I thought the needle in the c330 was indicative of the exposure compensation for the bellows draw.
Looks are important too. The mamiya tlrs look weird. Will probably freak out your clients/models, 'one lens to take a picture, the other one to capture your soul!'. Hasselblad looks PRO.
Mamiya TLRs will only "freak out" clients/models who are as self image obsessed as this contributor.Looks are important too. The mamiya tlrs look weird. Will probably freak out your clients/models, 'one lens to take a picture, the other one to capture your soul!'. Hasselblad looks PRO.
I had a 500CM in the past. Now I shoot with a RB67 system. 6x7 is much better in my view. Also german glass will always be expensive. I paid 105 USD for my 180 KL/L.
Mamiya TLRs will only "freak out" clients/models who are as self image obsessed as this contributor.
If I would decide for Hasselblad - I will definitely go with full manual one, so this should mean 500, 501, and 503 incarnations (did I miss any?).
The question is - what are the differences between these versions, which features you consider necessary or helpful, which lenses fit which cameras. I am asking ,as it is a bit more confusing than I appreciate.
My vote would definitely be for a SLR, not TLR camera.
There is absolutely no reason why you should have to work with the parallax.
The TLR concept was great in the days that SLRs were slow because of the mirror that had to be moved out of the way. Those days are well and truly behind us now. Nowadays, the TLR is a solution to a problem that ceased to be one over 60 years ago.
Most (all?) 6x6 SLRs offer a wider range of accessories too. But that may not be important to what you want to do.
This thread has made me realise how much I liked my C33 and C3, and having returned to using TLR's and loving the format, I think I'll try find another (or pair).
I never found Parallax a big issue, earlier in the thread i mentioned I shot a jexellery Catalogue with a C33 (same as C330 but all metal basically better built), I never had a paramender but back then I couldn't afford one, but set the tripod up right & just crank up the column worked perfectly.
One thing's great the lack of a mirror, regardless of what anyone says it gives TLR's abig advantage, and the mass of the C series is enough to allow shrp images at shutter speeds well below those achievable by SLR's with a mirror.
Ian
I agree entirely Ian, and have notice lately that this forum is full of posts from people who have bought Hasselblads on e bay and are having problems either in operating them, or determining if they are faulty, the Mamiya TLRs are mechanically simple, and don't have any interlock problems, I have a C33 and a C330F, and wouldn't exchange them for my people photography for Hasselblad gear.This thread has made me realise how much I liked my C33 and C3, and having returned to using TLR's and loving the format, I think I'll try find another (or pair).
I never found Parallax a big issue, earlier in the thread i mentioned I shot a jexellery Catalogue with a C33 (same as C330 but all metal basically better built), I never had a paramender but back then I couldn't afford one, but set the tripod up right & just crank up the column worked perfectly.
One thing's great the lack of a mirror, regardless of what anyone says it gives TLR's abig advantage, and the mass of the C series is enough to allow shrp images at shutter speeds well below those achievable by SLR's with a mirror.
Ian
My first quality camera was a Minolta Autocord TLR. I shot a lot of table tops with it, and would just crank up the column to adjust for parallax. Of course, a SLR shines for close ups.
Portrait photography is not table top photography. Parallax concerns are for very close up images. Most recomendations are to back aways with a somewhat longer lens to avoid the facial distortion of close up. Parallax correction would be for under 3 foot, more like 1.5 feet, not exactly the territory of portraits.
Mirror slap and viewfinder blackout or delay, slow shutter speeds, those are more of a concern. Of course, if you shoot with hot lights, focal plane shutters don't matter. The very brief viewfinder blackout, while brief, does matter. The old saying, "don't take your eye off the ball" applies.
Portraits can be made with any camera, however, view cameras and TLR are tops.
Please dear friends - do not start a TLR versus SLR war. I well understand that the technique and years of experience make more difference that the choice of the camera.
Concerning the Mamiya TLRs and close ups - according to specifications the 135 & 180 lenses at closest focus distance allow for subject of 27x27 cm. The 105 allows tighter crop - around 17x17 cm. That is more than close enough for tight head shot and longer focal lengths should yield results without significant distortion of the face.
I need time to think the Mamiyas over - I am used to Rolleiflex so partially I know what to expect.
Now back to Hasselblads. [Q.G. - thanks for the great overview]. If I understand correctly - If I do not need a TTL flash or such, I should be perfectly fine with 500 C/M or one of the 501 models. Still - I would like to ask what king of difference does the "better" mirror brings (I found also something called "GMS - gliding mirror system"). Also - how is the lenses compatibility? Which do and do not fit?
P.S. I shoot with flashlights, not hot lights. So the exposure is defined by the duration of the flash. The short exposure helps to keep the influence of other light sources (lamps, window light, trigger flash, etc..) down.
[...] Still - I would like to ask what king of difference does the "better" mirror brings (I found also something called "GMS - gliding mirror system"). Also - how is the lenses compatibility? Which do and do not fit?
P.S. I shoot with flashlights, not hot lights. So the exposure is defined by the duration of the flash. The short exposure helps to keep the influence of other light sources (lamps, window light, trigger flash, etc..) down.
I think you're missing the point: no matter how insignificant you can imagine it sometimes can be, there simply is no reason to put up with it at all.
It doesn't.
What are you going to do?
When you decide to press the shutter, it is too late to do anything about it, whatever you may see through the viewfinder.
You'll also not be ready to capture the moment you saw you just missed while looking through the viewfinder.
There are moments when you need to keep an eye on the ball. There are moments that it doesn't matter one iota whether you do or not.
I agree. Agree that some people think so.
But that doesn't make it so.
Explain, for instance (and for fun), how not having a 1/30 second viewfinder blackout being a major plus is reconciled with using a view camera for the same type of photography.
Ok well I hate Hasselblads after using them for 15 years in a studio and I love my Rolleiflexes. But if I was going to commit to studio use of MF I would go with the Hasselblad due to the quality interchangeable lenses and the film backs that you can load up several of in advance and have both color and black and white loaded. Plus you can have an assistant loading them while you shoot. With a Rollei you must either slow down or have a few cameras.
I know many people love Hasselblads as much as I do Rolleiflex (like Q.G.) but it isn't for everyone. To me it is an unpleasant camera to use and I can never feel in touch with it like my Rolleiflex. In my experience it spends a lot of time in the repair shop as well. Maybe that is because I didn't have the loving touch.
Dennis
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?