Hass or RB/RZ67?

[sim]

Hallo,

I am contemplating a move into medium format & wondered if you could give any advice on choices??

Currently shoot on Canon 35mm with L spec lenses in black & white printing at home. Nowadays, mostly close-up flower/botanical stuff but with an interest in portraits as well.

My preference would be a Hass (for the Zeiss lenses) but am slightly concerned about the close focus capabilites of the lenses, esp. the 120 macro which is only around 1:4. I would prefer something around 1:2 before having to load on extension tubes or bellows. I believe the RB/RZ can focus closer with its built in bellows - how close? How does the quality compare?

Any thoughts welcome & I will try to answer any queries, though my posts might be a bit slow!

Cheers,simo.

 

[André E.C.]

There's the fantastic Rollei SL66 to look at, you can use that Zeiss glass you mentioned, good luck.

I use Hasselblad, but that SL66 system is wonderful also.


http://www.sl66.com/



André

 

[Jeff L]

I use an RZ and it is truly great. The close focus capability is pretty good too. But.... if I have to do it again I would really look at a Hasselblad 500's because they are so small in comparison. Having said that, when I got into SLR MF the Blad stuff was not affordable for me. Now, ofcourse the Blad stuff is nearly free compared to what it used to be.

 

[Lopaka]

On the RZ, the 90mm lens will focus at about 8 inches from the front of the lens, with good image quality.
Both Hassy and RB/RZ are good systems and I think its more a matter of personal preference.

Bob

 

[Muihlinn]

My preference would be a Hass (for the Zeiss lenses)

then your choice is already made

I believe the RB/RZ can focus closer with its built in bellows - how close? How does the quality compare?

they do, and they also are 6x7: the quality is amazing with their latest lenses, nothing to envy to hasselblad apart fame and size

 

[mgb74]

Have you phyically handled both of them?

The RB/RZ has some definate advantages in features, but comes at a price in size and weight. Very much a personal decision.

 

[reellis67]

I would also suggest that you consider costs for all the lenses that you might want to use. The Mamiya lenses are, at least in my experience, far easier to afford than the equivalent lenses for the Hasselblad. If you know what lenses you might want to have and you can afford them for either camera then forget my suggestion, but if not, it's something that you should at least consider.

- Randy

 

[Nick Zentena]

. Nowadays, mostly close-up flower/botanical stuff.

How do you meter now? Do you use flash? If you use TTL metering and TTL flash make sure the body you are getting supports that.

 

[wilsonneal]

Agree with points above. I've owned both. Currently own Hass. Some thoughts: older Hass lenses, which are now quite affordable, have shutters for which Hass is no longer making new parts. So, at some point, those parts will be harder to find than they are today. Not too worried about it, but if I were building a system today, I might steer towards the more modern CF lenses, at slightly higher prices, than the C lenses. RZ glass does seem to be less expensive than these CF lenses, especially for the wider and longer lenses.

Yes, the RB/RZ is bulkier, but we don't go into MF because it's portable. The format lends itself better to conventional paper sizes.

The glass looks different, too. I'd look at pictures made with both to see which you prefer. Quite a bit of Annie Liebowitz' work is done with RZ. When I look at her work it has a distinct look that I think has something to do with the glass (sure, lighting is a big part of it, her vision, yadda yadda...no argument).

I found that the RZ glass was noticeably sharper than the RB, but maybe it was just my samples.

Neal

 

[Frank Szabo]

Re: the close focusing - there are Diopters available for the Hassy and Mamiya; Hasselblad calls them "Proxars".

With the proper diopter lens of good quality, you can expect excellent images without the bellows extension calculations/problems. I use them for both Hassy and RB67.

 

[takef586]

sim
The Hasselblad lenses are outstanding and the robustness and versatility of the V system is legendary. For what you want to do, there's a special lens which you can find around quite cheaply - the S Planar , or in a more recent version - Makro Planar 135/5.6. It comes with a bellows combined with a bellows type lens shade, and like the Makro Planar 120/4 it is corrected for subjects smaller than 1mx1m. In practice, you can use it for infinity subjects too, if you stop it down to f11.0, which is the case for this fl most often anyway. It goes down to 1:1 and you can read the compensation for close up shots directly from the rail. It would be cumbersome to use handheld, but I find that Hasselblads are tripod cameras anyway... Here's a close up as an example:http://www.flickr.com/photos/59177039@N00/2372219664/sizes/l/ and here one made at a middle distance:http://www.flickr.com/photos/59177039@N00/2239631967/sizes/l/.
The Makro Planar 120 on the other hand is more handy for various applications where extreme close up is not needed - it also has an exceptional bokeh:http://www.flickr.com/photos/59177039@N00/504884553/sizes/l/ and if stopped down delivers great sharpness at bigger distances as well: http://www.flickr.com/photos/59177039@N00/2925138084/sizes/l/

 

[Claire Senft]

The extension of the bellows on an RZ67 is 45mm. With a 90mm lenses this will put you at 1:2, with the 140 macro lens this will be slightly more than 1/3rd life size.

 

[epatsellis]

with a set of tubes #1 and #2, you can comfortably shoot macro with the 180.

 

[2F/2F]

I would consider getting your feet wet with a Mamiya C series TLR and a Paramender. They are a very cheap, high versatility, and high quality entry into medium format. You get a square picture, and have a bellows. If you like the square format and like to shoot close ups, it is a good option, and will likely give you prints that are for all realistic intents and purposes indiscernible from those shot with a Hassy and a macro lens. If you want something more, move on to a Hassy later, or an RB if you decide that you are not into the 1:1 aspect ratio any more. At any rate, you won't be any more than $300 or so into your C system, and will be able to get that back if you sell it. If you decide to quit medium format after a while, your trials will not have been expensive.

If I had to pick between a Hassy and an RB for a general purpose camera, I would pick the RB, for many reasons, but mainly the larger negative, the aspect ratio, and the bellows...oh yeah: and the prices!

If I wanted something more simple and easily portable (which I do not) I might lean toward the Hassy. Even so, I thought the RB made a decent camera for hikes in the San Gabriels when I borrowed one. Then again, I was evaluating it as an alternative to large format, not to 35 or a Hassy.

Since you are interested in closeups, don't forget that Paramender! Mine is always on in the studio.

 

[michael9793]

I have a hassey and a Pentax 67 ii and both are great it is just what you plan to use it for. the Pentax is easier to carry walking around for quick shots. the hassey I almost always use a tripod and take a little more time with my shots. But there isn't anything that takes more time than a 8x20.

 

[Mark Fisher]

I looked at both and bought the Hassy. A three lens set plus the camera made the mamiya system bigger and bulkier than a 4x5. I value lightweight and "packability". If I did not have a 4x5 and I stuck to studio work, I'd probably go with the Mamiya since it is a great system with a bigger, rectangular negative. Otherwise, assuming you have the money, I'd go with the Hassy with appropriate tubes or bellows.

 

[Curt]

I bought an RB67, 90mm, 180, 2X extender, prism, eye level finder, two backs, and filters. The first time I used it the backs leaked light, I got the seal kit and did the body and the two backs, now there are no leaks. It took a good outing to get used to the mirror up exposure but now that I have it down it's worth the effort. I took it along with my 5x7 on my recent Moab, Arches trip and now seeing the negatives I'm completely satisfied with my decision. It's not the lightest camera for sure, it's a brick with the prism, but the stability and capability of using my Grafmatic holders and Graphic backs gives it the added usability. The revolving back is not to be overlooked in the 6x7 format. I took advantage of that on the last shoot. On one outing I forgot my cable release and just put the mirror up and used the release button on the lens, very easy and no movement. I can't say that everyone will be comfortable with this camera, It fits my choice for the type of photographs I take. Brett Weston used one along with the Rollei SL66.

 

[sim]

Hallo all,

Many thanks for your replies & thoughts - much appreciated to hear from people who have actually used the gear. Still no clear answer but then I wasn't really expecting to find out what to do from the replies only, some useful things to consider though. Many thanks.

simo.

 

[Slixtiesix]

Hello Simo,
I agree with Andre´ the SL66 is far superior for macro work, its got
the same Zeiss lenses like Hasselblad and is much more versatile in
this direction. I use the S-Planar 120/5,6 which is incredibly sharp.
The big disadvantage is it´s slow flash speed of 1/30s, so if you
use flash for your portrait work, I recommend one of the other systems
mentioned. There have been two Lenses with central shutter for the SL,
but Hasselblad is much more dedicated when it comes to flash use.
There has been an SL66 which offered TTL flash (SL66X) but only 500 units were built.
Maybe you should think about getting two systems, a simple SL with the 80mm Planar or 120mm S-Planar and 40+80mm extension tubes is all you really need for macro! For Portraiture buy a 500cw or RZ.
Make sure that the SL is in good, well maintained condition as
they are between 25 and 40 years old now, and some may need service.

Andre´, your website is quite beautiful.

Greetz, Benjamin