Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Classic Film RangeFinders & Other Classics > SLRs - the unRF

SLRs - the unRF For those of you who must talk about SLRs, if only to confirm they are not RF.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 10-08-2013   #281
Godfrey
wonderment
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 6,837
Some really nice SWC photos!
Which reminds me, I have a bunch that I need to scan and render. :-)

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2013   #282
Pirate
Guitar playing Fotografer
 
Pirate's Avatar
 
Pirate is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Highland, Mi.
Age: 46
Posts: 1,877
I don't use mine enough. Maybe I will for some upcoming projects!
__________________


Leica II IIIc M3, Mamiya C2, Nikon F, F3P, F5, Hasselblad 500C/M, SW/C, Crown Graphic 4x5, Rollei 3.5F / SLX / Baby Gray, Sinar F and P 4x5, Polaroid 100 & 450 Land, Kodak Retina II and IIa, Fuji GW690II, Graphic View II 4x5.

http://dudewithad700.deviantart.com/
http://arolloffilm.blogspot.com/
My Top 10(12) Best!



  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2013   #283
Pirate
Guitar playing Fotografer
 
Pirate's Avatar
 
Pirate is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Highland, Mi.
Age: 46
Posts: 1,877
I once grabbed my SWC for a couple quick shots, and after not having used it in a while, I completely forgot to focus. Shots came out great anyway.
__________________


Leica II IIIc M3, Mamiya C2, Nikon F, F3P, F5, Hasselblad 500C/M, SW/C, Crown Graphic 4x5, Rollei 3.5F / SLX / Baby Gray, Sinar F and P 4x5, Polaroid 100 & 450 Land, Kodak Retina II and IIa, Fuji GW690II, Graphic View II 4x5.

http://dudewithad700.deviantart.com/
http://arolloffilm.blogspot.com/
My Top 10(12) Best!



  Reply With Quote

Old 10-10-2013   #284
mrak
Registered User
 
mrak is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levi Wedel View Post
I have the 7II and 50. It's easier to use than the SWC because it's about as wide a field of view horizontally, but vertically cropped. That said, the SWC has a very unique look.

The SWC works best hyperfocal focused. F8 is about as low as I dare go without using the ground glass attachment. F8 will show some dof and it can be guessed, but at wider apertures it can be hard. I don't think 4.5 would have very much in focus anyway, and there's probably mechanical vignetting. I haven't tried it, so I can't say. Most commonly I shoot at F16.

By everyday use, it depends what you mean. If you want precise focus and selective focus, the 7II will be a better choice. I like the SWC myself and wouldn't trade it for the 43mm. As for the 50mm, they do different things. I would recommend the newer SWC viewfinder. It's accuracy is good at hyperfocal. Close framing will always be a problem because of parallax, but it can be guessed most of the time. The viewfinder only shows the top 2/3rds of the image, so you have to look down and pan up, which sounds hard but isn't. You can still see the bottom edges of the frame, just not the center bottom (lens is in the way). For critical work, the reflex viewfinder and ground glass make the SWC much better than the 7II. In terms of joy to operate, I prefer the SWC. It handles really well and is fast to use. Not many parts, no battery, nothing to think about. Point and shoot.
Thanks for your reply.

How precise are the framelines? Are they too tight, too loose or just right? Would one still see the framelines with glasses? Also does the film back get in your way when you put your eye on the finder? I also heard that the image in the finder is mirrored horizontally. Is that true?

Then for the lens: should I keep away from non-*T versions or doesn't it make a big difference? People also advise to get the CF lens versions because of the prontor shutter. Sadly those are quite more expensive than the compur shutter versions. How expensive would it be to repair a compur shutter compared to a prontor shutter? Is a compur shutter even repairable at all anymore?
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-10-2013   #285
Rangefinderfreak
Registered User
 
Rangefinderfreak's Avatar
 
Rangefinderfreak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nowhere in sight
Posts: 642
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
Frank,
You will absolutely love this camera. It may be a Leica killer!
I made a better one..!Hasselblad Flexbody cassette back with film advance, mated to a NIKKOR PC 35mm :2,8 (covers full 6X6 frame !) and between a Prontor professional shutter. that gives strobe synch as well as multiple exposure possibility. Because of the PC nikkor , it has also some perspective correction.
Besides: It can be used with hassy Digital backs, because of the nikko`s retrofocus design. The Biogon is too near the sensor, so the edges are really unsharp on Digital ( no problem with film, though...) It didn`t kill any of my leicas, not even the M8...
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-11-2013   #286
mrak
Registered User
 
mrak is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 26
So I got to try out the SWC at a camera store today.

They were selling it for 35000€

It was bigger and heavier than I imagined. Not very comfortable to hold and operate in my opinion. The finder however was pretty bad. It was the old metal one. The image was very small, like that of a compact like the canon g and to my surprise there were no framelines besides a small circle in the center.

But I still have to say that I am intrigued by the camera and would like to try it out in field.
  Reply With Quote

need to "pre visualize"
Old 10-11-2013   #287
deardorff8x10
Registered User
 
deardorff8x10 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 15
need to "pre visualize"

The finder of the SWC is there to help frame a bit, but I find that after using it for a while, you get to know what things look like and it works great. The bubble is the most useful part!
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-11-2013   #288
Monz
Monz
 
Monz's Avatar
 
Monz is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,064

The First Frame by *monz*, on Flickr
__________________
RFF Gallery

My Top 10

Flickr Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-11-2013   #289
mrak
Registered User
 
mrak is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by deardorff8x10 View Post
The finder of the SWC is there to help frame a bit, but I find that after using it for a while, you get to know what things look like and it works great. The bubble is the most useful part!
Yeah the idea with the bubble is genius. But I don't like how with glasses I have to look around the finder to see the edges.

BTW how does the FOV of the Mamiya 7 43mm compare to the 38mm of the SWC? If I understand correctly the FOV of the 43mm on 6x7 is the same as of the 38mm on 6x6 but with a bit of the top and bottom cut off right?
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2013   #290
Levi Wedel
Registered User
 
Levi Wedel's Avatar
 
Levi Wedel is offline
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrak View Post
Thanks for your reply.

How precise are the framelines? Are they too tight, too loose or just right? Would one still see the framelines with glasses? Also does the film back get in your way when you put your eye on the finder? I also heard that the image in the finder is mirrored horizontally. Is that true?

Then for the lens: should I keep away from non-*T versions or doesn't it make a big difference? People also advise to get the CF lens versions because of the prontor shutter. Sadly those are quite more expensive than the compur shutter versions. How expensive would it be to repair a compur shutter compared to a prontor shutter? Is a compur shutter even repairable at all anymore?
Sorry, for some reason the forum didn't send me an email notification for the reply!

The framelines seem very precise to me when hyperfocal focused. The edges of the frame are the most important to my work, and it always seems bang on. If in doubt, you can always frame slightly wider, but I've never had a problem. With the new finder glasses are not a problem (haven't tried the old). I wear glasses always when using the SWC. It's easy to look through and the film back does not get in the way (I have a big nose and am left-eyed too; my nose touches the back lightly).

I'm not sure about the shutter repairs. My friend has a non-T* version I think, and doesn't seem to have any problems. They seem about the same, unless shooting directly into the sun, and even then I'm not sure the difference is great, but I don't know for sure. The finder is just a piece of glass so it's not mirrored. Having the bubble level inside is amazing (the trick to shooting that wide of an angle and keeping it natural looking is to shoot it level). The finder is quite distorted but gives a good idea of what will be shot. The M7II 50mm finder in contrast is not distorted at all, but mine is out of level (both the finder and the bubble level, separately) making it not great to use, and searching it seems to be a common issue.

The SWC new finder has only a couple frame lines—just the corners of where the frame is, and then space all the way around to see outside the frame. It also has the circle in the center. If you got the reflex finder (ground glass for the back), that one is mirrored because it's on the back. With just the ground glass and no finder it is mirrored vertically and horizonally like a large format camera. The ground glass has frame lines at a few intervals making it easier to square to architecture.

The field of view of the M7 43mm is the same vertically as the SWC but it is wider horizontally. The field of view of the M7 50mm is the same horizontally as the SWC (24mm equivalent in 35mm terms) but the 50mm is cropped vertically in comparison. I find the extra width of the 43mm shows more distortion for objects on the sides, like any wide angle. The crop of the SWC hides it more.
__________________
www.leviwedel.com
Behance
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2013   #291
mfogiel
Registered User
 
mfogiel's Avatar
 
mfogiel is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Monaco
Posts: 4,629
"The field of view of the M7 43mm is the same vertically as the SWC but it is wider horizontally." I think you got it wrong. 43/56 is not the same as 38/56.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2013   #292
Levi Wedel
Registered User
 
Levi Wedel's Avatar
 
Levi Wedel is offline
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfogiel View Post
"The field of view of the M7 43mm is the same vertically as the SWC but it is wider horizontally." I think you got it wrong. 43/56 is not the same as 38/56.
http://velvia-film.blogspot.ca/2010/...-and-35mm.html and http://www.sweeting.org/mark/lenses/medium_format.php
__________________
www.leviwedel.com
Behance
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2013   #293
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,307
Why not spell it out?
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2013   #294
mfogiel
Registered User
 
mfogiel's Avatar
 
mfogiel is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Monaco
Posts: 4,629
Dear Levi,
Not that this is something, that does not let me sleep, but mathematics is not an opinion, therefore, given, that a 120 roll film is producing an image 56mm high both on SWC and Mamiya 7, a 38mm lens will necessarily have a wider vertical coverage than a 43mm lens, no matter what pages you want me to look at. 38/56=0.68 and 43/56=0.77
On the other hand, a 72mm wide negative covered with a 43mm lens will exhibit a wider horizontal angle of coverage, than a 56mm wide negative with a 38mm lens, as 43/72=0.6 and as above 38/56=0.68.
I hope this helps. Anyway, you might enjoy looking at this, just to make sure you are not missing something:


http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xz3...rior-race_news

Best regards

Marek
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2013   #295
Levi Wedel
Registered User
 
Levi Wedel's Avatar
 
Levi Wedel is offline
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 25
The poster was looking for a way to approximate the field of view. If 5mm made a big difference they would make lenses on a 5mm increment. Strangely, they don't.
__________________
www.leviwedel.com
Behance
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2013   #296
mfogiel
Registered User
 
mfogiel's Avatar
 
mfogiel is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Monaco
Posts: 4,629
Dear Levi,
5mm can make a lot of difference if we talk about a wide angle lens, in fact, there is a lot of difference between a 20 and 25mm lens on a 35mm, obviously less so on 6x6.
However, do not get upset, it is never too late to learn. I recommend you this very instructive page:
http://www.artofmanliness.com/2013/0...elong-learner/
Ciao
Marek
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2013   #297
Levi Wedel
Registered User
 
Levi Wedel's Avatar
 
Levi Wedel is offline
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfogiel View Post
Dear Levi,
5mm can make a lot of difference if we talk about a wide angle lens, in fact, there is a lot of difference between a 20 and 25mm lens on a 35mm, obviously less so on 6x6.
However, do not get upset, it is never too late to learn. I recommend you this very instructive page:
http://www.artofmanliness.com/2013/0...elong-learner/
Ciao
Marek
That would be very useful if this were a discussion about 35mm lenses rather than comparing the SWC to 7 lenses. With MF, one can take a half step forward or back to make up that minor difference. I'm still not clear on why this concerns you.
__________________
www.leviwedel.com
Behance
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2013   #298
mfogiel
Registered User
 
mfogiel's Avatar
 
mfogiel is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Monaco
Posts: 4,629
Dear Levi,
I am not concerned. I just find it funny, how hard you find to admit you made a small error. However, I think we are digressing too far from the object of this writing, which should be the enjoyment of SWC. Why don't you post some of your colourful pictures made with this camera?
I don't shoot colour, but here is one of my old favourites:


TERRACE, SAINT JEAN DE LUZ by mfogiel, on Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2013   #299
Levi Wedel
Registered User
 
Levi Wedel's Avatar
 
Levi Wedel is offline
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfogiel View Post
Dear Levi,
I am not concerned. I just find it funny, how hard you find to admit you made a small error. However, I think we are digressing too far from the object of this writing, which should be the enjoyment of SWC. Why don't you post some of your colourful pictures made with this camera?
I don't shoot colour, but here is one of my old favourites:
I posted links to the math that show the exact differences, for those interested, and then I admitted that there was obviously a 5mm discrepancy (most people are capable of simple math themselves, without me explaining it to them) and explained why I hadn't found that difference relevant to the discussion. If that was not enough then please enjoy your victory.

__________________
www.leviwedel.com
Behance
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2013   #300
Levi Wedel
Registered User
 
Levi Wedel's Avatar
 
Levi Wedel is offline
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfogiel View Post
That is a great shot though, by the way.
__________________
www.leviwedel.com
Behance
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2013   #301
mfogiel
Registered User
 
mfogiel's Avatar
 
mfogiel is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Monaco
Posts: 4,629
Haha...
You know Levi, in Italy arguments like the one we have talked about are called: " questioni di lana caprina" and in the middle ages they were concentrating around the question how many devils will fit on a tip of a pin. I hope you won't feel that I have some personal stake here, BTW it is likely that we originate from the same corner of the world.
Ciao
Marek
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-13-2013   #302
Rob-F
My Avatar Is Missing
 
Rob-F is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Age: 75
Posts: 4,364
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfogiel View Post
Dear Levi,
Not that this is something, that does not let me sleep, but mathematics is not an opinion, therefore, given, that a 120 roll film is producing an image 56mm high both on SWC and Mamiya 7, a 38mm lens will necessarily have a wider vertical coverage than a 43mm lens, no matter what pages you want me to look at. 38/56=0.68 and 43/56=0.77
On the other hand, a 72mm wide negative covered with a 43mm lens will exhibit a wider horizontal angle of coverage, than a 56mm wide negative with a 38mm lens, as 43/72=0.6 and as above 38/56=0.68.
I hope this helps. Anyway, you might enjoy looking at this, just to make sure you are not missing something:


http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xz3...rior-race_news

Best regards

Marek
I agree with all the foregoing, except that the hasselblad A12 film back is masked to 54 by 54mm. You may want to do a slight adjustment for that.
__________________
May the light be with you.
-----------------------------------------------------
How could my avatar have just disappeared?
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-28-2013   #303
Pirate
Guitar playing Fotografer
 
Pirate's Avatar
 
Pirate is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Highland, Mi.
Age: 46
Posts: 1,877
SW/C with Nikon SB-11 flash



__________________


Leica II IIIc M3, Mamiya C2, Nikon F, F3P, F5, Hasselblad 500C/M, SW/C, Crown Graphic 4x5, Rollei 3.5F / SLX / Baby Gray, Sinar F and P 4x5, Polaroid 100 & 450 Land, Kodak Retina II and IIa, Fuji GW690II, Graphic View II 4x5.

http://dudewithad700.deviantart.com/
http://arolloffilm.blogspot.com/
My Top 10(12) Best!



  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2015   #304
Larry Kellogg
Registered User
 
Larry Kellogg is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 134
I know this is an old thread, but I don't think the SWC ever goes out of style. I just picked up a mint SWC/M with T* lens coating and have started shooting on the street with it in New York. I suppose the camera does attract some attention but shooting such that I don't raise the camera to my eye seems to make it less obvious, and doesn't cause people to react like raising my Leica to my face seems to do.

People are very tuned into whether a camera is being pointed at them. I tried to photograph a kid holding onto a railing in the subway like he was behind prison bars, and as soon as he saw me raise my Leica to my face, he stepped back. If a six year old knows when a camera is being pointed at him, everybody else does too.

I'm shooting Delta [email protected] to try to get my shutter speeds up. I sure like the ability to easily shoot something that is three feet in front of me without worrying about trying to focus on it. Hyperfocal and be there.
__________________
<a href='http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=1436'>My Gallery</a>
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2015   #305
FrankS
Registered User
 
FrankS's Avatar
 
FrankS is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada, eh.
Age: 59
Posts: 19,226
The SWC is one of those cameras that I haven't ever tried but would love to.
__________________
my little website: http://frankfoto.jimdo.com/

photography makes me happy
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2015   #306
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,307
This is the camera that is still linking me to film. I want to return to film because of the SWC.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2015   #307
charlesholland
Registered User
 
charlesholland's Avatar
 
charlesholland is offline
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 48
Two cameras I will never part with: the Hasselblad SWC and the brooks veriwide 100.
Wideangle at its best in square and 6x10 format. Enjoy your SWC. Ps: I don't use the viewfinder: just guess. If You have to practice: try bare bow shooting first.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2015   #308
Larry Kellogg
Registered User
 
Larry Kellogg is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlesholland View Post
Two cameras I will never part with: the Hasselblad SWC and the brooks veriwide 100.
Wideangle at its best in square and 6x10 format. Enjoy your SWC. Ps: I don't use the viewfinder: just guess. If You have to practice: try bare bow shooting first.
I'm with you there, guessing is another level of freedom.

I'm been inspired by the work of Giorgia Fiorio. She's done amazing work with the SWC, some of it might be through guessing, some probably not.

I noticed quite a bit of lens flare in my first two rolls so I bought the round shade for the SWC/M. I don't think the rectangular one is the right one for the SWC/M but would like to hear what people think.

Some cameras are special. The SWC is a special camera. I also consider the Rolleiflex 2.8f to be special, along with the Leicas, of course. I don't think I'll ever part with this camera, it's small and easy to handle, and and a lot of fun to shoot with.
__________________
<a href='http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=1436'>My Gallery</a>
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2015   #309
Emile de Leon
Registered User
 
Emile de Leon is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 302
I own the Brooks Veriwide...
Would love to own the Hassy SWC too..
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-05-2015   #310
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,307
I will use my SWC (with a flash) to take photos of someone well known. The lens is sharp, and there is no need to focus. I will practice this coming weekend with this set-up.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-05-2015   #311
sc_rufctr
Leica nuts
 
sc_rufctr is offline
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 51
Posts: 1,208
Thanks for bringing this up. We need more photos!
__________________
Peter

Adelaide, South Australia
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-05-2015   #312
Godfrey
wonderment
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 6,837
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Kellogg View Post
I'm with you there, guessing is another level of freedom.

I'm been inspired by the work of Giorgia Fiorio. She's done amazing work with the SWC, some of it might be through guessing, some probably not.

I noticed quite a bit of lens flare in my first two rolls so I bought the round shade for the SWC/M. I don't think the rectangular one is the right one for the SWC/M but would like to hear what people think.

Some cameras are special. The SWC is a special camera. I also consider the Rolleiflex 2.8f to be special, along with the Leicas, of course. I don't think I'll ever part with this camera, it's small and easy to handle, and and a lot of fun to shoot with.
The SWC lenses with Synchro-Compur shutter all take a round hood, which also acts as the series filter retainer. Be sure you get Hasselblad series filters ... they are offset in the mount so that they don't contact the SWC lens' front element. The later models with CF lens take a square Bay 60 sized hood.

Note that one of the changes when the 903SWC came out was a new surface treatment in the body to reduce internal flare... I've noticed that my '78 SWC flares a tiny bit more than the 903 did.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-21-2015   #313
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,307
I sent out today five rolls of 120 film that I used with my SWC in Italy during the summer of 2013. I had the film frozen since then. It is ISO 160 C-41 AGFA film, I think. I mailed the rolls to TheFindLab. I want this to be (hopefully) starting me finally to use the SWC more often. I will post here any results worthwhile posting from the five rolls once I get back the scans.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-25-2015   #314
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 740
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
I sent out today five rolls of 120 film that I used with my SWC in Italy during the summer of 2013. I had the film frozen since then. It is ISO 160 C-41 AGFA film, I think. I mailed the rolls to TheFindLab. I want this to be (hopefully) starting me finally to use the SWC more often. I will post here any results worthwhile posting from the five rolls once I get back the scans.
I just scrolled through the whole thread waiting to see your long promised photos. I'm glad we will see some soon!
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-25-2015   #315
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 740
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigeye View Post
Two lens gallerys on boards are consistently better to me; those for the 21mm SA and the SWC.
Agreed, and just when I thought I had cured the SA itch...

The photos from the SWC and the SA seem to have a similar feel, I wonder if it is the symmetrical wide angle that gives it that look?
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-25-2015   #316
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 740
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelwj View Post
The photos from the SWC and the SA seem to have a similar feel, I wonder if it is the symmetrical wide angle that gives it that look?
Just looking at the design of the two, they look quite similar;
The SWC Biogan
CZ_Biogon_38_4.5_Zeiss.jpg
And the SA
SA.jpg
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-26-2015   #317
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelwj View Post
I just scrolled through the whole thread waiting to see your long promised photos. I'm glad we will see some soon!
I forgot about the five rolls that I had taken with the SWC, but now they are being developed and scanned by TheFindLab.

I hope they come out well.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-03-2015   #318
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,307
This is the first roll of film [posted here] for me with the SWC. I awas trying out the SWC to see how I could use this camera to take photos.
1. Outside Joe Patti's Seafood Store in Pensacola, Florida.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-03-2015   #319
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,307
2. Inside Joe Patti's Seafood



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-03-2015   #320
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,307
3. Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Tennessee



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 13:54.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.