I often wonder who bought Hasselblads. When I worked in a lab in the 90's the vast majority of MF film that came in was 67. It was rare to see 6x6 film. Was it mainly a rich amateurs camera?
SG got it right. Stop beatting around the bush and go with the best: Hasselblad.
In my market, wedding photographers and studio photographers who did a lot of on location work.I often wonder who bought Hasselblads.
My father only drove Packards.
I often wonder who bought Hasselblads. When I worked in a lab in the 90's the vast majority of MF film that came in was 67. It was rare to see 6x6 film. Was it mainly a rich amateurs camera?
The difference between 645 and 35mm is big enough to make as much difference as 6x6, especially if you end up cropping from square to a standard paper size, as 645 is directly proportional/ Even 35mm ends up being cropped a bit if you want to fill the sheet.
View attachment 294308
My older brother was a commercial photographer, and made most of his money doing 4x5 nature stock shots, but also used his Technika handheld with rangefinder focus for portraiture. He was good at it, but also had quite a bit of Rollei SL66 gear - now that was a nice 6X6 system! But once he got his hands on my P67, he never looked back, and even photographed my own wedding with it. They were once quite popular for pro portrait and studio work in this area. Even the '22 wild elephant calendar my wife just put up on the refrigerator has P67 shots.
Rich doctors.I often wonder who bought Hasselblads. When I worked in a lab in the 90's the vast majority of MF film that came in was 67. It was rare to see 6x6 film. Was it mainly a rich amateurs camera?
Rich doctors.
Well, the doctors' Hasselblads and Leicas go with their Cadillacs.Oh, no, here is this tired and not very clever cliche about how only rich doctors or dentists buy Hasselblads or Leicas. It tired and not very funny any more. It's been a cliche for the last two or three decades. Lots of photographers buy Hasselblads and Leicas.
Well, the doctors' Hasselblads and Leicas go with their Cadillacs.
You're younger than me. I'm dating myself to the 60's and 70's. Doctors drove Caddy's and shot Leicas.Well maybe in your neighborhood but in southern California it is more like Porches for interns and residents and Bentleys for established doctors.
On the other hand I think of the RB67 as a truss buster.
Drew,ArcBody ... Ha! For the same price, one could buy a Packard (automobile, that is, not a Packard shutter), And for the same level of clumsy dysfunctionality as an ArcBody, one should opt on a Packard with four flat tires. They're branded Hassle for a reason.
And there's apparently also a logical reason why wedding photographers have trouble breaking out of that measly income calling - they should have started with more ergonomic gear to begin with, like a Pentax 6X7. They're great for wedding photography. I once had a co-worker that specially requested I photograph his wedding with larger gear. So I took a studio-style couples portrait using a 4x5, and then went to the wedding itself with my P67, exactly like they requested. But the Pastor's wife told me they had a rule that photographers had to stand in the back. No problem; I came with a tele lens. And just one KER-LUNK of the big SLR mirror, and the resultant shock wave blasted all the intervening guests clear out of the sanctuary, plus the pesky Pastor's wife herself, leaving nobody in between to impede my shot. Why didn't Hassie ever think of a great feature like that?
One of the reasons wedding photographers shot 6x6 square format was that they didn't have to turn a camera sideways for vertical shots.
I really liked that camera and if I were doing weddings today it would be my camera of choice.
Yes, but 6.45cm format does have its advantage. More shots per roll means less back changes. After I retired from weddings a Mamiya 645 1000S/ AE prism with an 80mm f1.9 and several other lenses dropped into my lap. I really liked that camera and if I were doing weddings today it would be my camera of choice. For tripod use I have a swing bracket for horizontal to vertical, which solves the problem of camera flip. Funny thing is I still have my Hasselblad cameras, but the Mamiya is long gone.
John
I don't know about being wise, but someone wanted the Mamiya 645J 1000 outfit and was willing to pay a very good price for it. I'd sell my Hasselblads if I could make the same margin of profit, but that's not likely. The camera is nothing more than a light tight box and I have plenty light tight boxes. JohnWHINT: The reason that you still have the Hasselblad is that you are a wise man.
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?