[HUG ] Re: SWC or 40mm?

A rather amazingly loud click when the shudder goes off I'd say.
As in its the single loudest click I've ever heard in any camera I've ever
used or seen anyone else use...
By far and to the scale of ten.


Mark William Rabiner



> From: <flexbody@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reply-To: "hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: 03 Jan 2009 00:49 GMT
> To: <hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [HUG ] Re: SWC or 40mm?
> 
> Early Super Wides used series VIII filters that were secured either by
> the shade or the retaining  ring supplied with the camera.
> Even today these filters are easy to find some even unused.
> 
> Starting with the later upgraded SWC/M Lenses from the CF range were
> fitted with 60 mm bayonet.
> Filters are easy to find new as well as second hand.
> 
> Often neglected is the possibility to use the Super Wides as point and
> shoot camera.
> Only a soft click from the shutter and a modest noise while the camera
> is cocked make this an ideal street camera.
> 
> 
>   "Bob Adler" <rgacpa@xxxxxxxxx> schrieb:
> 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.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  



=============================================================================================================
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: