Do Hasselblads handle like the RZ67?

[Greg_E]

If money allows and you are going to get an RZ, I would try to get the RZIID, that way if you need to rent a digital back you have more choices.

 

[Fred De Van]

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!

Thank god, NO!!!!

And a Chevy Suburban does not handle like a Ferrari Scuderia , either.

 

[keithwms]

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

First of all, there are (and have been, for quite a while) plenty of digital options for the mamiyas... not that I care. Anyway, pray tell, what do the plastic 645 digihassies have to do with the earlier 500s? Nothing more than the name.

Second, the RB system was introduced in 1970 and there are plenty of original RBs in service. They are robust beyond any reasonable criteria, and this is well known.

Third, you make it sound exotic that you can still get extension tubes and whatnot for the hassies. There is virtually nothing that exists for one system and not for the other; that is moot.

Alright, now let's put together some comparable systems and compare costs, shall we? At KEH...

EX grade 500CM BLACK LATE WITH WAISTLEVEL, 80 F2.8 C T*BLACK (B50), A12 BACK, MEDIUM FORMAT SLR MANUAL FOCUS CAMERA OUTFIT, $1254.

EX grade 500C WITH WAISTLEVEL, 80 F2.8 C T*BLACK LATE(B60), A12 BACK WITH 12 RELEASE, $958.

EX grade RB67 PRO-S WITH WAISTLEVEL, 90 F3.8 C, 120 PRO-S BACK, $486.

Note that a *brand new* rb67 pro SD at B&H is now running $799.

Now how about a typical semiwide / normal / short tele lens kit, let's see... at KEH...

EX grade Hassie 50 F4 C T*CHROME (63) $665.
EX grade Hassie 80 F2.8 C CHROME (B50), $449.
EX grade Hassie 180 F4 CF T*(B60), $789.
TOTAL: $1903

Compared to...

EX Mamiya 50 F4.5 C (77), $275.
EX Mamiya 90 F3.8 C (77) , $165.
EX Mamiya 180 F4.5 KL L-A , $235.
TOTAL: $675

Hmm, starting to see a pattern? I think I did mention a factor of 2-5x in my previous post.

Okay let's compare new lenses now.... just for fun... at B&H...

New Hasselblad Normal 80mm f/2.8 CFE Zeiss Planar Lens for 200 and 500 Series Cameras, $2488.

New Mamiya Normal KL 90mm f/3.5 Lens for RB67 Cameras, $649.

Indeed the RZ lenses are ~2x more pricey than the RB lenses, but look, even so...

New Mamiya Normal 90mm f/3.5 Lens for RZ67 Cameras, $1449.

:rolleyes:

If you still consider my comments unjustified, well... perhaps you might provide some actual data. Or is this just going to be yet another bunch of vagaries about reputation?

 

[DanielStone]

Not to add insult to injury, but I shoot both....

I was able to land a sweet deal on a RZ ProII kit with a 65 f4, 110 f2.8, and a 180 f4. i got 3 backs and a motor winder all for 1100 bucks, including a pelican case. I got it from a former instructor of mine who went all dig!, but after seeing me use my rb67(which I really regret selling), he sold me his RZ kit. He used it to shoot 300~ weddings over a 4 year period or so, and only had to send the body in for service once, just for a CLA.

I picked up a Hasselblad H2 kit with the 80mm lens (remember, its actually a FUJI camera with FUJI GLASS in it), but with Hasselblad's name on it. I saw this as my road to shooting digital in some way. The only thing I didn't think about was how much the lenses were . Albeit, the 645 format is usually enough for most of my situations, and getting 16 frames per 120 roll is nice compared to the 10 on the RZ. But when I need the most out of a 120 roll, I use the RZ ONLY! The few times I've used the Leaf Digi backs on the H2 have really been fun though. It's almost as good as looking at a drum scan of a 160vc neg!

so, i technically shoot both. But after comparing my friends cfe and cfi-series Hassy glass to the Mamiya's, I personally cannot find much discrepancy between the two sharpness-wise at the same apertures. I did notice a difference in color palette, even with the same films, same focal length lenses, and some contrast differences, the Mamiya's being higher by a bit. Also more saturated it seemed too.

It's nice to have the rotating back though, rather than having to crop all the time to make a vertical picture. And since most magazines are using roughly a 8x10 ratio at printing time, the RZ fits the bill most of the time anyhow.

I've used V-systems before, and they're phenomenal! But if I had to do it all over again, I'd still go with Mamiya(RZ II) and my H2. Both have SUPERB glass, and they are built to be used!

Look at the rental houses worldwide. Most don't rent Hasselblad 500 bodies much any more. They are renting RZ's to the film shooters and H2's with digi backs to the dig! guys... I worked at Samy's, so I saw what was being rented...

Anyhow, after the RZ was introduced, things changed in the rental market. Most people who shot Hasselblad for roll film went quickly went to Mamiya, primarily because of the 8x10 ratio, and because of the bellows focusing, didn't have to use extension tubes as much as they did with Hasselblad.

I like all three systems the same. Its just that I've found that the RZ fits in my hands better, same with the H2.

Just like why I went with a Sig Sauer over the Colt when picking my first pistol after turning 21 earlier this year...

just my $0.02

-Dan

 

[AutumnJazz]

Well, I decided to see Brüno after lunch, instead of heading to B&H, because there was a movie theater right next to Momofuku Ssäm (best meal of my life!), so needless to say I didn't make B&H. I thought they were open until 5pm.

I'll probably head back in another week or two. Train tickets are fairly inexpensive.

For the Hassie, I'd probably pick up a 50mm and an 80/2.8, and for the Mamiya probably a 50 (or 65) and a 110mm.

Although, until I go and USE both cameras, I don't know what I'm going to do.

 

[keithwms]

Although, until I go and USE both cameras, I don't know what I'm going to do.

Why don't you trade 'em back and forth from KEH. They are really nice about that. I think you can probably get two full kits shipped and try 'em out for a week and see for yourself. You lose some money on shipping and such, but... when I did it, it was very helpful. You really have to get things into your own hands and do your own math on the net cost.

 

[AutumnJazz]

Return fraud? I don't know...It may not be illegal, but it certainly seems unethical to me.

Is there an AE prism for the 'blad, like there is for the Mamiya?

 

[keithwms]

It's not any less ethical than trying on two different outfits at a store. You can call them up and tell them what you're up to. They will come up with a suggestion. Just try it.

Otherwise you could buy both kits and return one within 7 days. Easy peasy.

 

[Q.G.]

I picked up a Hasselblad H2 kit with the 80mm lens (remember, its actually a FUJI camera with FUJI GLASS in it), but with Hasselblad's name on it.

That old thing again... It actually is not.
Fuji manufactures the viewfinder, and the glass in the lenses.
The rest is made by Hasselblad.

Hasselblad did the prelimenary design of the lenses too, with Fuji finalizing the designs.

But it actually is a Hasselblad camera, conceived, designed, engineered, and built by Hasselblad, with Hasselblad's name on it (except in Japan, where Fuji also puts their name on it. They like doing things like that over there).

It's nice to have the rotating back though, rather than having to crop all the time to make a vertical picture.

People usually just turn the camera on its side.

 

[Eric Rose]

How do they handle? Well the RB could be likened to a semi and the Blad like a Buick.

 

[DanielStone]

its as simple as "try it out, and whichever one works for your needs better, use it and don't look back".

easy as that.

find something that works, and stick with it.

unless you like changing out your kit on a somewhat constant basis.

-Dan

 

[mpirie]

Is there an AE prism for the 'blad, like there is for the Mamiya?

You can have metering heads for the 500's either the PME51 for 45 degree viewing or the PME90 for 90 degree viewing. Remember, the 500's are mechanical cameras with apertures and shutter speeds set on the lens, so AE is not available.

 

[AutumnJazz]

I'm going to try the RZ67, probably this/next week. Ie., I'm going to order it tomorrow.

 

[Kim Catton]

Two days ago I bought myself a present:

Mamiya RB67 Pro-s
90mm C lens
120 Back
220 back
Polaroid Back
Waistlevel Finder
Prism Finder
Couple of filters

All in great shape (scratches on the housing and a bit of torn leatherette aside)

= 339 dollars

I am very pleased with this camera. I'm especially pleased with the system being so versatile. On location I'll shoot a couple of polaroids to preview before replacing the back with a filmback. If conditions demand it I'll exchange the waistlever finder for a prism one. Switching from horizontal to vertical is easy. Changing the lens is easy. Another thing about this camera is the quality and feel. It's a tank. Bulky, but build to last and withstand a great deal of stress.

On the downside it's absolutely huge and weights quite a bit...but for my style of shooting this isn't an issue.

I'm very exited about the RB and I'd imaging that the RZ system handles almost the same.

 

[Dave Dawson]

Just to throw my 2 penneth in.......Having owned Hasseblads in the past and currently use an RZ67. I wouldn't go back to a hassie.

Cheers Dave

 

[c6h6o3]

So, does the 503CW handle like the RZ67?

No

 

[Jeff Bannow]

Just to throw my 2 penneth in.......Having owned Hasseblads in the past and currently use an RZ67. I wouldn't go back to a hassie.

Cheers Dave

I went the other way and would say the same thing! Carrying the weight of the RZ67 was giving me backaches. A Hasselblad system is much lighter, and I like the way the Hassy operates better as well.

But, the RZ67 is a great camera, and the bellows and 6x7 size are nice. It can do anything you want. That's why it weighs a ton.

 

[olleorama]

I used to own and live for my H'blad 500CM. I then regrettably had to sell due to some financial problems. I now own a RB67. No experience of RZ67, but still, I think I can give some biased advice (being swedish and all, I have a 5 minutes walk to hasselblad exhibition center ).

In my opinion the biggest and most important difference is the format. Sure you can crop down a RZ67 neg to 6x6, but it is still a huge difference composing square and 6x7. A square photo has a lot more 'monumental' feel over it, it is always a bit 'dramatic'. The 6x7 is closer to the 'perfect' rectangular shape and has a slower more harmonic look to it. The difference for me at least is vast, after quite a few years with the blad I initially found it hard to use the WLF with the RB, still feels a bit strange, after 10+ rolls.

The bulk/size issue is in my view almost negligeable. Most of my photosessions are reached by foot, and I carry either one of these cameras in a back pack. You get sweaty with anyone of them. The RB (and much likely the RZ) are more difficult to use handheld with the bellows focusing, but the blad aperture rings demands more fiddling around. The blad is more compact and somewhat lighter, but all in all the two systems, with lenses, compendiums and so on are very close in that aspect.

Another difference I felt having migrated (via digital) to mamiya is that their lenses give better (or at least more appealing to me) results with color negatives. Maybe it's the coatings, maybe it's due to the fact that my planar was 35 years old. I don't know, but still, I think mamiyas lenses are better in that aspect. With b&W, the hasselblad lenses has a certain hasselblad feeling to them, I don't know what it is, maybe a combination of extreme sharpness and wonderful contrast, and I don't know if I would rate it as a good thing, but I can quite often see which photos are done with a hasselblad CZ and any other 6x6 lens.

If you are one of those guys who like build quality Hasselblad is definitely the way to go. The mamiya seems to been built by a sloppy hangover slob in comparison with hasselblad. Everything feels a bit loose and plastic with the mamiya. Hasselblad is almost all metal and every detail is (was) adapted by hand to guarantee a perfect fit. When hasselblad orders stuff from their subcontractors they demand a ridiculous quality assurance, even higher than most companies in the defense industry. A friend once had a summer job during his school years where he did some heat treatment on some minor details for hasselblad among others, and h'blad was the companys least favoured (among the guys on the floor) customer due to their insane quality demands. 20 % of the details in each batch had to be tested. Wonder why the used to be so expensive, huh?

I'm sure you will be happy with either one. Just remember the difference in composing.

 

[nick mulder]

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

Its an inefficient setup, you have a heavy collection of lenses with an image circle to cover 6x7 and the widest rectilinear lens is a 50mm... Then all that redundant rotating back mechanism to carry round.

6x6 - buy a blad

(RZ owner)

 

[Nick Zentena]

In my opinion the biggest and most important difference is the format. Sure you can crop down a RZ67 neg to 6x6, but it is still a huge difference composing square and 6x7. A square photo has a lot more 'monumental' feel over it, it is always a bit 'dramatic'. .

I've always had the opposite feeling. The more pano the more dramatic. Part of the reason I like 6x9 more. 6x6 always feels like a 60s snapshot. All the family snapshots I have are square.

 

[olleorama]

I've always had the opposite feeling. The more pano the more dramatic. Part of the reason I like 6x9 more. 6x6 always feels like a 60s snapshot. All the family snapshots I have are square.

Strange, huh? Well it is all subjective as we clearly see. Most of my family snapshots (not taken by me) are 35mm.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I've always had the opposite feeling. The more pano the more dramatic. Part of the reason I like 6x9 more. 6x6 always feels like a 60s snapshot. All the family snapshots I have are square.

That does not make square bad or wrong. I have seen many 35mm snapshots, does that mean that, by your criteria, I should avoid the 2:3 ratio and therefore should use neither 35mm nor 645?

The crappy snapshots of the twentieth century paid for the research and development of film and processing.

Steve

 

[Nick Zentena]

That does not make square bad or wrong.

I didn't say it did. I said square reminds me of old snapshots not something unusual.

 

[CBG]

One can go on and on about the relative merits of this or that. This particular discussion is near beat to death. Mindful that one more contribution is essentially valueless, I will jump right in anyway.

I can't get entirely comfortable with the interlocks, the comparative fussiness, the jamming, the coupled shutter speed and f/stop rings on the lenses I've used, and handling of the Blad. I don't want to have to remember not to take off extension tubes in the right order.

Confession: after using an RB for decades, I work it much faster and with less wasted motion than the Hassy. But, that's just me. The Hassy has engineered a build quality that is sooooo very very seductive. I really want to love it. Winding a Hassy is something every human being should experience once. But the closer I get to really trying to be productive, the less I love it - even if i feel like I should still "feel the love".

God, I hate changing film on a Blad. If I was shooting models in a studio, handholding with strobe illumination and had an assistant changing film, the Blad would start looking a lot better.

I'm more comfortable with the never fail, rock solid, dumb every day workability of the RB. It's a tank.

Why an RB? 77mm filters for all the glass I was likely to ever be able to afford meant I just get one big set of filters and didn't have to juggle multiple sets of filters and or step ups; the long bellows allows for very fast close focusing; the larger neg.; the lower cost; and the comparative simplicity. The only competitor for me at the time was the Pentax 67 which failed on several of those counts. (Funny in retrospect. Now, I find myself eying the P67 to get a hold of something essentially like a huge 35mm camera with a very wide 45mm lens. It can't replace the RB, but it can supplement it)

I know others can't stand the RB/RZ for reasons just as subjective. One item on the RB that I do not like is the very heavy meter prism. You've never carried a heavy SLR till you've added that prism to an RB. I've gone back to the chimney finder to cut down on weight.

 

[JLP]

I went the other way and would say the same thing! Carrying the weight of the RZ67 was giving me backaches. A Hasselblad system is much lighter, and I like the way the Hassy operates better as well.

But, the RZ67 is a great camera, and the bellows and 6x7 size are nice. It can do anything you want. That's why it weighs a ton.

That is exactly my take on the two great cameras. My 503CW is going nowhere but i could live without the Rz67 II if i had to. That said, i do like the Mamiya lenses a lot.