Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/02/15

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

Subject: [Leica] The final gasp of MF film?
From: benedenia at (Marty Deveney)
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 10:35:19 +1030
References: <> <>

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 6:47 AM, John McMaster <john at> 
> I have been scanning my Hasselblad negs from years ago (about 7000 pixels 
> sq and 280MB files). Doing the B&W looks good but the colour transparency 
> does not look much different to M9. The odd thing is (most of these were 
> SWC/M, 50mm and 150mm black T*) that they did not look much different when 
> I printed them but once scanned the SWC/M stuff is way sharper...

I noticed something similar.  Rolleiflexes have great Zeiss lenses, we
all know that.  But one of the things I found when I fuirst used a
really well aligned point source enlarger with an Apo El-Nikkor, and
later with Leaf 45 and FlexTight scanners is that modern Hasselblad
Zeiss 80mm f2.8 Planars are much better lenses than the old Planars in
Rolleis.  This figures, because not only are the designs and materials
30-40 years newer, but the Hasselblad lenses are a lot bigger and
permit different engineering solutions to the optical problems.

My guess is that you never noticed much difference when wet printing
either because you didn't enlarge enough, or your enlarging system had
enough factors to degrade the image quality (lens, alignment,
stability) to a point where they were about equivalent.  Scanning made
me a better wet printer, paradoxical, really.


Replies: Reply from john at (John McMaster) ([Leica] The final gasp of MF film?)
In reply to: Message from richard at (Richard Man) ([Leica] The final gasp of MF film?)
Message from john at (John McMaster) ([Leica] The final gasp of MF film?)