Camera Parts

Thanks for visiting our site!
Hasselblad Lens
Checkout Ebay Auctions For The Cheapest Prices

Check out Amazon:

Account limit of 2000 requests per hour exceeded.

Here are some more information for Hasselblad Lens:

Millions of dollars are spent every year on cosmetics by women who want their skin to appear smoother. The portrait of themselves that they like the best will make their skin smooth and silky, their eyes shining in gem like clarity and their hair glowing with natural shine. Unfortunately, the camera lens sometimes portrays them in merciless detail, every blemish and pore etched in clarity. Their hair lies dark and dank and their eyes dull and shaded.

But all is not lost. The proper soft focus application can solve most of these problems. There are many ways to soften a portrait.

Soft filters fall into three categories. The simplest is the diffusion filter. Examples of these are a filter made of stretched nylon stocking, a glass filter with raised rings or a randomly etched pattern on lucite. A second category is the soft focus lens or the Hasselblad Softar filter. A new type is often included in digital imaging software.

The advantage of the diffusion filter's low cost is mitigated by the soft effect being accompanied by a lowering of contrast and a muddying of shadow detail. All of the light coming through the lens and the filter is diffused over the whole picture, thereby diminishing the sparkle in the highlights and throwing unwanted light into the shadows. The effect does soften the skin tones, along with dulling the eyes and hair. Only a super close portrait could be satisfactory with this type filter.

The soft image lens replicates the achromatic spread of light inherent in the early portrait lenses. In those days, only two, three or four lens element lenses were used for portraits. Only when stopped down to F16 or F32 were they completely sharp. On the other hand, when opened up to F8 or F5.6 these lenses produced a glow of uncorrected light spreading out from the sharp image.

Unlike the diffusion filter, the soft focus lens adds light to the highlights and prevents the diffused light from reaching the shadows. The effect was a soft portrait overlaid with a gradually diminishing circle of light stretching from the point source. Skin appears smooth and unblemished, the eyes taking on a wet glow.

Fortunately, contrast is not diminished with this type of diffusion.

The Hasselblad Softar I and II glass filters simulate this effect quite nicely. There are even inexpensive ($35.00) clones made of French acrylic plastic that do the same job. The most effective modern equivalents are the Rodenstock Imagon lenses. These soft imaging lenses can be adjusted from super soft to quite sharp with graduated pierced attachments inside the lens.

For the digital portrait artist, Adobe Photoshop, ArcSoft and other professional imaging software include a soft filter or two. The effect is quite strong and should be used at fifty per cent or less for a good look. There is a strong inclination to sharpen the eyes and hair with the sharpening tool, but too much sharpening is quite noticeable and should be used with discretion.

A soft image portrait can be extremely flattering and beautiful

When done properly and with restraint. Try it out on your loved ones, she'll love you all the more.

Retired portrait photographer. Now writes and sings.

In the New Photography Age, is Mostly Wrong the New Mostly Right?

I read a really good blog post the other day by a local Ottawa photographer about film vs digital, and also the idea of how important content is. A good photo is a good photo whether it was shot with film or digital And of course the opposite is also true (probably more true).

But, what do I know? I haven't shot film in ages. Although I had been shooting film longer than some of these young photographers have been able to walk. Shhhhhhh, don't tell anyone though. Anyway, I thought I better shoot a roll so I could at least feel like I was part of the young group romanced by the old ways.

The cool thing about it all or the experience is, that it's made me not think so much about film vs digital, but more about the rules I was taught not to break. Today it's all about breaking the rules - but the young photographers coming out of school don't even know there were rules. (Rule number 56. Don't shoot into the sun, it'll give you flare in your lens)

It also makes me think or compare the idea of rules vs risks. When we all shot film we had more rules and we were less likely to take risks. Film is/was expensive and you couldn't see the results or rewards of risk until the film was developed and printed.

For me shooting digital allows me to take tons of risks - way more than in the days of film. So for that reason, shooting digital has way more romance for me than film. It may not be as seductive, but the dance is much funner with less rules - with 'super' results. But at the end of the day, life is a journey and I always applaud those who risk to explore, whether it's with an old Hasselblad with film or a new digital Nikon.

Dwayne Brown

About the Author

Dwayne Brown is a commercial and corporate photographer in Ottawa Canada. He blends over 25 years of commercial photography experience with his passion to capture and communicate to create imagery for design and advertising projects. For more information about Dwayne Brown and his studio please visit his website www.dwaynebrown.com

Digital Compacts.?

The Canon 850 with wide angle lens is reviewed as being so so picture quality wise. The 750 is far from perfect in operation. The finepix F40 is superb indoors, but metering/ graining an issue outdoors. The Panasonic TZ3 loses significant detail owing to over agressive noise supression. The Ricoh Caplio6 has bad fringing etc etc. Agreed! I have seen the shots.
Is it unrealistic for an old film camera enthusiast who favours a 20 year old Minolta to expect much in the way of a few good stills from a digital compact running on auto? Are they all merely ' happy snappys' bristling with electronic features? Face recognition for goodness sake. Time to add movies when they outperform a Hasselblad as far as I am concerned! Meanwhile the pixel count continues to rise which is arguably counter productive quality wise. Are there any professionals out there who can advise please?

I agree. Nothing like a good decent Honeywell Spotmatic or Minolta SRT101 to get some damn fine photos. (And oooh, how about that Nikon F or Nikkormat? Damn, those were great days!!)

What bugs the **it (my censoring) out of me is the limitations of the zooms on these pocket packs of junk. Who wants to have a low angle of 38mm on their camera? Who decided to have only 38mm as the widest on these cameras?

It's very hard to find one with a decent 28mm lens on it. I have started using a digital camera, but not for any real photography. Just snap shots around the house, because of the ease of transfering the photos and printing them out. But for real pictures, I still have a 35mm point-n-shoot which works worlds better for quality of picture.

Phocus 2.5 adds support for 150+ cameras
Camera maker Hasselblad has announced Phocus 2.5, a future update to the company's photo editing tool. The program handles tasks like white balance, shadow/highlight adjustment and lens correction, for instance by removing moiré patterns and image distortion. The v2.5 update primarily adds RAW support for over 150 non-Hasselblad cameras, from companies such as Canon, Nikon, Leica, Sony, Fuji and ...

Thanks for visiting!