Bronica... or Hasselblad?

[Q.G.]

Q.G.:

While I have no doubt that Hasselblads are superior, don't you think it's a bit disingenuous to assume that the continued existence of a product or company proves its superiority? Especially considering that we're on a forum where we use stuff that WE think is better than digital, yet is continually on the brink of discontinuation (black and white films/papers, Ilfochrome, RA-4 chemistry, etc.)?

Disingenious? No.

Realistic.
It is an expression of the market's appreciation of things. And it is that, even if we don't like it.
When the going gets tough, natural selection, survival of the fittest, the last man standing, and all that.

But yes, you're right that other factors play a role as well. Why some makes fall by the wayside sooner than others is not necessarily a mark of quality only.


But we must not get this all out of perspective (i fear we are more than halfway there already).
The entire thingy revolves about the question which of the two options would be the better.
As said before, such a matter is hardly decided by heaping both options together and saying that both do equally well.
So, much attention is given to the differences that separate the two as two distinct options.

In my opinion, you can do better than a Bronica.
And not just by going for a Hasselblad. A Mamiya RB or RZ, or Rolleiflex 6000-series would be better too. But they were not on your list.

 

[abstraxion]

Q.G. - I was very intrigued by the Rollei SLRs, especially after seeing Barry Thornton's work with them, but I can't seem to find much. KEH sells very little Rollei SLR equipment, and eBay has virtually nothing either. The Mamiya RB/RZ were definitely on my list, but they're kinda huge! The RZ in particular seems very nice, though... perhaps enough to overlook its size.

Everyone has made such good points, I fear that the decision has only become more difficult.

 

[wiltw]

Many many wedding pros shot with Hasselblad. Many many wedding pros shot with Bronica. The quality of optics and the hardiness of the body was never a deterrent to producing high quality photographs for paying clients.

I once went to a WPA convention back in the 90's, and someone from the FL area said something along the lines of, "In FL in my area, most pros have Bronica because we rather not tie up our money in equipment".

As for 'you can get digital backs for Hasselblad', you can for Bronica, too. You buy a digital back for Hasselblad and outfit it with an adapter plate which allows it to mount on the Bronica. There is zero advantage to a film body linked to a digital back, because it is equally 'awkward' for both brands in the absence of a direct link between body and back, not like where the body and back are made to 'hand shake' with each other transparent to the user so they look to be a single integrated unit...it interacts as an afterthought for both! Only the newest electronic Hassy's have the seamless interface.

 

[Marc Akemann]

I've used both Hasselblad and Bronica with their Zeiss, Zenzanon & Nikkor lenses. Surely one of these brands will be sharper than the others. But I have yet to hear from a client, bride, gallery viewer, etc., "Hmmm, looks like you used a Zenzanon. Too bad. You could have done better with Zeiss." The only people who see my work and ask about what lenses I used.... are other photographers. Frankly, I'm pretty sure I don't care what 'they' think.

 

[brian steinberger]

abstraxion, APUG is a wonderful place to get great information on everything analog photography related. But too much information can confuse and make decisions harder. I've gone through this too. Since there are so many photographers here of course you're going to have camps from both sides. You need to make the decision for you. I still say if you're getting your feet wet in MF and or aren't looking to spend much to start, go with the Bronica. If you do not have a budget, or feel that you'll be better a photographer somehow if you own a "Hassy" (there are people like this) then go for the Hasselblad. I really think you should save your money for film and paper and get the Bronica system. You will not be disappointed.

 

[AgentX]

Hassy stuff is so relatively cheap now that there's no reason NOT to buy it if, in fact, a Hassy is what you really want. If you get something you don't really want, you will still occasionally cruise Ebay or KEH wistfully and will end up buying it someday. No reason you can't spring for an old 500c with an 80, or a 60/100 combo, or even a 50/80/150 as was suggested above.

I think Bronica stuff is great, but there's nothing actually wrong with wanting a Hassy because it's a Hassy. Just don't fool yourself into thinking it'll make great pictures substantially better than they would be with a Bronica, or rescue stuff you're not happy with from being tossed in the bin.

If you're just looking for a 6x6 negative and aren't focused on the gear, I'm sure Bronica would give you fantastic results, and you'd be far less of a gear fetishist than most of us, which is a noble goal. It's just that when I've tried to escape my true desires, they end up biting me in the end. So why fight it if the price is within your reach?

Edit: Brian's point above is well-taken...more $ for film and paper is really where it's at...but I don't know if that's a budget concern for the OP. Plus, if you don't end up wanting to stick with MF, your resale on the Hassy will likely be quite easy and substantially recover what you paid for it. Not to say Bronica wouldn't, but I also wouldn't count on it.

 

[PhotoJim]

I was sure I wanted the Hasselblad. I no longer do. So I wouldn't say that this is a universal rule.

I'd love to have some Leica M or R gear, too, but I look at the shots I'm getting with my existing 35mm equipment and I get over it.

 

[AgentX]

Well, no one says our fickle hearts don't change...but you don't honestly know until you own it...

 

[hassyfan]

It's obvious that I'm a Hasselblad user, and have been since '82 when I gave up my C330 for a 500C/M. Today I shoot a 503CW and four lenses, etc. It's a phenomenal system and a real pleasure to use.

Either camera will produce fine images. The photographer makes the difference, the camera is just a tool to an end. If at all possible, you should hold each and see how it feels to you and any ease of use concerns you may have. To me, a Hasselblad 500series body w/80mm, WLF and film back is about as compact as you can get in 6x6 SLR.

I know that I wouldn't be using a C330 if I had a 6x6 SLR instead. So why not sell the C330 to help fund your new purchase?

Just my 2 cents.........good luck.

Ron

 

[Sirius Glass]

It's obvious that I'm a Hasselblad user, and have been since '82 when I gave up my C330 for a 500C/M. Today I shoot a 503CW and four lenses, etc. It's a phenomenal system and a real pleasure to use.

...

I know that I wouldn't be using a C330 if I had a 6x6 SLR instead. So why not sell the C330 to help fund your new purchase?

A very wise man.

Steve