HUG ] Re: SWC for sale?

Re: [HUG ] Re: SWC for sale?A 75mm lens on a Rollei is even more useful than 
the 80mm of the Hasselblad or Rollei.   It gives the same coverage as the short 
side of a 35mm lens on 35mm.   (The long side of a 35mm lens on 35mm includes 
more of the subject  than what the 75mm Rollei lens includes.)

Since the Rollei negative can be cropped down to the size of a 35mm negative, I 
have always thought of the Rollei as having a 35-75mm zoom lens, all in the 
same picture, all the time.

Oddly enough, though, I almost never crop it.

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Mark Rabiner 
  To: hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 2:20 AM
  Subject: [HUG ] Re: SWC for sale?


  I just have this gnawing sensation....
  As its a bit of a slightly bad example.
  35mm photography as it went down got turned around some and they ended up 
using 50 for their so called normal.
  It's really 43mm. And 50 is quite a jump from 43. I know from my broad 
experience with 45mm lenses. 
  A 50 though puts a much less kinder gentler edge to so called normal shooting.
  As in you're working with a short tele. As you almost are. Things are 
formalized and flattened. You get less.

  After much 50 use with 35's as I have;
  My first roll with 6x6 was with my Rolleiflex which I use now.
  And its a good bit wider in not one butin  BOTH directions.
  Especially of course as its a square its much wider than the 24mm short side 
of the 35mm format.
  60x60mms vs 24x36mms

  This is why I think so many jobs were done with a Rolleiflex. And nothing 
else brought along.
  Just a Rolleiflex with an 80 and it just gets everything. Time after time.
  You just don't worry about it or think about it. It gets the job done.
  And you can crop quit a bit if that's all you need.

  This less doable with a 50 on a 35mm camera.
  You're kind of glad if you have the option which you probably do have to 
bring along some other lenses.



  mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  Mark William Rabiner




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Snip
  I think the answer is yes.  Likewise, is the perspective of an 80mm lens in a 
500CM the same as a 50mm lens in a Leica?   Are they both really "normal" 
lenses?  Again, I think the answer is yes, but both these situations are worth 
thinking through and I would appreciate being set straight by anyone who knows 
more about this than I.
   
  Sherman Bloom






  On Jun 16, 2008, at 9:17 PM, Frank Filippone wrote:


    Eric.... this is, in my opinion, flawed thinking.... 

    Technical terms should be used correctly.  If they are not, the meaning
    becomes obscured.....

    Try "APO" for example of a word that has so many different meanings that its
    use has become useless......

    Angle of view is precise, descriptive, and independent of format size.  

    Hasselblad always speced their lenses this way......  and others used to put
    angle of view in the ads and specs of their lens lines ( Nikon, Canon,
    Leica, and others).

    And Yes, I do remember the "Metrification of the USA".  Utter Failure.  

    Frank Filippone
    red735i@xxxxxxxxxxxxx


    angle of view make so sense in these days of a melange of sensors sizes.
    but getting people to talk about AOV would be like getting the US to
    convert to the metric system (any remember 1975??)

    Eric




    
=============================================================================================================
    To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org 
<http://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: