Switching from Hasselblad 500C/M to Contax 645

I want to love my new(ish) Hasselblad 500C/M. It's beautiful and takes darn nice photos. The trouble is that while I like fondling and looking at it, I very much dislike using it. I can't focus the thing to save my life. Tried the Acute-mat D screens, a prism finder and patience. No combination of things makes me enjoy shooting with it. Perhaps if I were shooting landscapes it would be different, but for portraits it's just not working for me. I think I've been patient, but perhaps not.

I'm thinking about trying a Contax 645 instead. Gives me reasonable autofocus, handles more like "normal" camera, Zeiss lenses, and as a bonus, aperture controlled auto exposure and a real-live meter.

I can live with negs not being square I think, but are there any significant drawbacks to the 645 that I should know about before diving in? My other options are a Mamiya 6 or 7 but I think I'd like the flexibility the SLR offers for now.

Thanks!

Getting the Contax cameras serviced might be a problem soon. i believe (but not certain) that when Contax (or the holding company) went into receivership there was a period of time when the "company" that was left would honour servicing/warranties. I have a feeling that the time period of the agreement may be coming to an end.

Might be worth finding out about service/aftercare as no-one is procuding any new bits for this system (digi backs aside!).

Good cameras though.

Mamiya 6 or 7 might not focus close enough for a face shot.

or you might try
a bronica system,

the mamiya 645e is easy to focus.

jackbaty said:

I want to love my new(ish) Hasselblad 500C/M. It's beautiful and takes darn nice photos. The trouble is that while I like fondling and looking at it, I very much dislike using it. I can't focus the thing to save my life. Tried the Acute-mat D screens, a prism finder and patience. No combination of things makes me enjoy shooting with it. Perhaps if I were shooting landscapes it would be different, but for portraits it's just not working for me. I think I've been patient, but perhaps not.

I'm thinking about trying a Contax 645 instead. Gives me reasonable autofocus, handles more like "normal" camera, Zeiss lenses, and as a bonus, aperture controlled auto exposure and a real-live meter.

I can live with negs not being square I think, but are there any significant drawbacks to the 645 that I should know about before diving in? My other options are a Mamiya 6 or 7 but I think I'd like the flexibility the SLR offers for now.

Thanks!

Click to expand...

I can help you. Ship your Hasselblad to me and I will take care of the focusing problem. In the mean time, I will ship my 1935 Certo Dolly Super Sport with a 7,5cm Zeiss lens to you so that you have an easy focusing camera to work with. It uses 120 film so you can stay with MF. Of course you chances of ever seeing the Hasselblad again are definitely less than zero, but since you do not like using it that should not bother you.

your new found friend,
Steve

I have used both the Contax 645 as well as the Mamiya 7. @Sim2 is right; the Mamiya 7 won't focus closer than about a meter, precluding uncropped face shots. For just about everything else, it is a spectacular camera system, and is my primary go-with-me-everywhere system. I shoot about 95% of my images with the 80mm, which is slightly wide for the 6x7 format ("normal" is about 92mm based on diagonal measurement of the format size.)

The Contax is a superior handling camera system. Its ergonomics are among the best of any camera I've ever used. Its lenses are astonishingly sharp. Its single-focus-point autofocus, while nothing like what's available with even the lowest-end DSLR, is perfectly adequate for portraiture and the other typical uses for a MF camera. Mine hasn't seen much use of late because I have really fallen in love with the huge 6x7cm negative format, which is >50% larger than the Contax's 6x4.5. I'm using an RZ67 for much of my more stationery shooting these days, but I can't bring myself to part with the Contax. Mine was bought used about 5 yrs ago, but prices have fallen even farther, so it's disappointing to see what bodies, grips, and the basic lenses fetch on the used market. A good time to be a buyer rather than a seller!

The system was discontinued, IIRC, in early 2006. My understanding was that Kyocera or whoever was going to provide service for about ten years. The bodies are both rugged and relatively plentiful and not so expensive, so buying a duplicate for backup or parts would be one strategy. The 45, 80, 120, 140, and 210 are reasonably easy to get; less so, the 35 (awesome lens), 55 (my mainstay when I was shooting the C645 with a Kodak ProBack and its 1.5x crop factor), and 350 (anybody want mine? Seriously!). It's the more esoteric bits that are hard to find; a waist-level finder (which makes little sense, IMO, if you're shooting a rectangular format with a non-rotating back) is a rare and expensive beast.

If you like the format I'd not be put off by the camera's being out of production. I'd recommend the 140mm lens highly for portraiture; I wish I hadn't traded mine away when I acquired the RZ! Best portrait lens I've ever used.

Thanks for the replies. I really can't see any significant downside to the Contax other than that service may be an issue.

Steve, if I can't manage to find a decent used 645, I'll take you up on that Certo Dolly Super Sport

There are vision correction eyepieces for the Hasselblad. I sent them my Rx for glasses and they sent (sold) me the appropriate eyepiece. I don't know if they still do that but it may be worth a call to find out.

jackbaty said:

Thanks for the replies. I really can't see any significant downside to the Contax other than that service may be an issue.

Steve, if I can't manage to find a decent used 645, I'll take you up on that Certo Dolly Super Sport

Click to expand...

The Certo Dolly Super Sport has a mask so you can shoot 6x6 or 645!

Steve

If Contax 645s weren't so rare hereabouts maybe I'd have actually handled one to know what all the fuss is about. They've been on my short list of cameras I'd consider owning someday but mostly on looks and reputation. The 35mm f/3.5 is reputed to be top-notch. The only downside I've heard about them is they burn through 2CR5 non-rechargeable lithium batteries (I once had another camera one that burned through these at $12-14/pop, which I found rather annoying).

When I started shopping for a MF film system a couple of years back Contax gear was still damn expensive. Seeing that eBay was awash in MF gear I was leery of it suddenly depreciating. Contax bodies were going for 3X-4X the price I paid for my Pentax 645N. The major functional difference between them is the pathway to digital, but I really didn't give a hoot about that. On balance it turned out to be a terrific decision. Hard to imagine the Contax Zeiss 35mm f/3.5 at 5X the cost being more spectacular than what I am already seeing with my sub $300 Pentax SMC-A 35mm f/3.5. (What I am seeing is close to film limited resolution.)

The Contax is a fantastic camera but the AF sucks - I used one for some time but actually could not ever really warm up to it as I was so used to my other cameras - I bought it hoping for the AF to allow me to shoot a little more action oriented stuff but found that I manually focused anyway.

As for the used market - these things still bring big bucks in the US, maybe even more than a year ago. There are a lot of high end film wedding people that love the things and are always buying them.

Someone else mentioned the Bronica ETR - very similar handling and a quick wind grip that is fantastic -these things are a bargain and the lens system is really good.

One thing that may not have crossed your mind is the Hasselblad H1 or H2 bodies - I see these things go for a song (the same or less than the Contax) in a lot of cases. Of course no digital back but better AF (the H3 and H4 are superior). All of them handle very similar to the Contax and all are easily repaired, etc.

RB

Ps. Yes you can shoot film with the H series and yes the Fuji lenses are very very very good (esp the 100)

It´s the AF that eats the batteries. I always use mine on MF, and the batteries last for ages.
The 35 mm lens is great, and the 120mm Macro Planar is wickledly sharp. They are the ones I use the most, followed by the 80 mm Planar.
I´m still trying for bird shots with the 350 mm + 1.4 TC - not much success so far! That´s when a better AF might be useful.

Pete