135 format to medium format.

Hi all - been thinking about this for some yrs, got a job, done some extra savings to my past should hope to reach surplus next yr. Looking at a more systems camera like the Hasselblad 500. I do mostly landscapes / cityscapes even on travel with a tripod etc.

Is a Gitzo traveler tripod ok, I know that a Pentax 67 would have a lot of mirror slap on such a light tripod. What about the Hasselblad?

The other question is. Right now I am still using a rather old Nikon 18-35mm non G AF-D lens on my Nikon film camera. Should I update that the newer 16-35mm or even a 14-24mm - how would a Hasselblad compare with that? The Hasselblad lens would be a C T* lens. Not the more expensive CFE or what ...

Which focal length do you prefer for your landscapes in 35mm?

Slixtiesix said:

Which focal length do you prefer for your landscapes in 35mm?

Click to expand...

I forget the Haselblad lenses now. But the 3 was a 80mm standard, might have been a 50 or 40mm for the wide and maybe a 150mm.

Just as a suggestion. Your tripod would work wonderfully with a Fuji GA645i or the Fuji GF670. Both wonderful cameras with terrific lenses.

rayonline_nz said:

Is a Gitzo traveler tripod ok, I know that a Pentax 67 would have a lot of mirror slap on such a light tripod. What about the Hasselblad?

Click to expand...

There is no Hasselblad mirror slap except in the minds of range finger folks and we know that they are all deranged.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkKcbyh2CrA

The mirror movement is damped out to prevent mirror slap. It did not take Hasselblad fifty years to figure that out.

Coming to APUG for analog camera advice is harmful to your economic well being. Soon you will move to 4"x5", then LF and finally to ULF. You poor soul.

rayonline_nz said:

Hi all - been thinking about this for some yrs, got a job, done some extra savings to my past should hope to reach surplus next yr. Looking at a more systems camera like the Hasselblad 500. I do mostly landscapes / cityscapes even on travel with a tripod etc.

Is a Gitzo traveler tripod ok, I know that a Pentax 67 would have a lot of mirror slap on such a light tripod. What about the Hasselblad?

The other question is. Right now I am still using a rather old Nikon 18-35mm non G AF-D lens on my Nikon film camera. Should I update that the newer 16-35mm or even a 14-24mm - how would a Hasselblad compare with that? The Hasselblad lens would be a C T* lens. Not the more expensive CFE or what ...

Click to expand...

I don't know about all Hasselblads, but with the 500C you can open the focal plane shutter and just use the diaphram shutter for exposure, hence no mirror slap.

You may want to research the medium format world a bit more before you jump into it. It's completely different to 35mm, there are several formats (6x4.5, 6x6, 6x7, 6x8, 6x9, 6x12 & 6x17) and different camera types (Folder, Rangefinder, SLR etc.) each with their own strengths & weaknesses. Hasslebalds are very expensive if you want to build a system.

As for the lenses, most medium format lenses are primes (zooms are big, heavy & slow), compared to 35mm there are no 'rubbish' lenses and very few 'average' ones - most are good, very good or excellent (they were ALL designed for professional use). There are few independent lenses (those that exist are generally more expensive than the manufacturers own options). Measured by LPMM a very good 35mm lens might out resolve a medium format one, but for results on film, medium format will blow any 35mm lens out of water (the increase in film area sees to that). It's not even the resolution that matters, the tonal graduation is infinitely smoother than 35mm and this alone makes a huge difference.

You're entire technique may have to change (fewer & more expensive shots tend to influence more thought/time going into each shot). It's not just the mirror slap but the extra mass of a medium format camera & lens combination can challenge some tripods. Most medium format SLRs have some form of mirror lock-up, so mirror slap can be zero. The 'Pentax 6x7' came in two versions, the early ones without mirror lock-up, the later (generally identified as 'MLU') have it. The later Pentax '67' also has mirror lock-up as standard - but I shoot mine handheld.

I'd encourage you to get into medium format, but make sure you know what you want before spending $$$$ on some gear.

John.

cliveh said:

I don't know about all Hasselblads, but with the 500C you can open the focal plane shutter and just use the diaphram shutter for exposure, hence no mirror slap.

Click to expand...

Uhh, 'scuse me??

cliveh said:

I don't know about all Hasselblads, but with the 500C you can open the focal plane shutter and just use the diaphram shutter for exposure, hence no mirror slap.

Click to expand...

That make no sense. However one can lock up the mirror on a Hasselblad to eliminate the nonexistent mirror slap.

Sirius Glass said:

There is no Hasselblad mirror slap except in the minds of range finger folks and we know that they are all deranged.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkKcbyh2CrA

Click to expand...

+1I never noticed a mirror-slap issue with any of my Hasselblsd 501cs either.The 50mm CFLE is a great start for MF landscapes.The 40mm is more for architecture,start with a 50,80 150mm combination.You'll be good for years to come.The Gitzo will do fine

I prefer the SWC [38mm] to the 40mm because the SWC is rectilinearly correct.

Sirius Glass said:

That make no sense. However one can lock up the mirror on a Hasselblad to eliminate the nonexistent mirror slap.

Click to expand...

That's what I meant.

Those zooms probably have a wider field of view at their short end than any Hasselblad lens. But the Hasselblad lenses are most likely a good bit sharper than the zooms. The combination of a sharp prime and bigger negative will get you much better image quality than you would see in 35mm, given the lenses you've mentioned.

People like to obsess about mirror slap on reflex cameras, but for most purposes, it's a non-issue.
Not sure about the Pentax, but for the Hasselblad you can pre-release the mirror if you really need to avoid the possibility that vibration could spoil your shot.

I doubt that a Hasselblad is all that much different from a Pentax 6x7 for weight, the Traveler would probably support either one adequately.

Sirius Glass said:

There is no Hasselblad mirror slap except in the minds of range finger folks and we know that they are all deranged.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkKcbyh2CrA

The mirror movement is damped out to prevent mirror slap. It did not take Hasselblad fifty years to figure that out.

Click to expand...

What about at a fast shutter?


Mamiya RB. Handheld. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuLvmICPik0

I've used my Pentax 6X7 since the 80s and have never had a problem with vibration from mirror slap because I most always use the mirror lock up switch. I've done some (very) basic comparisons shooting the camera hand held using 1/60 second vs on a tripod at 1/60 second and I can't see any difference in sharpness. Having said that, I would only get a Pentax 6X7 with a mirror lock up switch.

I have read on other forums that some people have had problems with vibration using lenses longer than 200mm (100mm equivalent to 35mm), but that may be because they didn't have the correct support for lenses that large.

mweintraub said:

What about at a fast shutter?


Mamiya RB. Handheld. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuLvmICPik0

Click to expand...

OK the range finder freaks lost the argument so now they change the subject.

1/500 second is fast enough.

Just admit that the Hasselblad is a good camera. If it was not a good camera it would not have commanded high prices for over fifty years. Range finder freaks really need to get over themselves.

Sirius Glass said:

There is no Hasselblad mirror slap except in the minds of range finger folks and we know that they are all deranged.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkKcbyh2CrA

The mirror movement is damped out to prevent mirror slap. It did not take Hasselblad fifty years to figure that out.

Click to expand...

So tell us, what is the slowest shutter speed you can use handheld. I can do 1/15 on a Mamiya RB67. The problem is not just "mirror slap" but a combination of that and how stiff that damn shutter release is. In the end it doesn't matter what causes the camera shake, the end result is that you do 1/30 on the Hassy and you're toast.

As for that video, isn't putting a camera on a table like putting it on the most stable tripod ever made?

Sirius Glass said:

OK the range finder freaks lost the argument so now they change the subject.

1/500 second is fast enough.

Just admit that the Hasselblad is a good camera. If it was not a good camera it would not have commanded high prices for over fifty years. Range finder freaks really need to get over themselves.

Click to expand...

It is a good camera. It is a great camera. It just isn't that good handheld when compared to other cameras. And it isn't the start and end of it all like you make it out to be, just like a Leica isn't the start and end of it all like the Leica rangefinders freaks like to tell you.

film_man said:

So tell us, what is the slowest shutter speed you can use handheld. I can do 1/15 on a Mamiya RB67.

As for that video, isn't putting a camera on a table like putting it on the most stable tripod ever made?

Click to expand...

I do not have a problem because I use ISO 400 film and carry a tripod in each of my cars.

rayonline_nz said:

Hi all - been thinking about this for some yrs, got a job, done some extra savings to my past should hope to reach surplus next yr. Looking at a more systems camera like the Hasselblad 500. I do mostly landscapes / cityscapes even on travel with a tripod etc.

Is a Gitzo traveler tripod ok, I know that a Pentax 67 would have a lot of mirror slap on such a light tripod. What about the Hasselblad?

The other question is. Right now I am still using a rather old Nikon 18-35mm non G AF-D lens on my Nikon film camera. Should I update that the newer 16-35mm or even a 14-24mm - how would a Hasselblad compare with that? The Hasselblad lens would be a C T* lens. Not the more expensive CFE or what ...

Click to expand...

If you are going to lug a tripod around then you might as well get the real estate for it, grab yourself a 6x7 camera and be done with it.

As for how would a 14-24mm or whatever would compare to a Hasselblad? You can't really compare. Pretty much any Hasselblad lens is excellent, the issue though is that a 40mm Hasselblad is about as wide as a 24mm camera on your Nikon on the horizontal. And probably 17mm on the vertical. Which makes it very different in use. A more square format like 6x7 gets you a bit closer to what you are used in 135 but you still get a lot more space on the vertical which is very obvious with wides.

Systems I would look for depending on format/budget:
Bronica SQ series
Hasselblad
Rollei 6000 series
Mamiya 6
Mamiya 7
Mamiya RB67/RZ67
Pentax 67
Bronica GS (6x7)

The great thing is that they are all great systems! You really can't go too wrong with either of them so it is down to personal preference and not any real technical advantage of one vs the other.

Personally I had a Bronica SQB and 3 Hasselblads. I now have a RB67. I'd LOVE to get my hands on a Mamiya 6 too. One day...

PS
What about a Hasselblad XPan?

Sirius Glass said:

I do not have a problem because I use ISO 400 film and carry a tripod in each of my cars.

Click to expand...

Riiiiight...so there is no issue because you're either on a tripod or use a fast shutter speed. Right, right, right, why didn't I think of that.

film_man said:

If you are going to lug a tripod around then you might as well get the real estate for it, grab yourself a 6x7 camera and be done with it.

Click to expand...

If you are going to lug a tripod around then you might as well get a view camera so that you will have the lifts and tilts with a large negative.

Sirius Glass said:

OK the range finder freaks lost the argument so now they change the subject.

1/500 second is fast enough.

Just admit that the Hasselblad is a good camera. If it was not a good camera it would not have commanded high prices for over fifty years. Range finder freaks really need to get over themselves.

Click to expand...

I do admit that the Hasselblads are great cameras. I've never said otherwise. I just don't think they are the only good / great camera out there.

Sirius Glass said:

There is no Hasselblad mirror slap except in the minds of range finger folks and we know that they are all deranged.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkKcbyh2CrA

The mirror movement is damped out to prevent mirror slap. It did not take Hasselblad fifty years to figure that out.

Click to expand...

I don't want to be offensive, even less when you are what I consider one of the best forumers on APUG, but I find some problems with this post. I am assuming you are talking about the Hasselblad 500C and contemporaries of it. :

1 - The machine was designed circa 1956 with some mechanisms borrowed from the 1600F which was designed circa 1949. Most likely the mirror mechanism as well. In those times no SLR had mirror dampening or de-acceleration mechanisms. (See Exacta Varex, for a contemporary example). If i recall correctly, the first SLR to have a clockwork mirror de-accel mechanism was the Canonflex of 1959. Not even the Nikon F had it, and the Nikon F had a production change during the mid 60s to improve the mirror mechanism for lower shock.

2 - As far as i know there are no mirror damping or de-acceleration mechanisms on the 500C. If there were any, it would have been mentioned with great fanfare on the literature, moreover since in those times TLRs were ubiquitous and one of their key advantages was the absence of... vibrations.

3 - The mirror slap/vibration of the 500C is well known, and it's also suggested all over the internet that you should not go below 1/125 for handheld work with it, which suggests strong mirror slap/vibration compared to, say, a camera like the RB67 which posesses an internal mirror deaccelerator and that is routinely used at 1/30 handheld with no problems. For a fitting comparison, the contemporary Mamiya M645 has no such mirror-damping device and the manual explicitely states no to go below 1/125 without a tripod. Hmm...

4 - The video you posted shows the Hasselblad lying flat over a table. So there is no possibility of the camera showing any rocking motion. In other words it is a flawed test. To make a good test, the camera would have had to be placed on a pivot or in a floating stand with accelerometers.

5 - I bought the RB67 the same day I compared it against a 500C side to side. Basically I got to choose which one to buy. The camera vibration felt in my hands when firing the 500C was not only obvious; it was the heaviest i've experienced, even heavier than the Praktisix II medium format SLR and similar to the Kiev 60 SLR which is a very "agricultural" machine. The RB67 was even smoother than some 35mm SLRs. In fact i'm looking at some 8x10" i just made with my RB67 at 1/8 (one eight) shutter speed and the 90mm lens, **handheld**; some of the shots were blurry but some of them are just fine, and that's what I printed. Try that with a Hasselblad.

6 - At least in this city the main users of Hasselblad systems were studio/fashion photographers. Of course, with strobes at 1/500 flash synchronization, the vibration problem doesn't matter at all.