Another advantage of the Hasselblad, is the interchangable backs, which can give you no only 6*6cm but also 6*4.5, 4*4, 35mm with adapters, and the 6cm long panoramic with the use of a 6*6 CM back, that has a (IIRC) single gear change and, if wanted, a window templet that lies between body and magazine.
Do no think you can no put the camera on its side to grab a vertical, a monopod or tripod makes this a good option, even when "square" is your main focus.
Use a mask with the 35mm adapters too.
I believe elsewhere in this site, someone found a premade gear to make that happen.
The savings are self-evident in most of these magazines, which wind on the appropriate lenght of film, ie. the 4*4cm back allows for 16 exposures instead of the standard 12 frames of the 6*6.
Hasselblad or third party masks are available for these formats to keep excess image areas 'clean' of light marks, which is nice, too.
think 6x6 has advantages vs 6x4.5 if you like the square format, you want to be able to project transparencies, or you wish to use a waist-level finder and avoid the inconvenience of rotating the camera when shooting vertical compositions. Otherwise, they are pretty much the same thing, IMO.
Larger formats: Have gotten very satisfying results from a Fuji GSW690 III - when I held the camera really steady! These big cameras were once a ubiquitous sight in Japan, where they were used to photograph groups of tourists at scenic locations. But the cameras were generally mounted atop a tripod. But for mixed shooting styles, where there might be some camera shake, I’d prefer the more economical 6x4.5 format
