Hasselblad Magic - is it actually worth the pursuit?

[Marcelo Paniagua]

Over the last few years I have bought into a few medium format camera systems. I have a Mamiya C330f, now a C330s (a total bargain and unused), and a 645 1000s. I also bought a Mamiya RZ67 Pro II which I adore despite the weight. I use the RZ67 the most in studios and occasionally in the landscape, C330f/s when I travel which is ideal, but I wish I had a 6x6 camera similar to working method of the 1000s system - which leads me to perhaps take the plunge with a Hasselblad, 500CM or similar. Smaller, lighter and something I could carry with a digital system in one bag.

Regarding abandoning 645, I have never taken to it. I love looking downwards through waist level finders, I really don't like prism finders (add a lot of bulk) which we are all forced to use for portrait, so the camera needs a prism finder to get the most out of it.... (unlike the RZ's rotating back which I love). So I am finding myself moving away from 645 entirely to be honest. I love square compositions, I also love the RZ, but its too much in the field.

Seeing as this is not a 'on-a-whim' purchase and that I am so heavily into using film now, do I take the plunge with a Hasselblad, or explore the other 6x6 options, perhaps the Bronco SQ series or even going over to a retro S2A?

Any thoughts gratefully received.

I've used one, with an 80 and multiple backs. It is a nice experience. They are heavier, and, unlike RB67, they shoot, like butter . They are really nice machine. On my humble opinion, lens are worth it.

Since I only had one lense, sold it to move to a SL66 system with several lens, not because it is better but just personal preference. Same lens quality, added bellows and tilt included.

I know you probably already made up your mind about 4.5x6, but have you tried the 1000s with a waist level finder? They are a little bit expensive but man, the experience is totally different. Almost never used mine before it, and after it, I use it more often.

Regards

Marcelo

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Only a jackass walks around with all three Rollei versions around their neck at one time. Just like lenses for a Hasselblad, you have one on the camera, and the others in the bag. And Rollei TLRs aren't really heavier than a Hasselblad lens. So your Hassy, plus back, plus three lenses, is just as heavy and just as bulky in the bag as a trio of Rollei TLRs.

 

[BrianShaw]

But was it "Magic" ??

For me it was a good move, but certainly not “magic”.

 

[GLS]

In my opinion, yes they are worth it. Extremely well made, very versatile and with stellar lenses for the most part (certainly better than the equivalent offerings of the Bronica); in particular if you like the Zeiss style of rendering. For the size of the negative you are getting they are also actually quite light and compact for an SLR (at least with the WLF + one of the smaller lenses). It is my most used camera by a large margin.

 

[jerrybro]

I had lusted after a Hasselblad for years but could never justify the cost. When my first grandchild was born I finally broke down and bought a 500CM with an 80CF and I have never regretted it. I bought it when the market was down so got a near mint setup for less than they were selling for new a few decades ago. It took a while to get used to it and I had been using a Rollei for a about 10 years by then. It was the left hand grip and the long focus through of the lens that kept crossing me up. The onset of presbyopia complicated matters as well. It wasn't long before I added another back, then a PME prism and hand grip. The prism and grip turn it into a heavy package. I then added a 150CF lens for portraits. I can see how people end up with a plethora of bodies, backs, lenses and accessories, it truly is a system that can be configured for most anything.

I guess my only regret would be that I don't have the time to use it more often.

 

[Nokton48]

If you want to go really light this is the way to do it. I am a long time view camera user so I am used to the discipline of shooting only a few frames. This one will fit in your coat pocket! The single exposure back and holders.

001 by Nokton48, on Flickr


And if you must have maximum firepower. this is the way to do it. 500 exposures without stopping. The A500 back.
Yes I frequently shoot 70mm, but usually with A70s.

See what I mean? Hasselblad is versatile, nobody EVEN close. If that is important to you.

My new Hasselblad A500 magazine by Nokton48, on Flickr


I don't think it's magic, but it's been worth the pursuit.

 

[mshchem]

If you want to go really light this is the way to do it. I am a long time view camera user so I am used to the discipline of shooting only a few frames. This one will fit in your coat pocket! The single exposure back and holders.

001 by Nokton48, on Flickr


And if you must have maximum firepower. this is the way to do it. 500 exposures without stopping. The A500 back.
Yes I frequently shoot 70mm, but usually with A70s.

See what I mean? Hasselblad is versatile, nobody EVEN close. If that is important to you.

My new Hasselblad A500 magazine by Nokton48, on Flickr


I don't think it's magic, but it's been worth the pursuit.

A-500 sweet! I always wanted the Nikon F2 100 foot 800 exposure back. Processing would be fun

 

[Patrick Robert James]

The thing about asking questions on the internet is everyone will try to persuade you to do what they did. It is a weird kind of reinforcement for them.

Zeiss lenses are arguably the best lenses for medium format. You can get those lenses for square format on Hasselblads, Roleiflex 6000 series, Rolleiflex SL66s, and the Rollei HY66. The Rolleis have the advantage of some available Schneider lenses as well.

If you want to use flash then eliminate the 200/2000 series Hasselblads and the SL66. Focal plane shutters and flash aren't ideal.

The regular Hasselblads are a bit annoying that they don't have mirror return. You have to wind them to be able to look through the viewfinder unless you use a motorized version and that motor adds a lot of bulk. If that sounds annoying then the 6000 series Rollies and the Hy66 would be the way to go. On the downside, the Rolleis need a battery. Kind of a bummer when that runs out...

Each system has it's advantages and disadvantages obviously. I've used just about everything and I can tell you there is no perfect camera. You have to decide what you want.

Hope that helps you, at least a little.

 

[Down Under]

Another vote for a Rollei TLR if weight-reduction is a motivator. It's a beautiful camera that produces images with their own special magic. And there's something to be said for having a camera that has one and only one lens that keeps you from wasting time thinking about which lens you're using and makes you think more about how you're using it.

+1. How I wish I had been given this advice back in the 1980s when I suddenly had money to spend and went mad on cameras... I've owned a Rollei since 1966 but put it away in 1983 and started working thru the 35mm cameras - Nikkormat, Pentx, Leica (the biggest mistake I ever made), Linhof, Mamiya, German 6x6 and 6x9 folders and eventually, in a particular moment of madness, two entire Hasselblad kits. Almost all sold at a loss except the 'blads which gave me a modest profit when I offloaded them a few years ago. If I had to sell them now, in Australia anyway, I would probably lose money. So it goes.

I now shoot mostly digital but quite often the Nikkormats (worth nyet on the resale market, so I've kept them, also all my old Nikkors) and one of my four Rolleis get trotted out for a special shoot to be preserved on film for archival reasons. The results with the Rolleiflex and a recently acquired Rolleicord, always shame anything I can take on 35mm except for the interchangeable lens factor, but I've learned to live with this.

My Hasseblads were beautiful machines but buying extra lenses and all the other bits and pieces for it meant I paid out much more than I had intended. Am still selling off small pieces one by one, always at a loss (I bought into this system when prices in Australia were at their highest level). I also never felt comfortable with my 500CM out in the field, unless on a tripod. The ergonomics were lovely to handle but to shoot, for me, no go.

Nowadays I use my Rolleicord Vb with a pocketful of accessories (lens hood, a few filters, a 16 exposure and a 24 exposure kit and every now and then when I need it for critical shooting, the Rollei prism) and find the results are quite unique, a 'Xenar' look I've not been able to achieve even with a Zeiss Planar.

The message here? Hasselblads are wonderful, but there is always an alternative when one is on a budget. As a 71 year old pensioner, I now find my Vb much lighter to carry around with me and I shoot much less 120 film with the 16 exposure kit. As I've already said, the images speak for themselves.

 

[Down Under]

Only a jackass walks around with all three Rollei versions around their neck at one time. Just like lenses for a Hasselblad, you have one on the camera, and the others in the bag. And Rollei TLRs aren't really heavier than a Hasselblad lens. So your Hassy, plus back, plus three lenses, is just as heavy and just as bulky in the bag as a trio of Rollei TLRs.

Surely you mean a millionaire - I've never met anyone in 50+ years of shooting who could afford three Rolleis to have all the lens options.

The true beauty of the Rollei is its minimalism - one camera, one lens (okay, technically two lenses, but only one lens to take the picture), a few accessories in one pocket, not quite full. A few rolls of film in the other pocket. And off you to go shoot anywhere and everywhere. In the time I've owned mine, I've taken it to the summits of mountains in Southeast Asia, across Australia, to the arid deserts of southeastern New Mexico deserts and on fishing the Atlantic off eastern Canada. They have aways, aways produced the goods.

With Rolleis, one is ample, three is a crowd. Fritz Henle could have said it...

 

[bluez]

I'but have you tried the 1000s with a waist level finder? They are a little bit expensive but man, the experience is totally different. Almost never used mine before it, and after it, I use it more often.

Regards

Marcelo

Thats a very good point, i have a waist level finder on my 1000s, and the image is sharp and clear. It's a small package. Because others have discovered the same, the waist finders for the mamiya 645 are usually more expensive than prism finders. David, i think you be surprised how good the image is in a 645 viewfinder. I have used the 645 for street photography, just sitting on a bench, looking down in the viewfinder and taking pictures, no one seems to notice.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

99% of it comes down to how much the camera becomes an extension of how you work & see. If it gets in the way of that, then it's not the right camera, no matter how much people quote spec sheets at each other.

The other thing is that the Zeiss lenses have a pretty distinctive optical signature - whether you like that or not is something you have to decide.

The Zeiss lenses for the Hasselblad are one reason to buy into the System.They are superior beyond critique.

 

[BrianShaw]

The Zeiss lenses for the Hasselblad are one reason to buy into the System.They are superior beyond critique.

... even when folks critique them!

 

[Lachlan Young]

The Zeiss lenses for the Hasselblad are one reason to buy into the System.They are superior beyond critique.

They have a very distinct 'look' - and that may not be to everyone's taste. Personally, as much as I like the classic Hasselblad Zeiss look, I prefer the earlier Pentax 6x7 lenses - and I think the Schneider & Zeiss optics on the classic 2.8 Rolleiflex TLR's have a slightly nicer balance of characteristics than the T* ones for Hasselblad. Proclaiming one lens series to be the one & only is rather silly & instead suggests a degree of insecurity about choice of system.

 

[Nokton48]

It seems many of us have more than one MF system, depending on the objective.

Fuji GX680 Finder on Plaubel Makiflex Standard by Nokton48, on Flickr

In addition to my Hasselblads, I have this Plaubel Makiflex system, which I have collected for over thirty years. Since it is focal plane, I have dozens and dozens of lenses to put on it. Quite useful. Also 9x9cm on 4x5/9x12 is a 50% increase in fidelity over 6x6cm. Good to have a choice.......... BTW this camera is bulky but not heavy. Believe it or not.

If I want to travel lightly, I carry one of my old Plaubel Makinas, which fold up and fit in a coat pocket. These take same accessories as the Makiflexes. I really love these cameras

 

[Deleted member 88956]

I've used one, with an 80 and multiple backs. It is a nice experience. They are heavier, and, unlike RB67, they shoot, like butter . ...

I don't know what kind of beat up RB clunker you are comparing but my SDs surely work as smooth as one could ever need and mirror dampening is just some kind of mechanical miracle. Sure, RB isn't gonna give you a higher social status and your photographic "expertise" edges up the moment you get a Hassy, but these two are simply not comparable, Anyone needing a Hassy, there is no other choice, for those who can live without one, there is a plethora of equally qualifying choices.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

For me it was a good move, but certainly not “magic”.

Probably most honest reply from any Hasselblad owner I have read or heard.

 

[NB23]

The magic truly lies in a Rolleiflex.

Hassy c series is nice, sharp and all... but no image carresses the eyes as a Rollei image.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Making good photos isn’t really a function of which camera is used, but you should enjoy working with a Hasselblad. Buy bye newest and best condition you can afford... and don’t be too surprised if you need to have it overhauled. But it’s not a light piece of gear and will benefit from being used with a monopod or tripod.

according to the manual; it needs a maintenance check every 6 months with 'normal' use, which is defined as several hundred rolls of film per month. I had mine looked over once in 30 years and everything is still working fine3. I'm convinced low usage does them more damage than heavy usage.

 

[Vaidotas]

Its definitely worth to try.
Put aside stereotypes according status and all this hype around V system.
My experience ( its includes work with all common 6x6 slr, tlr, rangefinder systems) is very positive.
I'm feeling absolutely confident with my v500
And if it dont sticks to your palm, its easy to get money back.

 

[ic-racer]

Hasselblad Magic - is it actually worth the pursuit?

I'd just buy one and see how magical. After reading through the manual and figuring out all the manifestations of shutter and film back synchronization you magical powers will need to increase to get it all working together the first time. That assumes the equipment is all in perfect working order when you obtain it. I'm not dissing Hassy, most all fully mechanical pro-level medium format systems were complex and take skill to operate.

 

[Peter Schrager]

For me it was a good move, but certainly not “magic”.

YOU BRING THE MAGIC..ITS JUST A BOX WITH A LENS

 

[Deleted member 88956]

YOU BRING THE MAGIC..ITS JUST A BOX WITH A LENS

Yet lots of Blad owner's (and who aspire to it) claim the exact MAGIC of it, like everything else was in a different picture taking league (not). Same applies to Leica against the rest of it.

 

[BrianShaw]

The magic truly lies in a Rolleiflex.

Hassy c series is nice, sharp and all... but no image carresses the eyes as a Rollei image.

If there is any magic in camera gear, I’d agree with this statement.... with one modification: or Rolleicord.

 

[removed account4]

YOU BRING THE MAGIC..ITS JUST A BOX WITH A LENS

I know what you mean Peter these "Fanboy(Fangirl) Threads" crack me up.