- Joined
- Jan 30, 2005
- Messages
- 637
- Format
- Multi Format
Easy fix: go to the classifieds and ask for one for ten bucks. (The irony of post #274 in light of the Leica request is just dripping.)
The day I'm given a Hasselblad is the day I join that team. For now I don't have one nor can I afford one.
Easy fix: go to the classifieds and ask for one for ten bucks. (The irony of post #274 in light of the Leica request is just dripping.)
For now I don't have one nor can I afford one.
Look what I've started.
I'm on Team TLR because they look cooler. Plain and simple. And the Mamiya C line look twice as cool because they're twice as big. And it says 'Professional' on the front.
I have yet to see how the Hasselblad 500 series, the Zeiss lenses, the backs and all the other wonderful bits and pieces have been "bettered"
Those lenses and bodies are still the standard bearers for 6x6 analog cameras, medium format SLRs and the almost boxed 6"x6"s such as Pentax, Rollie (135), etc.
Even though the current Hasselblad digital MF cameras and backs are no made by the same company as that which made the 500cm I carry, that some of those dbacks can fit and function on that camera and other 500 series bodies attest to the enduring vision of their creators, with it's small, marvelous form factor and the best glass in the World.
Show us a camera that even meets the fullness of the analog paradigm of the 500cm, much less the digital enhancements in today's World and perhaps we'll better understand your reasoning.
Same here, only I don't need one, either. I have an RB67.And a couple 6x7 on 220 backs, as well as 6x4.5, 6x6, and 6x7 (and 6x9, but I can't cover that frame, quite) on 120. And if I'm feeling retro, all of those backs will fit my Century Graphic, too (and it will cover 6x9).
I am very happy with your decision. Now I do not have to worry about you competing with me for Hasselblad lenses and film backs. Thank you.
Film backs allow me to switch between color and black & white, infrared film, and film speed all options for every subject.
They do sell bulk rolls of 46 mm during their annual custom cut event -- don't know that I've heard of them doing the same in 61.5 mm, but I don't know any reason they wouldn't if enough people ordered it. A hundred foot roll of that would yield 17 or so rolls of 220...
My A-70 backs hold up to about 65-70 frames, vs. the A-24, vs A-16 (4x4), vs. A-12, plus the cut film holder in their little inserts.
Plus the polaroid and Instax instant film backs and the (cursed) digitals.
There may be even a tiny negative or paper printer one day, invented by other Hasselblad owners.
My backs are in sync, all have original inserts and I have spare, new dark slides, In case I forget to insert the dark slide into the holder on the back and loose one, though I am entirely capable to make new brass, bronze, etc dark slides on my own.
Lens quality of Zeiss glass and leaf shuttered lenses are very much the apex optical glass, in medium format, and continue to be the prize in pursuit by other analog lens makers, plus the "V" lenses shutters are repairable by the owner, if they dare to learn how and do it themselves.
These lenses, up to the 350 and 500mm (plus teleconverter, if you roll that way) give you reach beyond any TLR I know of, but, rare, bespoken tech may exist somewhere but no in competition to with these lenses.
Ask folks here to post shots from their 180mm lenses or macro from the 135mm or 120mm lenses on bellows do you can see but a sample of why The Hasselblad 500 series, the Flex and arc bodies, etc, when the shooter is in the mood or need, are worth their weight in the Studio and, the field.
As I said before show us a camera that matches the Hasselblad 500 system, in a very wide selection of abilities, if you can.
We'll be waiting...
Cheers
It is the optics and the system.There is a quote function you know Eli.
Look…
I’m not saying the Hasselblad system is bad, or even that I wouldn’t like to own one with an assortment of lenses, given the chance.
Problem is, all of the time when I see a Hasselblad in the wild, and talk with owners it’s with the standard 80mm/f2.8.
A lens that is terrific but not leaps and bounds above the competition and is even outdone by a few other 6x6 normal lenses.
If they own other lenses it’s very rare that they actually use them.
This is not a problem with Hasselblads.The second you get into other focal lengths, problems arise.
The wides has the typical problems of wides on an SLR with added tele optics to focus beyond the mirror, with all the problems of optical degradation, loss of speed, weight and size. Only scaled up.
Hasselblad even made a body that addressed that particular problem. In which case the advantages of the system starts to thin out, if you need whole different bodies.
Not so, a few years ago I bought a 500mm C lens for ~$480US with a discount the KEH offered to me.That leaves long lenses. The portrait/medium long lenses are superb, I’ll give you that.
But they are also insanely expensive and/or slow and takes the camera from moderately luggable to a chore and a liability.
And you can in fact make portraits just fine with an 80mm lens.
You can even crop to gain some tele effect, without getting into 135 grain territory.
The 1750mm Hasselblad is too hard to find one available and its price would be pricey.The longer long lenses are just ridiculous.
Apart from being so expensive that you could buy a superb ED APO short refractor telescope for the price, still have money left over and get better results, they are also so heavy that you will have to carry a tripod.
And to get the sharpness worthy of the format too, you have to stop down so much with EI 100 rated film that you are into dangerously low speeds.
Again, good ideas don’t often scale.
So in short, these lenses are just not practical.
People like the idea of them more, than they actually own and use them.
If you look at studio use mainly, there is the Mamiya RB series that is at least as good with much more bang for the buck, but a lot bigger and heavier. But that’s OK because they were mainly meant for tripod use and in a studio.
It is the optics and the system.
This is not a problem with Hasselblads.
Not so, a few years ago I bought a 500mm C lens for ~$480US with a discount the KEH offered to me.
The 1750mm Hasselblad is too hard to find one available and its price would be pricey.
The RB requires that male users wear a truss if they are going to carry around and use hand held.
I was sad to sell my RB67 system a couple of years ago - space issues and a move mandated that the body, the accessories and the 4 lenses had to go. The selling price was about the same as most Hasselblad lenses, and the larger negative size gave me results that were as good or better than the Hasselblad shot negatives I printed in the past.
If I was in the market to buy another medium format system I'd buy an RB67 system again in a heartbeat - long before I'd buy a Hasselblad.
I was 64 when I sold my RB67. I used it for handheld work on a regular basis, although more commonly I carried it, a couple of lenses, some accessories and a tripod as I traipsed through the woods and trails and other interesting locations - often a few kilometres at a time.
The RB67 is bulky. But if you need to have assists to help you carry it, it probably means you should restrict your photography to something with more limited capabilities, in order to protect your health.
Same here, only I don't need one, either. I have an RB67.And a couple 6x7 on 220 backs, as well as 6x4.5, 6x6, and 6x7 (and 6x9, but I can't cover that frame, quite) on 120. And if I'm feeling retro, all of those backs will fit my Century Graphic, too (and it will cover 6x9).
Well then you “just” brought the studio with you. That is definitely an option.
But realistically most amateur photographers don’t have the time and dedication to pack that kind of gear and lug it along more than maybe once or twice a year.
They need something that can, irritating as it sounds, be combined with a vacation, a country side trip with family, a quick spontaneous joyride, or just a walk around the block.
An anchor of a camera plus three lenses a tripod and misc. is not compatible with the above.
The RB requires that male users wear a truss if they are going to carry around and use hand held.
I remember when I first experienced an RB in the early 70's, the fact that one could use Graphic roll backs made these wonderful cameras seem more affordable. Still couldn't afford one then.
That’s all that really matters.I prefer
That’s all that really matters.
If I had a Hasselblad I'd be telling everyone that it's the greatest camera of all time and you're all fools for not having it so there.
Problem is, all of the time when I see a Hasselblad in the wild, and talk with owners it’s with the standard 80mm/f2.8.
A lens that is terrific but not leaps and bounds above the competition and is even outdone by a few other 6x6 normal lenses.
If they own other lenses it’s very rare that they actually use them.
Hey, that's the same "killer feature" my RB67 has! Who knew?
220 film stands about as much chance of a comeback as Kodachrome.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?