Considering moving from a Mamiya to Hasselblad setup. Some thoughts and looking for feedback.

[Alan Edward Klein]

Not you, the OP. When he said, " And let's be real, they are very attractive cameras." regarding the Hassie, well, that's a GAS attack. I know the feeling. I have an RB67 for years. Last year I looked at a 4x5 from Chamonix and decided large format photography was for me, at 75. So now my back aches carrying around LF and MF stuff. I should have taken a pill for gas before placing the order. _

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Let's be real though, this is the very attractive camera.
Oh noooo!!!!

I bought their H-1 instead of taking a pill.
https://www.chamonixviewcamera.com/cameras/45h1

 

[Sirius Glass]

I think that if you go for the C330, which is a nice camera, you will still have in the back of your head, "but maybe the Hasselblad would've been better...?" Then you will sell the C330 and buy a 500CM.
So, just get the Hasselblad now (it is easily hand-holdable) and just cut out the middle step of the C330. Shortest line to your eventual destination.

Now there is an example of a smart young man who understands good things and the quality of life.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Let's be real though, this is the very attractive camera.
Oh noooo!!!!

Looks are one thing, but it cannot be used hand held and it is not as fast to use as a Hasselblad.

 

[Alan Gales]

I've owned both an RZ67 and a Hasselblad 500/cm. They are both fine cameras.

The Hasselblad is definitely better for shooting hand held. It was great for portraits without a tripod. The original focussing screen is on the dark side, however. I had both the original and a Beattie Intenscreen. The Intenscreeen was even brighter than my RZ screen. The later Hasselblad screens were said to be even brighter so you will probably want to change to a later screen in the camera.

Focussing was better on the RZ. The focussing ring on the Hasselblad lens was a little stiff. It wasn't bad and you quickly get used to it but it wasn't as nice as focussing the RZ lenses with the bellows focus. Of course the RZ focusses much closer too.

Like said earlier, try out the Hasselblad for a while before you sell your Mamiya gear. If you don't own the "L" grip for the RZ then try it. It does really improve hand held shooting. Of course it still won't match the smallness and light weight of the Hasselblad. There is nothing like trying out gear to see if you like it.

For me, I always shot landscapes with a tripod even with a 35mm camera.

If you are really into landscapes then try 4x5. Perspective controls are very nice!

 

[GG12]

Two variables to keep in mind:
- tripod or hand held - will you do both, or is one more important?
- use of mirror lock-up - this can really reduce vibration and allow for lower shutter speeds. Using MLU, an SLR Rollei on a monopod was readily usable down to 1/40. The Hassy would be the same.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I've owned both an RZ67 and a Hasselblad 500/cm. They are both fine cameras.

The Hasselblad is definitely better for shooting hand held. It was great for portraits without a tripod. The original focussing screen is on the dark side, however. I had both the original and a Beattie Intenscreen. The Intenscreeen was even brighter than my RZ screen. The later Hasselblad screens were said to be even brighter so you will probably want to change to a later screen in the camera.

Focussing was better on the RZ. The focussing ring on the Hasselblad lens was a little stiff. It wasn't bad and you quickly get used to it but it wasn't as nice as focussing the RZ lenses with the bellows focus. Of course the RZ focusses much closer too.

Like said earlier, try out the Hasselblad for a while before you sell your Mamiya gear. If you don't own the "L" grip for the RZ then try it. It does really improve hand held shooting. Of course it still won't match the smallness and light weight of the Hasselblad. There is nothing like trying out gear to see if you like it.

For me, I always shot landscapes with a tripod even with a 35mm camera.

If you are really into landscapes then try 4x5. Perspective controls are very nice!

I started shooting 4x5 last year but I'm still not comfortable with upside down viewing on a ground glass and dark hood. I find an eye-level viewfinder on my RB67 easier because everything is right-side up the way you see the subject with your eyes. Since I shoot landscapes, all my RB67 shots are on a tripod with mirror lockup. (MLU). I found hand holding it for people shots hard. I have no experience with a Hassie.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Two variables to keep in mind:
- tripod or hand held - will you do both, or is one more important?
- use of mirror lock-up - this can really reduce vibration and allow for lower shutter speeds. Using MLU, an SLR Rollei on a monopod was readily usable down to 1/40. The Hassy would be the same.[/QUOTE

Many decades ago I used the mirror lock up because the early 21mm Minolta lens stuck into the camera. I have rarely if ever used the mirror lock up to the point that I would have to look up in the manual if I wanted to use it on my Hasselblad. Maybe the wannabee bulky clunky copycats
need to have their mirrors locked up, but I have not needed it.

 

[Alan Gales]

I started shooting 4x5 last year but I'm still not comfortable with upside down viewing on a ground glass and dark hood. I find an eye-level viewfinder on my RB67 easier because everything is right-side up the way you see the subject with your eyes. Since I shoot landscapes, all my RB67 shots are on a tripod with mirror lockup. (MLU). I found hand holding it for people shots hard. I have no experience with a Hassie.

When I owned my RZ I also owned a Pentax 645Nll. I shot the RZ on the tripod and took the Pentax with me for hand held shots.

I used to sell film photography gear on eBay. I took the Hasselblad in on trade. I really liked it for shooting people hand held. I had a 4x5 back then for landscape work. Many will tell you that if you are always going to crop the 6x6 to a rectangle you might as well shoot 645. I tend to agree but wedding photographers back in the day liked the 6x6. They never had to flip the camera on it's side and worried about crops after the wedding. I ended up selling the Hasselblad and the 4x5 to fund my 8x10 kit. I now own a Mamiya C220f for a medium format camera. The camera and lenses were dirt cheap but good quality. Personally, I prefer waist lever finders for medium format but we are all different.

It took me a bit to get used to upside down and reverse on large format but eventually I did. This may sound crazy but I actually prefer it. It slows me down and I can see my composition clearer. When I went to art school they always told us to hold our drawings up to a mirror. The mirror shows all your mistakes and imperfections. Of course that's just reversed but upside down also helps me see better. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Sirius Glass]

When I owned my RZ I also owned a Pentax 645Nll. I shot the RZ on the tripod and took the Pentax with me for hand held shots.

I used to sell film photography gear on eBay. I took the Hasselblad in on trade. I really liked it for shooting people hand held. I had a 4x5 back then for landscape work. Many will tell you that if you are always going to crop the 6x6 to a rectangle you might as well shoot 645. I tend to agree but wedding photographers back in the day liked the 6x6. They never had to flip the camera on it's side and worried about crops after the wedding. I ended up selling the Hasselblad and the 4x5 to fund my 8x10 kit. I now own a Mamiya C220f for a medium format camera. The camera and lenses were dirt cheap but good quality. Personally, I prefer waist lever finders for medium format but we are all different.

It took me a bit to get used to upside down and reverse on large format but eventually I did. This may sound crazy but I actually prefer it. It slows me down and I can see my composition clearer. When I went to art school they always told us to hold our drawings up to a mirror. The mirror shows all your mistakes and imperfections. Of course that's just reversed but upside down also helps me see better. Just my 2 cents.

Now you must sell the C220f and the 8"x10" camera and buy a 16"20 camera, tripod and hat. The hat is an integral part.

 

[Alan Gales]

This is Sirius Glass's favorite song. He claims it's about Hasselblads.

 

[Sirius Glass]

This is Sirius Glass's favorite song. He claims it's about Hasselblads.

... he enters from stage left, walks to center stage, turns to the audience, smiles. Then Sirius Glass says "Thank you", bows, turns and walks off stage.

 

[xtolsniffer]

I am in a very similar position to the OP. I have an RB67 setup but find it a bit much for everyday photography. However, if I am out 'to do photography' rather than walking around with kit 'just in case' it is very hard to beat. My usual kit is an RB67 body, 90mm, 50mm and 140mm macro, both sizes of extension tubes, two backs (Portra and HP5) plus filters, focus rail and Gitzo carbon fiber tripod. I mainly do landscape or macro, and the RB67 is just beautiful for macro. This is not a camera that I would walk about with on the off chance of a good shot though. Feeling the need for this I bought a Mamiya C220 TLR and I just love it. Compared with the RB67 it's light and compact, I can keep an 80mm lens on it and hang it round my neck and have a 55mm lens in my pocket and it's so easy to handhold. If I'm braced, or with a walking-pole monopod, I can get down to 1/15th second. I have seriously considered trading both for a single Hasselblad system but hold off partly for cost reasons but mainly because the 6x7 negative gives you a lot more real-estate. If you don't like square then you'd crop a 6x6 neg to 6x4.5 anyway, in which case 6x4.5 gives you a lot more cost-effective options. Don't get me wrong, if I could afford to buy into the Hasselblad system, I would, I just don't think t would solve all of my issues.

 

[Alan Gales]

Now you must sell the C220f and the 8"x10" camera and buy a 16"20 camera, tripod and hat. The hat is an integral part.

Do baseball caps count? I do own a few of those.

For me 8x10 is plenty large enough. Contact prints from 16x20 would be nice though!

 

[Alan Gales]

Exactly. This reminds me of Apple's "natural scroll" setting or left/right side driving in UK vs EU. Easily learned and becomes natural within a month. I have a 45-degree prism for my Blad now, but it gives me headache because it is "inverted" vs what I am used to. I compose with my 35mm cameras just fine, but when my hands are holding the camera below my chin, something flips in my brain and I need a WLF image.

Yeah, waist level finders rule on medium format!

 

[mshchem]

I have both RZ II and Hasselblad systems. I've used both as you intend. With modern films and the Zeiss lenses pretty hard to beat a blad. The RZ II AE prism weighs way more than I can carry. For what is offered trying to sell my RZ stuff I will keep it for now.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I am in a very similar position to the OP. I have an RB67 setup but find it a bit much for everyday photography. However, if I am out 'to do photography' rather than walking around with kit 'just in case' it is very hard to beat. My usual kit is an RB67 body, 90mm, 50mm and 140mm macro, both sizes of extension tubes, two backs (Portra and HP5) plus filters, focus rail and Gitzo carbon fiber tripod. I mainly do landscape or macro, and the RB67 is just beautiful for macro. This is not a camera that I would walk about with on the off chance of a good shot though. Feeling the need for this I bought a Mamiya C220 TLR and I just love it. Compared with the RB67 it's light and compact, I can keep an 80mm lens on it and hang it round my neck and have a 55mm lens in my pocket and it's so easy to handhold. If I'm braced, or with a walking-pole monopod, I can get down to 1/15th second. I have seriously considered trading both for a single Hasselblad system but hold off partly for cost reasons but mainly because the 6x7 negative gives you a lot more real-estate. If you don't like square then you'd crop a 6x6 neg to 6x4.5 anyway, in which case 6x4.5 gives you a lot more cost-effective options. Don't get me wrong, if I could afford to buy into the Hasselblad system, I would, I just don't think t would solve all of my issues.

Buy the Hasselblad and just wait a little longer between buying lenses.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Do baseball caps count? I do own a few of those.

For me 8x10 is plenty large enough. Contact prints from 16x20 would be nice though!

No, a proper hat. A Stetson will do, for example. A Fedora. An Akubra.

 

[MattKing]

No, a proper hat. A Stetson will do, for example. A Fedora. An Akubra.

How about a raspberry beret?

 

[Sirius Glass]

How about a raspberry beret?

​

 

[138S]

The Hasselblad 500cm 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.
______________________

Looking to see if anyone has input about the hand hold-ability of a Hasselblad, moving from Mamiya, lenses, etc.

Having used Hassies and Mamiyas, if starting I would think if going to one or to the other way, but at all I would move from one system to the other.

Both are top notch level. No one of those are specially suitable for handheld usage. For hand held usage I would strongly prefer a Pentax 67II, the single drawback is that loading film is slower than inserting a back, for pro usage, but it totally wins in ergonomy.

Regarding steadiness for the shots, I'd just use a monopod when suitable, a poorman's VR that works amazingly well !!!

If you are a square format fanatic then the hassie is ideal, but if not you will be cropping all shots. Many Pro photographers having made a living with a hassie for decades have never sold an square image ever, they always have cropped their shots.

At the end, personally, I would move to the hassie only if vastly preferring square format, if not your Mamiya setup is superior, 6x7 and 3x4 aspect are excellent formats !!!!! Think in that...

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I've had the C330 with 75mm and 150 lens and I liked it a lot, but, other than looking into a WLF, and using the same film, there is no a lot there to compare to the 500cm.

For me, using that camera felt like using a small movie camera, especially with the long lens, and I'd never no feel it was a great TLR, it is, IMO, however, even if you used a chimney finder from a Hasselblad or a 45° prism, you'll never confuse it with a SLR.

Now that you've got me thinking about it, I think, if I did no have my own Hasselblad system, the 500cm body with even just an 80mm lens, the C330 is the best of the medium format, interchangable lenses camera systems, after Hasselblad, and would be elevated as my first choice after Hasselblad Analogs are off the table.

Hasselblad or C330, you pick either #1 or it's best alternative, but hold on to what you've got, if that's even an option, for about. Year and actually see which camera you reach for most days.

IMO.

PS: if I ever bought the TLR, I believe the 180mm would be a better choice than the 150mm.

this is especially tru for the Hasselblad. the Carl Zeiss f/4 or 5.6/180mm is out of this world.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

When I owned my RZ I also owned a Pentax 645Nll. I shot the RZ on the tripod and took the Pentax with me for hand held shots.

I used to sell film photography gear on eBay. I took the Hasselblad in on trade. I really liked it for shooting people hand held. I had a 4x5 back then for landscape work. Many will tell you that if you are always going to crop the 6x6 to a rectangle you might as well shoot 645. I tend to agree but wedding photographers back in the day liked the 6x6. They never had to flip the camera on it's side and worried about crops after the wedding. I ended up selling the Hasselblad and the 4x5 to fund my 8x10 kit. I now own a Mamiya C220f for a medium format camera. The camera and lenses were dirt cheap but good quality. Personally, I prefer waist lever finders for medium format but we are all different.

It took me a bit to get used to upside down and reverse on large format but eventually, I did. This may sound crazy but I actually prefer it. It slows me down and I can see my composition clearer. When I went to art school they always told us to hold our drawings up to a mirror. The mirror shows all your mistakes and imperfections. Of course, that's just reversed but upside down also helps me see better. Just my 2 cents.

I'm using a digital camera to sight into my shot first. Only then do I set my tripod exactly where I composed with the digital. The digital zoom lens also helps me pick the 4x5 lens. Switching to BW allows me to see in BW too. It's very handy. Then when I pull out my 4x5, it's just a matter of adjusting the frame a little here and there. I don't compose through the 4x5 at all. Maybe I'll get better but I think this works for me.

I didn't like the waist level finder on my Rb67 medium format. The left-right backwards orientation drove me crazy after decades using 35mm. So I bought an eye-level finder and will only use the waist level finder for low shots.

It's just not natural for me to see upside down. Aesthetically pleasing pictures are viewed right side up once printed. Of course, relationships of objects might be better seen upside down. But I'm not convinced compositions are seen better generally But that's just my experience and everyone see differently.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

@Alan Edward Klein you may want to check out the smartphone app called "Artist Viewfinder" - it does exactly what you're doing with a digital camera: allows you to frame on the phone using FOV of your lenses. I even used the calibration feature to achieve 100% identical coverage. It has B&W switch too.

Thanks, Gregg. The phone might be ok. But I can't see the screen in sunlight. I find it awkward to use even when I'm shooting pictures with it when I have no other camera. I also use the digital camera (an Olympus E-PL1 micro 4/3) as a light meter. While I have a light meter app for my phone, I don't have confidence in it. Plus the camera allows me to spot meter down to 1 1/2 degrees and I use its histogram. A phone is definitely an option though.

 

[etn]

That bag is similar to the re-purposed diaper bag I used for my RB67 from time to time .

That’s excellent. I’ll have to remember it when my kid (now 1) grows up. Thanks!