Shouldn't a medium format folder give the same IQ as an SLR?

[warden]

What cameras are you comparing it to? I've handled several Hasselblads over the years, but the price tag has kept me from running film through one for real. However they didn't seem 'bad' for a waist level finder camera cradled to my chest. I find that style more 'hand holdable' than range finders or SLRs held up to my face. Assuming a hedge or something isn't in the way. Not a great setup for photographing over a crowd either.

I like these two old farts doing their best to handle their creations.

http://www.hasselbladhistorical.eu/HS/HSHmeetsR.aspx

 

[Sirius Glass]

@Sirius Glass as I a Hasselblad owner let me tell you, another Hasselblad owner, that I suspect you never used your Hasselblad. It is by far the least-handholdable medium format camera I've used or owned.

I have used a Hasselblad for over a decade and I find I can hold it very well in my left hand and use the left index finger to fire the shutter while focusing with the right. I have owned eight or nine other MF cameras and this is the most comfortable for me.

 

[lecarp]

Neither will improve your IQ. A point and shoot may reduce the strain on it.

 

[Sirius Glass]

It isn't THAT bad, and I find it fairly fun to lug around. Saves on silly things like gym memberships.

Putting the 500mm lens on it did remind me just how much time I've spent behind a desk and relaxing on my couch for the last two years, but that's beside the point.




What cameras are you comparing it to? I've handled several Hasselblads over the years, but the price tag has kept me from running film through one for real. However they didn't seem 'bad' for a waist level finder camera cradled to my chest. I find that style more 'hand holdable' than range finders or SLRs held up to my face. Assuming a hedge or something isn't in the way. Not a great setup for photographing over a crowd either.

I too use a prism with the Hasselblad. The WLF sits sadly in the corner, never used by me. Why? First I do not like the left right reversal and second I was never looking down at my waist to take a photograph. No one has ever said that I was Budda like.

 

[Sirius Glass]

They aren't bad, they're just not as hand-holdable as:

• All TLRs
• All rangefinders, and most folders
  
• Other SLRs I own: the Mamiya 645 Pro and Bronica GS-1

That's quite a list! Hasselblad mechanics allows too much vibration, it is not a camera one can easily shoot with 1/focal-length shutter speed rule. And despite this, the Hasselblad platform is by far my favorite system because of the feelings it evokes when I'm using it. A Hasselblad is more engaging than even a Leica, IMO. But it's happier on a tripod.



And if you spend equal amount of time with Mamiya 645 Pro or Bronica GS-1 you will be able to shoot at slower shutter speeds than your Hassy. It's not you, it's just physics. I don't know if it's the barn doors, or something else, but even the Bronica with its larger mirror manages to move it with less drama.

I have no problem using the 1/[focal length] shutter speed. I owned a Mamiya C330f with three lenses and found while it was not heavy with the old lenses it required flipping from side to side to set the shutter speed and iris. Later lens models eliminated that annoyance and are better designed but I chose to move one. The Mamiya Cxxx are bulkier than the Rollei tlrs.

[wink wink]Maybe you should stop using plastic camera and move to adult cameras.[/wink wink]

 

[Sirius Glass]

Well I know the problem exists, it's about helping you to find it. You don't print every photo with large magnification, and AFAIK you do not scan at good resolution, so how do you know what's on your negatives? Here's a 6,000x6,000 scan of a Hasselblad negative made on a tripod. You will not get the same crispness with a 100mm Planar handheld at 1/125s.

The problem may exist, but I have never had it even in the 36"x36" prints that I have make nor on the wall when I blow up slides 6'x6'.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I't all relative. Someone might call a print from a handheld slow exposure 6x6 crisp; I'd probably call it mush. In fact, I regard anything 3 foot wide enlarged from medium format mush, even tripod-shot. But even mush can sometimes be interesting. So to each his own.

What I do know is that if I don't use mirror-lockup with my P67 for exposures for slower than 1/60th, the mirror slap with be strong enough to seismically level structures within a ten mile radius, so there won't be any walls left big enough to hang a large print on anyway.

 

[abruzzi]

What I do know is that if I don't use mirror-lockup with my P67 for exposures for slower than 1/60th, the mirror slap with be strong enough to seismically level structures within a ten mile radius, so there won't be any walls left big enough to hang a large print on anyway.

you know, one of the things I've enjoyed about LF is the quietness with no mirror slap, just a nice little <snick> and its done. But then yesterday I got a Sinar Copal shutter, and that thing comes close to the P67. I should measure both with a SPL meter to see which is louder. I have no idea if that shutter will introduce vibrations, but at least its on a camera that only works on a tripod.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I got buzzy vibrations from Compur no. 3 shutters, enough to affect sharpness, but never with Copal 3 or 3S. I wouldn't be too worried about mere noise if there's no actual vibration during the exposure phase itself. And I'd like to own a Sinar shutter someday for barrel process lens applications; but it's a low priority.

 

[swchris]

What is mean with "IQ" in this context?

 

[Helge]

What is mean with "IQ" in this context?

Image quality or intelligence quotient depending.

 

[reddesert]

There must be some law of nature that all threads about medium format eventually turn into people yelling at each other about Hasselblads.

 

[DREW WILEY]

That's why they're named Hassle-bads.

 

[Arthurwg]

There must be some law of nature that all threads about medium format eventually turn into people yelling at each other about Hasselblads.

That's because it's the best camera and some people won't accept that.

 

[Down Under]

Image quality or intelligence quotient depending.

FINALLY a response!! How revealing that at least one poster on this site knows what they are talking about...

Thank you, Helge.

 

[Sirius Glass]

That's because it's the best camera and some people won't accept that.

Here is one who clearly understands the truth.

 

[DREW WILEY]

What do you define as "best"? Best for what? Let's see, to get a rectangular image with a Hassle you end up with only half as much surface area as a 6X9 using the same film size (not everyone likes square), and even less than 6x7, so less bang for the buck in terms of enlargement ability. The lenses are good, but so are other pro med format systems. It's not necessarily any more durable. It's certainly not the most ergonomic MF SLR if handholding is in mind, and doesn't offer much in terms of fast lenses. But Hassie is indeed a great system if you need to lighten your wallet as much as possible, as fast as possible. And they're also great for IQ action on forums like this one : Intentional Quibbling.

 

[Paul Howell]

As we are back in the Hassie debate, one of the major reason to own one if you can afford it, reparability. My Kowa's are or were very nice cameras in the day, at this point only guy in his 70s or 80s who is reported to be a racist has the parts to repair. Mamiya, Bronica all iffy in terms of finding parts.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Interesting. My P67 has never needed a repair even though it's had 45 yrs of hard outdoor use. But it was made during the peak of their quality control it seems. Some of the later ones with redundant bells n whistles have alleged reliability issues. Don't worry, it's all fun. But few people can afford all of em to play with. I'm a user, not a collector, and primarily a LF guy anyway, although advancing age is making me lighten up my carry loads somewhat.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Parts and lenses are readily available for the CF lenses and later. There are some spring shortages for the C lenses. Other MF cameras may have parts or service shortages. I found that while I like the Rollei slr 6x6, there are not as many in types or numbers as the Hasselblads. The anti-Hasselblad people do not want to talk about nor acknowledge the the Hasselblad V Series have interchangeable parts and lenses built over 50 years while none if its MF slr competitors do. Eat your heart out Drew as much as the Hasslelblad parts, lens and service availability keep you up at night.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Hasselblad is the best in the same way as Leica. It set a high standard for a medium format system camera, which other brands have tried to emulate with varying success. Some are better at certain things, and some are worse. But a Hasselblad is the benchmark everything else is measured against, just like Leica is the benchmark rangefinder, and Rolleiflex is the benchmark TLR.

I think these iconic cameras were successful because of one thing: balance. They aren't really outstanding for one specific thing, and also have no glaring weaknesses. Any product, especially something as complex as a camera, presents numerous trade-offs for its designers to navigate through. The 500-series is extremely well-balanced. It starts with the 6x6 negative size (the most efficient trade-off between negative size & glass weight & shooting ergonomics) and continues with lenses, repairability, modular design, materials, etc. Most products force you to deal with a wider amplitude between their "highs" and "lows". The Bronica GS-1, which I shared my experiences with just recently, is a prime example of an unbalanced product: brilliant in some ways and "WTF they were thinking?" in others. The same can be said of every other MF camera I own.

Highly underrated especially since people by cameras via internet today, is the size of the camera. Large camera in small hands or a small camera in large hands may not fit well. A camera has to fit in your hands and please you not everyone else on a website.

 

[Helge]

Hasselblad is the best in the same way as Leica. It set a high standard for a medium format system camera, which other brands have tried to emulate with varying success. Some are better at certain things, and some are worse. But a Hasselblad is the benchmark everything else is measured against, just like Leica is the benchmark rangefinder, and Rolleiflex is the benchmark TLR.

I think these iconic cameras were successful because of one thing: balance. They aren't really outstanding for one specific thing, and also have no glaring weaknesses. Any product, especially something as complex as a camera, presents numerous trade-offs for its designers to navigate through. The 500-series is extremely well-balanced. It starts with the 6x6 negative size (the most efficient trade-off between negative size & glass weight & shooting ergonomics) and continues with lenses, repairability, modular design, materials, etc. Most products force you to deal with a wider amplitude between their "highs" and "lows". The Bronica GS-1, which I shared my experiences with just recently, is a prime example of an unbalanced product: brilliant in some ways and "WTF they were thinking?" in others. The same can be said of every other MF camera I own.

People cut them no end of slack and read intent and purpose into the design, mostly because of the halo effect.
The name, the history and the price sets a scene where these heroic cameras can do no wrong.

Of course they are well crafted. They cost an arm and a leg back in the day.
But that doesn’t mean that other cameras aren’t well crafted too, in their own way.
Both the Leica and Hassy are in a sense and in their own way over-designed.
The Hassy is a concept taken from elsewhere and polished by watchmakers to what they saw as perfection.
It still has the frailty and overcomplexity of a watch though. Good ideas don’t often scale. Neither does mindsets.
Leica is the idea of small, light, well crafted and, for what you got, reasonably priced camera, IE the Barnack Leica, “perfected” to probably it’s inversion in the M series.
Both have glaring problems that are brushed off or made into features.
Macro and tele work (and even very wides, where wide angle was supposed to be Leicas forte) is a circus side show with a Leica. You have no way of getting even the faintest visual idea of depth of field unless you turn it into an SLR.
Hasselblad is bigger than a camera that includes two cameras stacked on top of each other (Rolleiflex). Has a pretty dim finder with anything below 2.8 lenses, which are super expensive and scarce outside normal lens territory.
And the party trick of changing magazines turns into a complex rite with lose bits all over the place for what is supposed to be a field camera.
You have twelve frames FFS. How often does changing film become necessary‽ Just finish the film or bring a second body.

No real single point to the above. There are good cameras and there are better. But engineering in industrial design, is as much the art of careful and poetic compromise, and knowing when to stop, as it is the art of convincing people that something is worth it.

 

[BMbikerider]

I had a Mamiya 7, great glass. Hard to beat a Heliar, but it has a different type of look. The Mamiya pics looked as if they came from a medium format Leica, very nice and sharp w/ quite a bit of 3D.
!

That's rubbish you cannot get a 3D image out of a 2D image! Think about it. Imagination is a great thing.

 

[John Wiegerink]

That's rubbish you cannot get a 3D image out of a 2D image! Think about it. Imagination is a great thing.

Yes you can! if you live in the "Twilight Zone". Rod Sterling died far to young.
I have had and still do own, several MF systems. No, I'm not a collector of MF cameras. I just never sold the ones I acquired. The two I use the most are the Pentax P67's and the Hasselblad V with Rolleiflex coming in third. I'm not a square kind of guy and for that reason only, I'll take the Pentax. But, as a camera system the Hasselblad V is hard to beat. In my opinion the Hasselblad V became highly successful and sought after for one reason. Victor Hasselblad himself. A lover of photography will build a better camera system than any bunch engineers and bean counters can. If he saw a need for something, he had it made to fit into the system and we as Hasselblad users all benefitted from it. I tip my hat to Victor for a truly stunning camera. I do agree with Drew in that the P67 has been completely trouble free for me, but I've only had mine for 37yrs not 45yrs like Drew. With my V Hasselblad's it's the Compur shutters that require attention from time to time, but otherwise are very dependable, for me anyway. One other downside to the Hasselblaad, like the Leica, is the blasted cost, but that's the price one has to pay for quality I guess. JohnW

 

[warden]

Hasselblad is the best in the same way as Leica. It set a high standard for a medium format system camera, which other brands have tried to emulate with varying success. Some are better at certain things, and some are worse. But a Hasselblad is the benchmark everything else is measured against, just like Leica is the benchmark rangefinder, and Rolleiflex is the benchmark TLR.

I think these iconic cameras were successful because of one thing: balance. They aren't really outstanding for one specific thing, and also have no glaring weaknesses. Any product, especially something as complex as a camera, presents numerous trade-offs for its designers to navigate through. The 500-series is extremely well-balanced. It starts with the 6x6 negative size (the most efficient trade-off between negative size & glass weight & shooting ergonomics) and continues with lenses, repairability, modular design, materials, etc. Most products force you to deal with a wider amplitude between their "highs" and "lows". The Bronica GS-1, which I shared my experiences with just recently, is a prime example of an unbalanced product: brilliant in some ways and "WTF they were thinking?" in others. The same can be said of every other MF camera I own.

Much agreement here. I’ve written before about my love and hate of Hasselblad. I couldn’t get used to the quirky ergonomics, the noise it makes, etc and so the first year I owned it I barely used it, while thinking of selling it. It wasn’t until I accessorized it with a prism viewfinder and a few other things that it started to fit me and the way I like to work. It’s still not my favorite camera to use, but it’s easily the most flexible medium format camera for me, so it gets used. The noise, size, and weird ergonomics are trade-offs for features that matter.