Do Hasselblads handle like the RZ67?

[AutumnJazz]

A few months ago, I went to B&H. I love to look at camera gear, if only to look. I've since fallen in love with the RZ67 (Pro II, I suppose) after I held it and "used" it for a bit. I just LOVED the way it felt in my hands. It felt so perfect. But, the 6x6 format appeals to me much more than 6x7. Don't ask me why, it is just more interesting to me. I suppose because you can make anything with a square. Heh.

So, does the 503CW handle like the RZ67? B&H only had new Mamiya stuff, and they didn't have any used MF gear.

Thanks!

 

[dkn]

the hasselblad is much smaller and doesn't use a bellow. it's a bit easier to carry around, but if you're aiming for that perhaps a rangefinder is better.

i'm glad i sold my 'blad and picked up an rz67. both have amazing glass though, either way is a win.

edit: also, the rz67's lens and back mount a bit differently, the latter a bit more awkwardly than the hasselblad.

 

[AutumnJazz]

Why are you glad? Way to help.

 

[JLP]

Big difference in weight and size, i have both and like both but they are different in many ways. The Zeiss glass is more clinical than the Mamiya and i actually prefer the Mamiya glass.
If you plan on shooting handheld the Hassy is the better option of the two, the bellows focusing on the Mamiya is nice but works best when on a tripod.
Also consider the price difference, backs for the Mamiya go for much less than half of the price for the Hassy and lenses are dirt cheap for the Mamiya too.

 

[archphoto]

I you have fallen in love with the RZ: get it !
You can allways crop to 6x6 wihout any loss of quality, just a little piece of film and if, after some time, you find out that the 6x6 format is not for you nothing is lost as you allready have 6x7 and don't have to swich camera's and lenses.

Peter

 

[dkn]

the coating on my rz67 glass seems to make a more colorful, punchy shot where as the zeiss optics seemed a bit more vintage looking. portra VC seems to look better through the mamiya glass where as NC is more fitting with the zeiss glass (purely opinion of course.)

the rz's bellow allows for very close focusing as well.

 

[AutumnJazz]

@arch: That is like using photoshop to make a digital shot look like Kodachrome!

@dkn: Apparently, Mamiya glass has the best color of any glass. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070620194331AAXKbJh

 

[Greg_E]

Why not a 6x6 back for the RZ?
http://cgi.ebay.com/Rare-Mamiya-RZ-...temQQimsxZ20090707?IMSfp=TL090707182006r10750

 

[Sirius Glass]

One question to consider is what is the size of you hands? When I sold cameras, I looked at the size of the customer's hands. If the man had really large hands I would point out that he might have trouble with the controls of an Olympus Pen F. And visa verse. Actually, using that approach, I was able to sell cameras to people who were not really ready to buy a camera when they came in.

For me since my hands are small and the Hasselblad really fits well in my hands, the RZ67 feels too bulky for me. YMMV.

The real question is: What feels right for you.

Steve

 

[AutumnJazz]

Wrist to tip of middle finger: 18cm
Thumb join to other side of hand: 10cm

 

[JLP]

Wrist to tip of middle finger: 18cm
Thumb join to other side of hand: 10cm

Get a Hasselblad

 

[AutumnJazz]

Get a Hasselblad

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Metric_system_adoption_map.svg

Japan uses metric...

 

[archphoto]

Nope it has nothing to do with PhotoShop and Kodachrome !

It has everything to do with your affection for this camera and what you can do with it !
Cropping is a part of daily darkroom work.
And at times a photo looks better square than rectangular.
If you want to crop a square negative to a rectangular one you loose quality;
If you want to crop a rectangular negative to a square one you loose no quality.

And as has been sugested you can get a 6x6 back for the RB/RZ.

I think the RZ will give you more choices without loss of quality and might save you money in the long run.

Mind you, I have a RB 67 and a Rollei SL66 and a Rolleiflex but given the insight I have now in the past I would have gotten the RB in the first place.

Peter

 

[AutumnJazz]

Too bad F&H went out of business. I would have JUMPED on the Hy6, for no other reason than the Schneider optics.

 

[mpirie]

Too bad F&H went out of business. I would have JUMPED on the Hy6, for no other reason than the Schneider optics.

Even if F&H are out of business, you can still pick up a lot of Rollei kit on some websites and pro dealers. The SL66/s/se appeals to me because of the ability to tilt the lenses, thereby bringing part of the appeal of 5x4 to the roll film user (albeit limited).

I had an RB many years ago but traded it for the 503cx and have added to it over the years. The RB was most at home on a tripod and the use of bellows and rotating backs meant added weight and size.

As other have said, try your choices, even if just handling them in the store.

Mike

 

[AutumnJazz]

No warranty service.

 

[Ranger Bob]

I had an RB67 for two years and really liked it. Then I used a Hasselblad one weekend. I sold the RB and have been using Hasselblad for 13 years. Not only was it more comfortable to use, I like the way the Zeiss lenses rendered what I was photographing better than I did the Mamiya.

 

[AutumnJazz]

I wish more people would post in this thread. I'm heading to NYC (and by extension, B&H) in 30 minutes. Haha.

 

[Andrew Horodysky]

You better hurry... they close at 2:00pm on Fridays.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I wish more people would post in this thread. I'm heading to NYC (and by extension, B&H) in 30 minutes. Haha.

You got sage advice from me, what more could you want or need??

Steve

 

[keithwms]

Add up the cost of all the lenses and peripherals. If you are truly in this for the long haul, then it'd be unwise is to pick one body and one lens and make a decision based on that.

I eventually went for the rb because I knew that I would eventually want the whole shebang- all the lenses and backs and gizmos. When I compared that long term cost, the hassie systems were unjustifiably 2-5x more expensive. At the time I was going methodically through all of the available systems, thinking about the systems as a whole and the availability of used and *new* lenses for uninflated prices. If I were going for one specialized body/lens combo then my logic would have been very different. Quality wise there is no demonstrable difference between the leading brands, if you look at total systems. When people say one is much better than the other, that is pure naked partisanship. Might have been true ~50 years ago but the markets have moved past that.

Now, judging by your flickr photos, I see that you shoot a fair amount of impromptu stuff (as opposed to tripod-bound) and you work with people, with fairly fast lenses. If that is your strength and you wish to continue in this mode (as perhaps you should, if you enjoy it) then I'd consider a 645 instead. The overall style will be much faster and handholdable and there are far more fast lenses covering a wider range of focal lengths. If on the other hand you want to do more deliberate shooting, well then you may well consider the larger formats.

Bottom line for me, as usual, is this: go with what will make you feel more productive. A common mistake is to purchase something that seems to make somebody else productive, or which has some sort of reputation that you'd like to live up to. To heck with that! Pick the gear that will make *you* productive. It's *your* money and *your* investment in time... and ultimately *your* photograph. Remember that.

 

[Q.G.]

When I compared that long term cost, the hassie systems were unjustifiably 2-5x more expensive.

Long term means that the thing you buy costs almost nothing, month per month.
After many decades, i do still remember how hard is was to scrape enough money together to buy my first "unjustifiably expensive" Hasselblad. But if i now tote up the total money spent on equipment and see how much it was per year... a steal!
The better your choice, i.e. the greater the chance you keep what you buy, the less the costs play a role.


However, if you ...

At the time I was going methodically through all of the available systems, thinking about the systems as a whole and the availability of used and *new* lenses for uninflated prices.

... and do what all too many people do, i.e. not just consider and compare systems, but buy-to-try, you end up spending far, far more in total than you would have had, had you bought the most expensive system to begin with.

I do agree: make sure that you buy what you want.
Even if what you want is expensive, it may well turn out to be the cheapest choice.

 

[Sirius Glass]

When I compared that long term cost, the hassie systems were unjustifiably 2-5x more expensive.

UNJUSTIFIABLY??? The Hasselblad can be used for both analog and digitally, parts and service are still available, lens still available, bellows still available, extension tubes still available, film and digital backs still available. All of the are fairly inexpensive compared to the cost of new parts to the system. The Hasselblad is more reliable than the Bronica and the Mamiya. And Hasselblads still work after 50 years [Don't try this at home with the Bronica or Mamiya]. It is hard to find cameras that can justify the long term costs of the Hasselblad in MF.

Steve

 

[Andrew Moxom]

I've played with all manner of MF cameras in the Mamiya stable, and then went to Hasselblad. With the exception of the Mamiya 6MF (which I sold in the end last month) none of them handled like a Hasselblad. IMHO, Hasselblad is the best system out there. The longevity and lineage is and has always been there.

Sure I got distracted with Mamiya 645 on many occasions, and I am not dis'ing that particular marque.... ( I never learn). Yet, I always come back to the square format, specifically Hasselblad.I had a brief affection for the Mamiya 6 like said earlier, and those RF lenses trounced the ziess versions no if's and's or but's. ( I know I'll get 'flak' for that) However, the M6 rangefinder was not to be for me. I like a ground glass, and while it served me for 10 years, when I got another Hasselblad body, the M6 got left at home more often than not.

While I've handeled the RZ at various stores before.... I was just not struck on it's heft, and general awkwardness to use... Maybe it was me, and again personal preference. The Blad is just more intuitive, but again that comes down to familiarity.

YMMV and you have to find what best suits you. If I could do this over again, I would pick Hasselblad as the perfect all round #1 choice and you only have to bleed once when you purchase into the system. I chose to do it a few times The last time was to get a body with focal plane shutter for using funky lenses and not because I'd wandered off course again!!!

 

[aldevo]

A few months ago, I went to B&H. I love to look at camera gear, if only to look. I've since fallen in love with the RZ67 (Pro II, I suppose) after I held it and "used" it for a bit. I just LOVED the way it felt in my hands. It felt so perfect. But, the 6x6 format appeals to me much more than 6x7. Don't ask me why, it is just more interesting to me. I suppose because you can make anything with a square. Heh.

So, does the 503CW handle like the RZ67? B&H only had new Mamiya stuff, and they didn't have any used MF gear.

Thanks!

It would be easy enough to rent one or both for a weekend to determine if you can live with it or not. I would have preferred a 6x7 neg over a 6x6 but I realized quickly that I probably wouldn't be happy with the bulk of an RZ system. Hassie is too rich for my blood, so I went with a Bronica SQ-AI outfit.

As I'm sure others pointed out there is a 6x6 back for the RZ67. But one of the real advantages of an RZ67 is the rotatable back - that's great for 6x7 but (obviously) rather useless for 6x6.