i would just recomend a 80mm to start
WLF is not so bad...
but SWC is a must
but sell the eletronic controled cameras and buy a hasselblad 50X
I am considering selling some of my kit or all of my kit and condensing down to a Hasselblad setup. Currently have a Mamiya 645e and RZ67 with various lenses and accessories and an Epson v800 scanner. I am moving from a hybrid workflow to a purely black and white analog/darkroom workflow for film. I mostly do landscape photography and I shoot hand held frequently when conditions allow for it. I also like printing large, up to 16x20".
The RZ67 gives beautiful results if I don't need to carry it far from the car. The Bogen tripod I use to support this camera is unwieldy for anything but a short walk. If lighting allows, I can handhold the RZ67 with some of the lenses and get sharp results at 1/60s and sometimes slower. The camera is really well damped and the mass helps with vibration. The setup is just a bit much if I need more than a few pieces of equipment, but the results are worth it if the situation allows for it.
The 645e is a much easier setup to use. I use it with a grip which makes the camera feel and operate like a larger 35mm SLR. I can hand hold the camera as low as 1/30s (if I am steady) and get sharp results. The 80mm 2.8 and 45mm 2.8 lens I have for it yield very sharp results with the 80mm 2.8 being my favorite of the two. If I had a complaint about these lenses it would be a lack of "character" for anything requiring a shallow depth of field. Overall the camera is fine to use, but the negatives lack the same flexibility for cropping that the RZ67 has. I also prefer having less shots per roll. I usually go out to shoot one or two specific scenes and 15 shots can feel like a chore to go through, or I have to wait to finish the roll another day. It also it not the most exciting camera to use in my opinion.
The Hasselblad seems like the obvious camera to move to. It is smaller than the RZ67, has removable backs, is large and widely supported system, and produces a negative size between the 645e and RZ67. And lets be real, they are very attractive cameras.
My concerns with moving to a 500cm are as follows. I have read that they do not produce sharp images hand held, especially below 1/125 of a second. I also worry the lenses may not be as resolving and sharp as the Mamiya lenses.
Looking to see if anyone has input about the hand hold-ability of a Hasselblad, moving from Mamiya, lenses, etc.
I like square photos, but I rarely compose for them as I typically use the aspect ratio of the camera for composition. If it is a square, I am sure I will print to a square more. I will occasionally print square if it improves my composition.In response
MY first 'question' is.. How often do you print an negative a square image (rather than 'say' a FULL FRAME on 8x10 (or larger)
paper. I used a Hasselblad for quite a few years (as a 'Pro') but invested in my RB67 thanks to a 'great deal' when purchasing it.
And... as of 'to-day' I have not yet printed any negative from my RB67 cropped down to produce a 'square image'. It does not (as of to-day get nearly as much use as my 4x5 Linhoff monorail or my MUCH more experienced B&J 'woodie' that had its grey paint
removed (and replaced with a few coats of Tung oil.
Ken
For background: I have been on Mamiya for medium format since moving up from 35mm. I have two systems with several lenses each: Mamiya 645 Pro TL and Mamiya C330 TLR. Last year, I have decided to get into Hasselblad.
The Hassy is by far the most engaging camera to shoot out of the three, and if I was forced to pick a single system that's the one I'd keep.
- As everyone says, Zeiss lenses are fantastic. One notable peculiarity here is they all have an extremely long focus throw. Precision over speed. It forces you to adopt completely different shooting pace, much slower and more deliberate than with Mamiya 645. Feels like you'll like it. I have settled on 60-100-150 instead of more commonly recommended 50-80-150. Why? Because I like my lenses to be comparable across systems. (I have the 80mm and 55mm Sekor lenses for my 645).
- I prefer the WLF on my Hasselblad, as it makes it much more portable than 45 degree prism or a chimney finder. With a 60mm lens it neatly fits into a small messenger bag, which I can walk around all day without even noticing.
- Risking to enrage Hasselblad aficionados, I will say that Hasselblad is more vibration-prone when used handheld, compared to Mamiya 645 Pro or Mamiya C330. I'd say it takes away one stop compared to the 645 and two vs the C330. Could be my technique, could be the auxiliary shutter, could be both.
- Another "precision over speed" thing with Hasselblads is their focusing screens. I have tried two, both AccumateD-V2 variety, and they both are impossible to focus quickly with. These screens are incredibly bright and allow you to see the exact focus point with incredible precision, but only if you focus slowly (and lenses are designed for this). If you try quick & long focus throws it's hard to focus by feel, like I can on the Mamiyas. It's hard to explain, but you don't get this feeling of distance-to-focus by how blurry the image is.
- The square is a personal choice. I almost never crop, I love the square and apparently I've been loving it my whole life (been chopping off "ears" on 35mm shots since forever). I used to have a 6x7 camera and found that aspect ratio to be annoying. Not wide enough for scenes where you need it, but takes away 2 frames on a roll, but again it's a personal thing.
I like square photos, but I rarely compose for them as I typically use the aspect ratio of the camera for composition. If it is a square, I am sure I will print to a square more. I will occasionally print square if it improves my composition.
Even cropping down to 4:5 from a 6x6 negative will still give me more used negative than 4:5 from a 6x4.5. 6x4.5 from my 645e always needs to be cropped on the long side to fill 4:5 aspect paper. Even that gives me pretty good 16x20 prints.
I guess my point is I am not bothered by cropping a bit as I already am doing it with a smaller negative.
I print with half inch borders, so 6x4.5 on to an 8x10 or 11x14 fits with very little cropping (particularly 11 x 14).Even cropping down to 4:5 from a 6x6 negative will still give me more used negative than 4:5 from a 6x4.5. 6x4.5 from my 645e always needs to be cropped on the long side to fill 4:5 aspect paper. Even that gives me pretty good 16x20 prints
Again, thanks for your reply. I will keep what you said in mind about the cameras. I like the sound of the c330 and might take another look at that camera again. I worry about it not being an SLR though.In terms of portability I find all three of them comparable, and a lot depends on personal preferences. In my case, I pay attention to two variables:
- Moving them, i.e. what kind of bag do I need? All three comfortably fit into a relatively small Ona Bowery Bag. So I can be exploring a new town with any of them. 645 and C330 even allow to put another lens in there! In that sense the Hassy is a bit less portable than the other two, but it doesn't matter to me as I never change lenses on the go.
- On location portability, i.e. do I need to always keep the camera on a tripod or in the bag? Can I just have it hang on my neck? Surprisingly, I never liked 645 for this. The shape & weight distribution makes it really awkward to have it on you, I think the prism makes it so. Hasselblad with a WLF fits quite well and I can have it on a strap on my shoulder for extended periods of time. But if you mount a prism on a Blad, it becomes a tripod queen. C330 is the best: it's a neat brick which I can wear on a shoulder strap just behind my elbow, and it is by far the least fragile (and cheapest) of the three, i.e. I take it with me to "rough" places.
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?