Does anyone here use a Hasselblad for everyday photographic fun?

lesm · Dec 20, 2011

With 1500 quid (why doesn't my keyboard have a pound sign?) at your disposal I would think you could have the best of both worlds with a Mamiya 645 and a Nikon. I bought a Mamiya 645 1000s recently to go with my Pentax 35mm kits and find myself using it more and more for everything, even street. Not so good in tight , fast-moving situations and certainly there isn't the vast range of lenses you'd have with Nikon etc., but it's just so much FUN!

Eric Rose · Dec 20, 2011

I love my Blad and until it jammed up in a very new and cruel way I used it as my daily shooter. Not any heavier than my 35mm gear with a zoom. Nothing beats the images I get from it IMHO.

Mark Fisher · Dec 20, 2011

If you print your own work, there is nothing like a larger negative. I went from a Rolleicord to a Mamiya C220 to a Pentax 645 to a Hasselblad 550c/m. I wasted a lot of time with those other cameras... I can guarantee that any of the relatively modern medium format cameras will provide a far sharper, less grainy image than any 35mm. I still use a 35mm occasionally but not very often anymore. For the money and what you described, I'd get a 3 lens kit of a Mamiya 645 or Pentax 645 and a 3 lens Nikon kit. If you like to use any automation, the Pentax really does handle like a big modern 35mm and is probably the most "hand-holdable" of the medium format SLRs. It wasn't for me, but it might be perfect for you.

MattKing · Dec 20, 2011

ted_smith said:
Hi

Thanks for all the tips guys.

Several of you have mentioned Mamiya 645's. I've done a quick search on eBay, and there are several listed - much more affordable!

I have looked at the links posted by Matt, and they look like good deals. I note from the Wikiepedia entry that The Mamiya 645 Pro-TL (discontinued) was first released in 1997 and The Mamiya 645AF was first released in 1999. These are more recent models than some of the others and I'd prefer to get one from that era rather than the 70's range.

Of the two, 645 Pro-TL or 645AF, obviously the AF allows autofocus but is there any difference in image quality compared to the Pro-TL? What about the Mamiya 645 AFD, that was more recent still in the early 2000's? I have my eye on this one : http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Mamiya-64...170803?pt=UK_Film_Cameras&hash=item20c02da6f3

The only downsides of the AF series of the Mamiya 645s vs the manual focus Pro or Pro Tl are:

1) They have fixed viewfinders - there is no waist-level option. This doesn't mean a lot if you ever shoot anything vertical ;
2) They have built-in winders rather than a manual winder, with a power-winder option; and
3) The wonderful, relatively inexpensive and readily available manual focus lenses only work on the AF models if you are comfortable using stop-down metering; and
4) The accessories for the AF cameras, being current and newer, are more expensive.

With respect to item 3, some of the older accessories for the manual focus bodies can be hard to find.

Danielle · Dec 20, 2011

If you get hung on the 645 idea, the mamiya 645 afd would be quicker to use than a hassie V series. And on the H system hassie, I do believe they have film backs (645), however yes they're expensive. I have seen the odd pretty good deal for the mamiya afd systems. Plus they're a current system (lenses etc).

This all depends on how good you get with the medium format systems. I can use my mamiya RB relatively quickly if I have to even with the waist level finder. But it won't autofocus of course. I've known a number of photographers with V system Hasselblad's, and they all adore them. Plus they do have a nice classic pretty look to them.

As what has been mentioned, you look at the large negatives after using 135 for so long and it is really a wow factor. I remember when I saw it and I thought it was amazing.

bdial · Dec 20, 2011

Several years ago when I was doing work for hire and in college I had a Hasselblad. Got frustrated that I couldn't afford any lenses and finally traded it for a new F3 and a few lenses. Went back to Hasselblads a few years ago. Although I still have the F3, the Hasselblad gets much more use.
My main reasons are the large negatives and the optics.
Some good advice in the prior replies, the only thing I'd add is don't buy one because of the reputation, buy whatever you buy because it works well for you, and fits the work you'd like to do.

Danielle · Dec 20, 2011

Yes as said above, forget reputation and only buy one because it works well for you.

I guess it should be mentioned that you can enlarge a medium format neg much bigger with better detail than you easily can a 35mm neg. Thats probably the main reason a lot of us use them.

agfarapid · Dec 20, 2011

I've made the pilgrimage from 35mm to MF (via Mamiya 645's and a Fuji rangefinder) to a 500c. We could talk and discuss for hours about the Zeiss lenses (I only have the 80 Planar which is great) and their quality, etc. The real challenge you will have in moving to a Hassey or any MF is how you choose to view the world which you photograph. The only way to truly enjoy 6x6 is with a WLF. It dramatically changes how you see things, it's different from using an eye level finder, much slower, but that's not a disadvantage. As an everyday camera? I don't think so. I use different cameras for different situations. When speed is critical (shooting ballet or modern dance) only a 35mm will allow you to move with the speed of the dancers. However, if you want to do some interesting street shooting, landscapes or revealing portraits, your Hasselblad will be your best friend if you take the time to know it. I also have a 645 Super with a full range of lenses, prism viewfinder, etc. It's a great machine and I enjoy using it, but the 500c forces you to slow down, take your time and really see what's happening in front of you. Before you sell your Nikon gear, play with a V series Hasselblad or even a RB67 and see if you enjoy the very different change in workflow. You might find that there's room in your universe for both.

winger · Dec 20, 2011

I have a Hasselblad 503cxi as well as a Pentax 645N. I use the Pentax much more, but it's a little easier to handhold for me. I totally agree about trying one out first if you can.
I don't have an eye level finder and that might make some difference. I wouldn't count the Hasselblads as fast shooting cameras - mine makes me slow down and think (which is frequently a good thing). Personally, I'd shoot a wedding with the Pentax before the Hasselblad (have, in fact), but plenty of weddings have been shot on them.
Quality-wise, they blow away 35mm, imo. And in the darkroom, it's just a really nice feel to work with large negs.

cjbecker · Dec 20, 2011

I posted earlier and I should state that I only really used the 80 and because I like simple, I am using a rolleicord III now for everything. The lens is not up to par with the blad ziess glass but the camera fits me better.

skahde · Dec 21, 2011

I'd like to give the discussion a twist and dare to question your reasoning. A similar thing happened to me many years ago and I lost most of my Nikon-setup. I was very tempted to buy into Leica-M to replace it which I thought was better suited for my photography. In addition there was a nice used M4-P sitting in my favourite shops window for a tempting price. I found all kinds of reasonings to justify buying it. To this date I'm gratefull to the dealer who stopped me when I told him my story (Leicas came a few years later). He simply said, there was a reason why I had the Nikon and should try to remember it. This made me think twice and I ended up replacing most of what I had lost with minor changes here and there. Looking back this was one of the smartest things I ever did. 35mm SLRs work for so many things and are dearly missed when you don't have one.

I also own Hasselblad but as an addition for the subjects where it really pays of. The Hassi is slower and more cumbersome in use. To me it is in no way a replacement for a fast 35mm-SLR.

And a last word: Replacing the lost camera with the exact same body made me feel much easier about the loss. That way I felt hard about the money lost which is not a very personal thing, but the camera was in a way with me again which helped me a lot in recovering from the incident.

edit: typos, wording.

Thomas Bertilsson · Dec 21, 2011

Do the newer Mamiya 645 cameras have rotating backs too? I'm wondering, because one of the main reasons I switched from 645 to 6x6 was that my Mamiya 645 was a pain in the neck to shoot portrait oriented photos with, because it did not have a revolving back.
So I had to get a tripod head that rotated 90 degrees. Finally, aligning the camera in that position was not a happy job...
I ended up shooting everything horizontal, and then cropping at printing time.

benjiboy · Dec 21, 2011

If you're wanting " fun" from your photography Ted you aren't doing it right, you have to aspire to be a tortured Artist"

CGW · Dec 21, 2011

Thomas Bertilsson said:
Do the newer Mamiya 645 cameras have rotating backs too? I'm wondering, because one of the main reasons I switched from 645 to 6x6 was that my Mamiya 645 was a pain in the neck to shoot portrait oriented photos with, because it did not have a revolving back.
So I had to get a tripod head that rotated 90 degrees. Finally, aligning the camera in that position was not a happy job...
I ended up shooting everything horizontal, and then cropping at printing time.

No they don't. Nothing substantially different shooting a Mamiya 645 in portrait orientation than a 35mm on a tripod since virtually all heads allow for this. The only pain shooting a 645 portrait oriented comes from using a WLF. Strange...

Thomas Bertilsson · Dec 21, 2011

CGW said:
No they don't. Nothing substantially different shooting a Mamiya 645 in portrait orientation than a 35mm on a tripod since virtually all heads allow for this. The only pain shooting a 645 portrait oriented comes from using a WLF. Strange...

That's what I thought... I ended up getting a prism about two weeks into using the camera.

The tripod head I used were two different ones, one of the ball heads that have the quick release handle on it, that you use just like a pistol grip. That made the tripod so heavily weighted on one side that it almost fell over once or twice due to the heft of the Mamiya camera.
Then I tried a more conventional ball head, and while that was better, I still thought it was really wonky to focus the camera, crank the film advance, using the mirror lock-up, etc...
35mm usually has such nimble controls that it doesn't matter to me whether the camera is vertical or horizontal. Somehow with the larger size, and much higher weight, the 645 was a lot more cumbersome to adjust in the same way.
The reason I spoke up about it is that it's definitely a consideration to include in a pros/cons list of what to purchase.

faustotesta · Dec 21, 2011

Should you come here (Rome and its suburbs) i can borrow you my 500cm with planar 80.

CGW · Dec 21, 2011

Thomas Bertilsson said:
That's what I thought... I ended up getting a prism about two weeks into using the camera.

The tripod head I used were two different ones, one of the ball heads that have the quick release handle on it, that you use just like a pistol grip. That made the tripod so heavily weighted on one side that it almost fell over once or twice due to the heft of the Mamiya camera.
Then I tried a more conventional ball head, and while that was better, I still thought it was really wonky to focus the camera, crank the film advance, using the mirror lock-up, etc...
35mm usually has such nimble controls that it doesn't matter to me whether the camera is vertical or horizontal. Somehow with the larger size, and much higher weight, the 645 was a lot more cumbersome to adjust in the same way.
The reason I spoke up about it is that it's definitely a consideration to include in a pros/cons list of what to purchase.

If its the Manfrotto 222, then sure the awful design makes it unwieldly. The much-improved 322, which I use with a Mamiya 645, is also perfectly workable with my Bronica SQ-B and big 35mm bodies+motor drives. Same goes for other larger Manfrotto ballheads. The older, taller Manfrotto pan/tilt heads can be problematic since the pivot is a long way from the camera base. The drive grip really improves the Mamiya 645's handling on or off a tripod. Not had any difficulty accessing the MLU, either. YMMV but I've not had any trouble with this camera equal to yours.

markbarendt · Dec 21, 2011

If I were starting over I'd still get some Nikon gear, an F100 or FM2 and a few primes.

In MF I love my RB, and I can't see giving it up, but if I we're starting again I'd probably start with a TLR, or two.

Thomas Bertilsson · Dec 21, 2011

CGW said:
If its the Manfrotto 222, then sure the awful design makes it unwieldly. The much-improved 322, which I use with a Mamiya 645, is also perfectly workable with my Bronica SQ-B and big 35mm bodies+motor drives. Same goes for other larger Manfrotto ballheads. The older, taller Manfrotto pan/tilt heads can be problematic since the pivot is a long way from the camera base. The drive grip really improves the Mamiya 645's handling on or off a tripod. Not had any difficulty accessing the MLU, either. YMMV but I've not had any trouble with this camera equal to yours.

To each their own, obviously. I'm merely quoting my experience.

All my worries went away when I finally got the 6x6. I actually still crop a lot of shots, but now I get the ability to print square, portrait, or landscape - from the same negative with the Hasselblad. I like that a lot, and find it a lot easier to deal with at the time of exposure. There are fewer decisions to make, which for me makes the process of exposure a lot quicker with the Hasselblad than the Mamiya.

CGW · Dec 21, 2011

Thomas Bertilsson said:
To each their own, obviously. I'm merely quoting my experience.

All my worries went away when I finally got the 6x6. I actually still crop a lot of shots, but now I get the ability to print square, portrait, or landscape - from the same negative with the Hasselblad. I like that a lot, and find it a lot easier to deal with at the time of exposure. There are fewer decisions to make, which for me makes the process of exposure a lot quicker with the Hasselblad than the Mamiya.

Print square? Shoot square. Print rectangular? Shoot 645 or 6x7. Why waste the film?

Thomas Bertilsson · Dec 21, 2011

Will not argue this with you.

DWThomas · Dec 21, 2011

In medium format I shoot mostly 6x6, but for 35mm (and "other") I did recently acquire an L bracket where the camera mounts on the bracket which has two QR plates to allow a quick change from horizontal to vertical without hanging weight off the side. The only problem for triflers like myself is the cost. I have a bottom end Manfrotto that works with their RC2 QR stuff that I already owned. That was pretty reasonable, but in higher end stuff (read: RRS made sized for specific cameras) the bracket rivals the cost of a used camera body!

Dave in Kansas · Dec 21, 2011

I really like the square format as well, and like Thomas, don't have to worry about how I will print it until I get to the darkroom printing stage. Perhaps it's because I don't have a good eye for art and frequently find I prefer a print with the paper orientation different than I imagined the scene when I took the picture. Besides, 6 x 6 still gives me 12 pictures on the roll. How many pictures of something do you really need? I have a hard enough time using up a 12 exposure roll of film. Film is cheap compared to my free time.

Dave

markbarendt · Dec 21, 2011

CGW said:
Print square? Shoot square. Print rectangular? Shoot 645 or 6x7. Why waste the film?

Well, so I don't have to carry more than 1 camera?

And, Why would I let the camera in hand dictate the final composition/crop? (as long as I only crop one way.)

lxdude · Dec 22, 2011

Thomas Bertilsson said:
I ended up getting a prism about two weeks into using the camera.

On a tripod it is easy to compensate for verticals while using a WLF. With the camera in portrait orientation, stand to the side of the camera, facing it. Hold a small mirror like a makeup mirror to the WLF, angled at a 45 degree angle, and look down at it to view the screen. The image will be right side up and correct left to right.

Does anyone here use a Hasselblad for everyday photographic fun?

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency