Handheld Test: Hasselblad 500 CM vs Mamiya RZ67 vs Rolleiflex 2.8F

[Sandeep]

I own these three wonderful medium format systems and was curious to see how they perform comparatively when handheld at slow shutter speeds. Can you get usable results out of them handheld ? Is mirror vibration going to be an issue with the SLR’s,? Does mirror lockup make a difference? Is camera weight going to be a factor?

So I conducted a test. The three competitors were:

1) A Hasselblad 500 CM with what is probably the easiest to hold handheld tele, the Zeiss 160mm f4.8 Tessar CB lens which weighs in at only 650g. Equivalent focal length of approximately 100mm in 35mm camera terms.

2) A Mamiya RZ67 with a 180mm f4.5 W-N lens. One big and heavy combo with an equivalent focal length of approximately 90mm in 35mm camera terms.

3) A Rolleiflex 2.8F cira 1960 TLR with a Zeiss 80mm f2.8 Planar lens, equivalent to approximately a 50mm lens on a 35mm camera.

The objective of the test was not to test optical performance which has been discussed numerous times before but performance when handheld. With that goal in mind I decided to shoot each camera at very slow shutter speeds of 1/15 sec. and 1/30 sec. handheld, something I would not normally dream of doing but speeds where I felt it would be easy to notice image deterioration due to handheld vibrations coming into play rather than lens optics. Each test shot was repeated twice to account for variations and only the best at each shutter speeds were compared. The Hasselblad was also tested with and without mirror pre-release so see what effect that had. It is virtually impossible to shoot the Mamiya RZ67 handheld with the mirror locked up as it requires pressing the shutter while having a cable release screwed into the lens and using that to activate the shutter, something almost impossible to do unless the camera is on a tripod or you have an extra pair of hands. I had heard that the Rolleiflex can easily be used at slow speeds because of its light weight, small leaf shutter and no reflex mirror required to move, I was curious to see how it would fare. Test target was some newspapers taped to my front screen door and photographed with each camera handheld from around 15ft. away with targets at the center and edge of each frame. All three cameras were focused on the same point. I shot the Rolleiflex closer to account for the difference in its focal length and wanted to have it have approximately the same magnification as the other two, hence I moved in closer. Film used was Fuji 100 Superia and test results were determined using a light table with a high quality 10x aspherical magnifier. I also shot a few test shots of a mailbox at approximately 30ft. away at 1/125 sec with each camera as well as a building and street sign approximately 150ft away.

Results

The Rolleiflex had the most consistent performance with the least variation between test frames in the testing. Test images were sharp and clear and I could easily read 4mm sized type font at the center and edges of the frame. Very sharp and easily usable for prints and enlargements for excellent results. The real shocker was the Mamiya RZ67, the heaviest camera of the bunch. At least one of the two test frames at 1/15 sec and 1/30 sec were very sharp and clear. In fact the RZ test frame at 1/15 sec was even sharper than the Rolleiflex. The Hasselblad test images were consistently blurry due to vibrations at both 1/15 sec and 1/30 sec. There was no discernable difference in image quality noticeable between the mirror pre-released and not pre-released images at each shutter speed.

At 1/125 sec all three cameras produced excellent and very sharp results showing that vibrations are not a factor at this speed and the variances noticed were more likely due to differences in camera optics coming into play. In the mailbox test at 30ft, the Mamiya RZ produced the sharpest image with the Hasselblad in 2nd place with the Rolleiflex an extremely close third. In the school/street sign test at 150ft away center sharpess was virtually a dead heat between all three, with the Hasselblad showing the best edge performance, the Mamiya RZ a slightly hair behind and the Rolleiflex a clear distant third, definitely differences between optics and not handheld vibrations.

Conclusions

The small and light weight Rolleiflex can clearly handle slow shutter speeds handheld down to 1/15 sec with no problems for consistent and repeatable sharp results and it’s 50 year old Zeiss Planar lens is a superb performer but edge performance is not as good as the Hasselblad or Mamiya RZ.

The real surprise was the Mamiya RZ. It appears that this big and heavy camera can be used at slow shutter speeds handheld that I would normally never have dreamt that it could achieve. The camera is supposed to have a well damped mirror mechanism and perhaps this combined with it’s large mass help dampen camera and hand vibrations further. Although results are not consistently repeatable, it appears that if you shoot a few shots at a slow shutter speed down to 1/15 sec with the RZ you will get at least one excellent and sharp frame very usable for enlargement.

Folks had said that the Hasselblad should not be used handheld at shutter speeds below 1/125 sec and it appears they were right. This camera clearly needs to live on a tripod at slow shutter speeds but is indeed very usable handheld at 1/125 sec or faster. Its surprising, but pre-releasing the mirror seems to have no discernable effect when shooting handheld.

I hope my test and these findings are of help to others.

 

[df cardwell]

Have to toss in Guillaume Zuili's recent gallery posts with his Rollei T in Paris:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

When we factor in the performance of a Rolleiflex WITH the remarkable travel qualities, it really stands by itself.

 

[lgpod1]

Thanks Sandeep for this comparative testing of these three great cameras. As a Hassy owner, I agree shooting with a Hassy below 1/125 requires a tripod. I have taken many great images with my Hassy shooting at 1/125th and above hand held.

 

[antielectrons]

The comparison is faulty as the longer focal lengh lenses on the Has and RZ will work against them.

 

[Sportera]

I have a Rolleiflex and a 500cm. Let me say that first both produce the same quality of images. The Blad below 125 is shaky but I have held the rollei at 1/30 with good results. The blad with 150mm must be tripod mounted are shot at 1/250 to handhold.

Both are great cameras. I use them both handheld with trix or hp5.

 

[Sandeep]

The comparison is faulty as the longer focal lengh lenses on the Has and RZ will work against them.

That's a good point given it's shorter focal length in may not be an apples to apples comparision between the Rolleiflex and the other two, but:

1) One can still draw conclusions about the practicality of the Rolleiflex at low shutter speeds down to 1/15 sec given the resulting test shots it produced viewed at high magnification.

2) Once can draw direct comparitive conclusions between the Hasselblad and the RZ in the test given their almost identical focal lengths, same shooting distance and same shutter speeds used.

 

[rbarker]

I would agree that the Rollieflex inclusion was somewhat of a "ringer" - due to the short focal length and the leaf shutter. But, it does show what the TLRs are very capable at that slower shutter speeds. The added weight of the RZ over the Hassy probably adds to its stability when handheld - not too heavy, but heavy enough to rest better in the hands.

Nonetheless, I'm happy with the Hassy for the MF work I do.

 

[nworth]

I have an old Bronica S2A. When I press the shutter release, it sounds like a cannon and the camera jumps in my hands. To my surprise, the handheld images are sharper than those for my other medium format cameras, and it isn't just the excellent lenses for this beast. I guess all the noise and motion happen after the exposure. I usually use the standard finder, which means I hold the camera low and just let it settle into my hands. That may be steadier than holding the camera up to eye level.

 

[isaacc7]

One great trick I like to use with TLR cameras is to use the strap as a tensioning device. I pull the strap down and make the strap taut. I find that this gives me quite a bit better hand holdability with the trusty TLR camera. I guess that it should work equally well with any waist level camera, but I haven't tried it with anything but a TLR. I did use a variation of this technique with my Leica. I was able to shorten the strap so that when I held it tight, it was the perfect distance away from my eye.


Isaac

 

[BrianShaw]

The comparison is faulty as the longer focal lengh lenses on the Has and RZ will work against them.

This was my first thought whenn I read this thoughtful posting yesterday. I didn't comment because I'm not sure the results would change too much if each camera had an 80mm (or 90mm for the RZ) lens on them.

Ralph's comment about the Rollei being a ringer made me chuckle... only a fool would dispute the superiority of TLR for handheld, slow-shutter-speed shooting over any MF SLR.

All in all, however, I, too, like my Hassy for MF work. Every once in a while I think about pulling the Rollei TLR out of the closet again, but haven't done it yet.

Working with the Hassy hand-held has given me a renewed appreciation for two things: fast film, and tripods.

 

[benjiboy]

It works for me.

One great trick I like to use with TLR cameras is to use the strap as a tensioning device. I pull the strap down and make the strap taut. I find that this gives me quite a bit better hand holdability with the trusty TLR camera. I guess that it should work equally well with any waist level camera, but I haven't tried it with anything but a TLR. I did use a variation of this technique with my Leica. I was able to shorten the strap so that when I held it tight, it was the perfect distance away from my eye.


Isaac

I made a what I call my "pocket tripod", and have used it for years, it was made out of about 6ft of bath chain, and a 1/4 whitworth erc. screw with a ring attached. you screw it into the cameras tripod socket and stand on the chain and pull it tight, this can be used with nearly any hand held camera, and it works for me.

 

[antielectrons]

Brian,

I have owned many TLRs and now use an SL66. I am thinking of getting another TLR, not so much for low speed handholdability but more due to the compact size and portability.

Antonio

 

[gnashings]

I think it was a very interesting trial - and yes, all the technicalities are obviously visible, I don't think Sundeep is overlooking them - but I can see wanting to satisfy one's curiousity, have fun with your cameras.

Of course, from a technical standpoint, this is almost impossible to do conclusively - even if the focal lengths of the cameras' lenses are equilzed. Take into account the fact that a 200lbs man may actually find a heavier camera to be an adventage - light weight is no friend in the battle against vibration, as long as you can handle that weight comfortibly. Then there is the size of your hands, how naturally steady your hand are in the position that is inherent to holding that given camera (two identically sized and weighted cameras could do differently due to the ergonomics of how you hold them!). I have, for example, seen a RB67 fired hand held with the mirror locked up - by a guy who is 6'4 (I think - tall anyhow) and a long enough cable to hold in one hand.

Too many variables - but still a fun read, and I get the impression tha the author wasn't really looking for anything Earth shattering from his experiment

I have to say one thing though - if there was ever a perfect street camera, it has to be a TLR. No mirror, leaf shutter, they are all basically boxes - they stand up on the table, on a counter top, a garbage can, cigarette pack "tri-pods" - and can do so on their side, up-right, you name it. Waist level finder makes a guy like me leaning against a wall pretty much a tripod... unless I all of a sudden develop a washboard stomach (which I doubt). And on top of that, you can shoot sideways, over your head, around corners - its just a wonderful design for just about everything that forces you to travel light.

 

[antielectrons]

Sundeep being aware of issues does not mean he didnt overlook them, as he clearly did.

It would be quite simple to conduct a conclusive test. Barry Thornton's test in Edge of Darkness comes to mind. Conclusion, you may think you can get good sharpness hand held but you are deluding yourself.

Antonio

I think it was a very interesting trial - and yes, all the technicalities are obviously visible, I don't think Sundeep is overlooking them - but I can see wanting to satisfy one's curiousity, have fun with your cameras.

Of course, from a technical standpoint, this is almost impossible to do conclusively - even if the focal lengths of the cameras' lenses are equilzed. Take into account the fact that a 200lbs man may actually find a heavier camera to be an adventage - light weight is no friend in the battle against vibration, as long as you can handle that weight comfortibly. Then there is the size of your hands, how naturally steady your hand are in the position that is inherent to holding that given camera (two identically sized and weighted cameras could do differently due to the ergonomics of how you hold them!). I have, for example, seen a RB67 fired hand held with the mirror locked up - by a guy who is 6'4 (I think - tall anyhow) and a long enough cable to hold in one hand.

Too many variables - but still a fun read, and I get the impression tha the author wasn't really looking for anything Earth shattering from his experiment

I have to say one thing though - if there was ever a perfect street camera, it has to be a TLR. No mirror, leaf shutter, they are all basically boxes - they stand up on the table, on a counter top, a garbage can, cigarette pack "tri-pods" - and can do so on their side, up-right, you name it. Waist level finder makes a guy like me leaning against a wall pretty much a tripod... unless I all of a sudden develop a washboard stomach (which I doubt). And on top of that, you can shoot sideways, over your head, around corners - its just a wonderful design for just about everything that forces you to travel light.

 

[127]

if there was ever a perfect street camera, it has to be a TLR.

Ever try a baby tlr? If a full size TLR is perfect, the baby still manages to improve on it for candid shooting. All of the benefits of a full size TLR, and the camera is a fraction of the size/weight. Easily fits in a coat pocket, and small enough not to attract attention. You get a 4x4 neg rather than 6x6.

I drove FrankB nuts with my baby Rollei at the APUG gathering last autumn!

Ian

 

[isaacc7]

Ever try a baby tlr? If a full size TLR is perfect, the baby still manages to improve on it for candid shooting. All of the benefits of a full size TLR, and the camera is a fraction of the size/weight. Easily fits in a coat pocket, and small enough not to attract attention. You get a 4x4 neg rather than 6x6.

I drove FrankB nuts with my baby Rollei at the APUG gathering last autumn!

Ian

I've always loved baby Rolleis, but how many different types of film are there fro them these days? I think J and C has some, anyone else?

Isaac

 

[catem]

Sandeep, this is really interesting.

I use my mamiya RZ hand-held all the time, and am very happy with it, though i have sometimes wondered about getting a hasselblad simply because it's that bit smaller and I thought might make life easier - specifically for working without a tripod.

After reading this I'm appreciating my RZ all over again. I seem to spend a fair bit of time telling people how it's easy to use hand-held and get some disbelief about it's size and abilities. It's nice to have my own experience confirmed, and I'll think twice before changing to another MF system (can't afford it anyway, but that's beside the point!)

 

[127]

I've always loved baby Rolleis, but how many different types of film are there fro them these days?

Basically theres Efke 100 bw, and MacoColor 200 C41. MacoChome slide is still around but disconinued, and various places roll their own.

Ian

 

[antielectrons]

Nobody said that handheld was not possible. What I did say was that you will generally not get the same sharpness as with a tripod when shooting medium format. Barry Thornton did a very good test of this in his book, Edge of Darkness - where he shot a small light point at various speeds both handheld and with tripod. Even at 1/125 second movement was clearly visible in the hand held shots, as it was too even with a light tripod. It was only the heavier tripod with mirror lock up that showed no movement. Have a look for yourself, it is on page 65.

The point I was making therefore, vis-a-vis this thread is that it is not so much an question of whether a Rollei TLR is better for hand-holding bur rather should you be hand holding at all if what you want is a sharp image.

Your abuse ads nothing to the discussion. Yes, there have been some very good hand held shots - but were they sharp? Most likely not.

I for my part will make use of the "report post" button.

Antonio

 

[Ole]

Using a tripod is generally considered a good idea, with any camera at any size.

But it's not always practical or even possible. And that's when it's nice to know that some cameras are better for hand holding than others!

Some of my best MF shots were hand held - and sharp enough for all practical purposes. Like enlarging to 12x16" and viewing from very, very close.
Of course I have other shots which are soft, blurry and totally useless!

BTW, I've removed an abusive message and a quote of it in this thread.

 

[Ole]

The problem with moderating threads is that there will often be some "carry-over" into later posts. The decision of how much to edit these is a difficult one, and we moderators generally hope that later posters will ignore these and just get back to the subject.

Please?

 

[Nicole]

Lets get back on topic shall we.

This is based on my own personal experience - I use a Hasselblad 501CM and must say that although I do own a good tripod, I rarely use it for my work. Everything is pretty much hand held. 80% of what I do I shoot wide open in low light with shutterspeeds to 1/8 sec and am extremely happy with the results the blad produces.

 

[Nick Zentena]

I didn't see it mentioned. What kind of finders on the three cameras? All WL? Or a mix?

 

[Nicole]

WLF

 

[mikebarger]

While I have to have a tripod attached to my Blad, it isn't a problem for me with landscape work.

However, I'm jealous of those that can handhold the Blad and get outstanding shots such as Nicole's fine work.