Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/08/13

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Hasselblad digi-backs, lenses - was M9"M8
From: red735i at earthlink.net (Frank Filippone)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 15:18:51 -0700
References: <C6A9E9C7.52D0A%mark@rabinergroup.com> <p06230908c6aa3189a222@[10.0.1.199]> <0D984AC4-A065-4311-A904-AA8B335CDDB1@mac.com>

Maybe I am being dumb,, but using a Schneider or Rodenstock Digi-lens on a
Hasselblad body means that you do not have auto aperture ( nor, maybe any
shutter at all if you have a 500 series body) .

Unacceptable comparison to anything that is at all user friendly.  ( pick
one or more... Canon DSLR with Canon lenses, Leica DMR with Leica Lenses,
ditto Nikon, any other system camera.... ).  ( I am pretty much consistent
with my assessment that no-auto Iris is a no show in my book, and also for
the marketplace).

The ONLY practical solution to a Hasselblad body assembly is Hasselblad
lenses.  If you want a digital back, you are still in the same camp....
Hasselblad lenses.

Period.

If you want something to experiment with, argue away..... but it is pretty
meaningless from a usability standpoint.  

Which is where I thought this discussion was moving towards......Use.

Frank Filippone
red735i at earthlink.net





Replies: Reply from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Hasselblad digi-backs, lenses - was M9"M8)
Reply from henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff) ([Leica] Hasselblad digi-backs, lenses - was M9"M8)
In reply to: Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] M9 - not much more expensive than M8?)
Message from henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff) ([Leica] Hasselblad digi-backs, lenses - was M9?M8)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Hasselblad digi-backs, lenses - was M9?M8)