What's new
Medium Format Forum

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

SWC Tripod foot

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Summilux

New Member
I'm thinking about buying an SWC for use with my CFV. I know that I can use the EL adapter to get the battery to fit, but I was wondering if it is possible to modify the tripod foot. I would like to remove the foot, reduce its length and then remount it. Not having an SWC, I would like to know whether removing the foot is possible without special tools. I have the tools to cut, grind and smooth the foot. Also, does the foot actually support the back, meaning that if I cut it, will this put too much strain on the locking hinges of the back.

Thanks

Jonathan
 
Jonathan,

Why do you want to cut off part of the camera foot?

The correct way to fit a DB or Polaroid back to older pre /M SWC cameras is to lower the foot and raise the mounting for the viewer.
Kits to modify these cameras are still available from Hasselblad specialists like John Dellera in London.

The foot does not in any way support the film or DB.

Work on these cameras is best left to repairman with sufficient knowledge of Hasselblad equipment.


Paul
 
Paul,
I'm considering cutting off the rear part of the foot because of the CFV battery. I think the EL battery adapter necessary for fitting the CFV to an SWC spoils the lines of the camera/back combo. It also seems a bit dodgy mechanically for a camera that would see a lot of field use. I saw an SWC/M with a cutoff foot on ebay and I like the idea. It's a bit vain, I know.
Jonathan
 
Modified foot

I bought a used SWC about a year ago with a modified tripod foot. Not the neatest work, I guess, but the CFV functions well with the camera and there is no problem with the battery getting in the way. The only problem I have with the combination Hasselblad SWC/CFV is the occational green/magenta cast that have been discussed in a few threads before on this Forum. I find it annoying never knowing if it going to be present in the pictures or not.
Anders
 

Attachments

  • swc.jpg
    EXIF
    swc.jpg
    62.4 KB · Views: 39
  • swc.jpg
    EXIF
    swc.jpg
    62.4 KB · Views: 38
astan said:
I bought a used SWC about a year ago with a modified tripod foot. Not the neatest work, I guess, but the CFV functions well with the camera and there is no problem with the battery getting in the way. The only problem I have with the combination Hasselblad SWC/CFV is the occational green/magenta cast that have been discussed in a few threads before on this Forum. I find it annoying never knowing if it going to be present in the pictures or not.
Anders
Click to expand...

Hm, is that shortened tripod plate not liable to be sort-of lose on the tripod?

Not that I have an SWC, but I would created an adapter plate to move the whole stainless steel plate forward, instead of shortening I mean.

I admit: owning a milling machine makes that idea more viable.

Wilko
 
astan said:
The only problem I have with the combination Hasselblad SWC/CFV is the occational green/magenta cast that have been discussed in a few threads before on this Forum. I find it annoying never knowing if it going to be present in the pictures or not.

Anders
Click to expand...

The problem is more likely to occur with the CFV 39 and the CFV 50.
The first CFV DB has a smaller sensor meaning the areas most likely to suffer from colour cast are not registered due to a smaller sensor.
 
wbulte said:
Hm, is that shortened tripod plate not liable to be sort-of lose on the tripod?


Wilko
Click to expand...

Yes, the plate is a little loose, but I have no problem with that as I use it only handheld. But as you say, it is something one should consider if one plan to use it mainly on a tripod.

Anders
 
polypal said:
I see.
Still this mod looks like a sort of amputation to me :z04_augenroll:
Click to expand...

I am thinking more like a crime against humanity.

Taking a working well built camera which is no longer made and destroying it because of inflated ego and of lack of knowledge. [Lack of something else, but the rest of you can fill in the blank space.] Is an unspeakable crime!

This is what happens when people think digital is the only way, because they do not know about the advantages of film.

Steve
 
Chopping of the foot is reversable as long as you make sure you have a complete set of parts in stock to reverse the amputation.
 
You suppose I have not done any surgery without knowing all my achievements.
The list of my activities is longer than you think.
Respect for the privacy of others prohibits more details regarding this subject. :z04_computer_haukap
 
polypal said:
You suppose I have not done any surgery without knowing all my achievements.
The list of my activities is longer than you think.
Respect for the privacy of others prohibits more details regarding this subject. :z04_computer_haukap
Click to expand...

Is it that you are protecting their privacy or that you removed their private parts?
 
Hello Stever,

In my native language we have a saying: "leave that in the middle"
The saying means: do not give details about the matter

That is what I was thinking of regarding the second part of your comment:

"Is it that you are protecting their privacy or that you removed their private parts?"


Paul
 
polypal said:
Hello Stever,

In my native language we have a saying: "leave that in the middle"
The saying means: do not give details about the matter

That is what I was thinking of regarding the second part of your comment:

"Is it that you are protecting their privacy or that you removed their private parts?"


Paul
Click to expand...

:) Your non-response to that told me you understood what I meant and decided not to comment. To expand on it, I was referring to cutting off parts of ones body just to satisfy a fleeting need. Hence, if you really must use a D-back do not hack up a good camera, find something else to hang the D-back on rather than destroy a classic.

Steve
 
Summilux,

I came to the same conclusion and decided to cut the foot. The L bracket is not an attractive solution and makes the handling of the camera a pain. With the foot gone it's an extremely useable package.

It's completely reversible if you obtain the parts. I didn't intend to do that.

My experience - I planned to remove the foot, saw off the foot and dress with a file. I removed the chrome plate, then loosened the 4 foot retaining screws. They loosened, but didn't release and couldn't be locked again leaving a floating foot- issue!

Hasselblad fixed these, at no cost, during a recent service. Plus I sold the CFV-16 on.

If I buy another CFV I will cut that foot in situ. Carefully wrap the camera to avoid the ingress of filings and saw it and finish with a file and emery paper. I will not cut the outer plate and would not refit it.

Hope that explains and helps.

Gary
 
Green/Magenta cast with SWC

Anders,
With the SWC, I would set the camera to SWC and change the capture time to 1 sec. The reason is the film armature that pokes the magazine and in the case of the CFV the capture is longer than the 500 C series and starts the capture before the lens opens and exposes creating a half image. You will also get this if you slowly squeeze the camera trigger as the arm pokes out and starts the capture. If you increase the capture time, you will have less of an issue. Or you can put the sync cord in and shoot that way. -Al
astan said:
I bought a used SWC about a year ago with a modified tripod foot. Not the neatest work, I guess, but the CFV functions well with the camera and there is no problem with the battery getting in the way. The only problem I have with the combination Hasselblad SWC/CFV is the occational green/magenta cast that have been discussed in a few threads before on this Forum. I find it annoying never knowing if it going to be present in the pictures or not.
Anders
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top