Where do I start on medium format?

blad 500C(M), def!

you'll find a body, back & lens for €500! you will!
i got one for €600 and haven't regretted it for one sec (original budget was < 500).

mm

I'll stretch the budget for a 'blad, but the eur->aud conversion is a killer right now!

But if you know of one for €500, quit holding out and share the info

postalman said:

And vpwphoto, if the decision were easy I would have made it already! If only I could find a mint 500cm system for $500... *sigh*

Click to expand...

I want a $12,000 Maserati Quattroporte with low miles and somehow gets 35 mpg.

I started with a 500cm setup. body wlf a12 80 2.8.

Yesterday I was 90% sure that maybe the 500cm with the standard a12, 80/2.8 would be the way to go. I had initially dismissed it as being too expensive but some searching found them for around $800+s/h, which is more reasonable for a 'blad (but too much for a bronica). But then I read more about the 500 and I have my doubts about the mechanical leaf shutter calibration and jamming, and its inability to do multiple exposure (easily).

I realise the weakness with the SQ-A is that no-one repairs them, but the bodies are so cheap I think I can live with that. I just wish they were as pretty as the Hasselblads. It's like '90s toyota vs '60s jag. The SQ's are newer and seem to be less jam prone/ require less maintenance, but they're all electronic and pig-ugly with no style.

Try PENTAX 67 Large Field, Used Cameras are less expensive. The Lens can be used on the the other formats and other Brands.
I have Used the PENTAX 67 Twenty Five Years. The Results are hard to match by any standard. Check Out My Images With
A Google Image search American Photographer Mark Fisher or American Beauty Photographer Mark Fisher.

postalman said:

Yesterday I was 90% sure that maybe the 500cm with the standard a12, 80/2.8 would be the way to go. I had initially dismissed it as being too expensive but some searching found them for around $800+s/h, which is more reasonable for a 'blad (but too much for a bronica). But then I read more about the 500 and I have my doubts about the mechanical leaf shutter calibration and jamming, and its inability to do multiple exposure (easily).

I realise the weakness with the SQ-A is that no-one repairs them, but the bodies are so cheap I think I can live with that. I just wish they were as pretty as the Hasselblads. It's like '90s toyota vs '60s jag. The SQ's are newer and seem to be less jam prone/ require less maintenance, but they're all electronic and pig-ugly with no style.

Click to expand...

Beauty is skin deep. Bronicas are a great deal tougher than the urban legends about their fragility imply. Just make sure you get an SQ-Ai or SQ-B; SQ-As are getting very old. As for repairs, Koh's still does 'em:

http://kohscamera.com/repair.htm

The "style" concerns are irrelevant. Just don't end up like some digruntled hipster friends with busted old 'Blads they can't afford to get fixed. Same goes for those '60s Jags.

postalman said:

Yeah, portability >> horizontal film spool.

Click to expand...

That tends to be true if you mean which way the film spool itself lies, but not if you are talking about which way the film moves through the camera. Pentax 6x7, Kiev, Exacta, etc. = big. All have horizontal film movement/vertical spools. Mamiya 645, Pentax 645, Hassy, Bronica 645 and 6x6, etc. = more portable. All have vertical film movement/horizontal spools.

The blad lenses can be "used" up and been through many hands. My shutter gave me trouble after 15 years... I bought it new.
I liked the idea of the Bronica having an electric brain to regulate the lens shutters.
Buying a Blad on-line would be a chore... there are lot's of tell tales to use and abuse that can be examined with camera in hand.
I wouldn't worry too much about the 500 bodies, it's the lenses that can have most issues with the shutters wearing out.
80mm and 150's are the most used Blad lenses.
I always thought if I had to just have two lenses I would go with the 60 and 120.. of course those are high dollar lenses more so than the 80 and 150.

CGW said:

Beauty is skin deep. Bronicas are a great deal tougher than the urban legends about their fragility imply.

Click to expand...

I have used them both.... and don't get too caught up in hyperbole of advertising...
But the Bronica system would have been used up two or tree times over with what I put my 500 and 3 lenses through. I don't own or desire to own a full size 4wd truck... but there are situations where one is required or it is at least prudent to have one.

CGW said:

Beauty is skin deep. Bronicas are a great deal tougher than the urban legends about their fragility imply. Just make sure you get an SQ-Ai or SQ-B; SQ-As are getting very old. As for repairs, Koh's still does 'em:

http://kohscamera.com/repair.htm

The "style" concerns are irrelevant. Just don't end up like some digruntled hipster friends with busted old 'Blads they can't afford to get fixed. Same goes for those '60s Jags.

Click to expand...

I agree. The Bronica SQ series = 95 percent of a Hasselblad's capability, at a significantly lower price. They are both good cameras. Hassy better? Sure. But mostly in terms of build quality, not in terms of what you can do with it photographically. And how much money is the betterness worth? Don't get me wrong. I think Hasselblads are generally preferable, and worth the money...but only if you have the money. For those who have a lower budget, the Bronicas are a great system, and I'd have no second thoughts about investing in one.

Man, you guys aren't making this decision any easier...

What is the consensus on CGW's advice to avoid the SQ-A all together and get an SQ-Ai if I go the bronica route? The extra $150 for the Ai body would put it in 'blad territory.

Also, how hard is it to do multi exposure with the 500cm? If it requires removing and reattaching the back, does the film go back in exactly the same position? One thing I do want to try with film is multi-exposure with compositional elements fixed between each exposure, which sounds like it's hard to do if I have to remove the back.

And how often does the shutter in the 500 actually jam? I've seen articles about how to un-jam it, but is it common? like greater than 1:1000 exposures or less? I'm not willing to pay extra for something unbreakable if it still jams every 20 rolls.

2F/2F, can you please elaborate on what the 500cm can do that the SQ-A can't? I honestly thought the feature list was longer for the SQ, maybe with a reduction in robustness and no Zeiss lenses.

Thanks again for all the advice

With regards to multiple exposure on a 500CM (or any other Hasselblad V camera) the process is:
1. take photo
2. put dark slide in
3. take back off
4. wind camera to cock shutter and return mirror
5. put back on
6. take dark slide off
7. repeat for as many exposures you want

I don't consider this an issue as I've made maybe 3 multi-exposures ever and the first one was just to try it out. Obviously if you shoot a handful of such shots every week then you should seriously consider a proper multi-exposure camera. It is not just inconvenient to do such action on the 500CM but in the end you put the slide in/out and the back on/off all the time, wearing down the light traps and the back latch and you're also much more likely to drop something if you're constantly fiddling it.

As for which Bronica to buy, I'd say the newer the better (as with everything). Here's the timeline for Bronicas
http://tamron-usa.com/bronica/sq_guide.asp

You can also consider the SQB, which is the newest, if you're not going to want a metered prism. I don't know what the prices are like there but a SQ-B in the UK is almost half the money of an SQ-Ai, yet the SQB is newer. Also, a SQ-Ai is nearly the same money as a good condition 500CM.

Regarding what the 500CM (and any other 'blad) cannot do vs the SQAi:
The 500CM won't couple with metered prism (you can use one but there is no automation)
The 500CM has no motorised winder
The 500CM doesn't do multi-exposures
The 500CM doesn't have 135 backs (if you're into that thing)
If you want a grip, the 500CM has a left-hand grip for the shutter and you then wind with your right hand using the body crank. The SQ has a right hand grip with a crank to wind the film making holding and handling as a large 35mm SLR.

On the plus side the 500CM will:
Take Zeiss lenses which may or may not be of tangible difference to you
Work without batteries, which is either an advantage (it just works!) or a disadvantage (the lenses will eventually need servicing after a number of years)

Reliability? Don't know. I've had two old Bronica lenses go bad on me. I've had an even older Hasselblad back needing repair. Is that a draw? Bad luck? One vs the other? I'd say they both look and feel like they'll last many years so I wouldn't consider this an issue. These are both old cameras, decades old, so expect some servicing to be needed in the long term.

I also find the Hasselblad design much nicer to hold and see and use, but that is obviously of no significance whatsoever towards the final image.

Finally, you seriously need to consider your budget. You can get a SQAi or 500CM kit for about the same money. But adding anything after that is VERY EXPENSIVE for the 500CM. I can get SQ backs for £40. A usable 500CM back is at least double that or £150 if you want to be sure it won't need new light traps. Lenses for a 500CM are about £50-100 more expensive when you compare the newest Bronica PS lenses to the oldest Hasselblad C lenses:
A Bronica 150PS is about £150-200.
A 30-40 year old Hasselblad 150C is £200-250.
A slightly newer 150CT* is £250-300.
A more modern 150CF is £400-500.
The current version 150CFi is £900 and more.

I can get a SQB and waist finder, 80PSB, a couple of 120 backs and a 150PS for the price of a 500CM. That's some serious money that can go towards film and processing.

You don't actually need to take the back off the Blad, just tip it back past the gear as you wind, then click it back on.
Never had a lens "jam", I think you are thinking of the winding tools "un jamming tool" sold on the web. I find a US dime works fine too.
This is used when the lens is triggered off the body... usually when extension tubes are removed in the wrong order.

When the lens shutter gives up, it does just that, it gives up... broken done! (Mine after some 1000+ rolls of film and several thousand digital exposures as I have been using a Leaf Aptus back for about 5 years now.

My repair cost me $200 USD from a retired Hasselblad repair man in Wisconsin. It performs as new again.

My kit of some 18 years:
500cm
80 cf
150 cf
50 cf
1.4 Hasselblad converter (can only be used with lenses 100mm and longer).
3, a12 backs
503cs with winder... sold it as I needed a 500 elx to use with a Dicomed Digital System that is long gone.
still have the 500elx... but enjoy the 500 cm more. 500 elx is one quirky camera... seems to like to "sleep" now and then.
Polaroid back

Have borrowed or rented 60mmcf 250mm cf (before I got the converter)
and SuperWide...mmmm nice camera to use for wide work.

I once saw a custom multi exposure back on ePrey for hasselblad V system.
They are few and far between but you could get an a12 modified by a competent 'blad guy Im sure.

As to the shutter jam, this is a contentious subject but it invariable involves some error on the users part.

I did manage to do it once but now that I know the camera it doesn't happen.

All the Zeiss legend is not just idle b/s.
They really are that good.

You can also consider the SQB, which is the newest, if you're not going to want a metered prism. I don't know what the prices are like there but a SQ-B in the UK is almost half the money of an SQ-Ai, yet the SQB is newer. Also, a SQ-Ai is nearly the same money as a good condition 500CM.

The SQ-B typically sold as "budget" kit(body+80/2.8PSB+WLF+120)and many seem to be sold that way now.I didn't find the lack of a metered finder troublesome since I use a handheld meter for all my other MF stuff, whether outdoors or with studio lights. Some dislike the SQ-B for its inability to do "T" or "B" exposures. Multiple exposure and mirror-up shots are no sweat. It's no more plasticky that the SQ-Ai. The speed winder grip is a useful and usually cheap accessory. My only beefs are hard-to-find 120 backs and scarce/pricey lenses beyond the 65mm, 80mm, 150mm(similar issue with Blads beyond the 80mm).I like it for the size/weight savings over my Mamiya RB67 Pro S kit.It was also the newest and most affordable 6x6 option available.Nothing wrong with Bronica glass: both the 80/2.8PSB and older105/3.5S are very sweet, though I don't have any Zeiss to compare 8^)

film_man said:

As for which Bronica to buy, I'd say the newer the better (as with everything). Here's the timeline for Bronicas
http://tamron-usa.com/bronica/sq_guide.asp

You can also consider the SQB, which is the newest, if you're not going to want a metered prism. I don't know what the prices are like there but a SQ-B in the UK is almost half the money of an SQ-Ai, yet the SQB is newer. Also, a SQ-Ai is nearly the same money as a good condition 500CM.

Click to expand...

What you're saying is misleading.
The SQ-B is not the newest, only the latest. Buying an SQ-B does not guarantee a newer camera.
"The newer the better" does not apply reliably in the case of the SQ-B. It did not supersede the SQ-Ai. The SQ timeline you cited describes it as, in essence, a stripped SQ-A, calling it "nearly identical". An SQ-B will be newer than any SQ-Ai built between 1990 and 1996, but there were a lot of both made after that, and individual condition and amount of use will be far more important than the introduction dates of the models, or for that matter, the age of an individual camera. The oldest SQ-Ai is six years older than the oldest SQ-B.
No new SQ series cameras have been made for about seven years. The introduction dates of the two models are now largely irrelevant.

Also: lenses are what constitute the large cost difference between Bronica and Hasselblad, not bodies.

lxdude said:

What you're saying is misleading.
The SQ-B is not the newest, only the latest. Buying an SQ-B does not guarantee a newer camera.
"The newer the better" does not apply reliably in the case of the SQ-B. It did not supersede the SQ-Ai. The SQ timeline you cited describes it as, in essence, a stripped SQ-A, calling it "nearly identical". An SQ-B will be newer than any SQ-Ai built between 1990 and 1996, but there were a lot of both made after that, and individual condition and amount of use will be far more important than the introduction dates of the models, or for that matter, the age of an individual camera. The oldest SQ-Ai is six years older than the oldest SQ-B.
No new SQ series cameras have been made for about seven years. The introduction dates of the two models are now largely irrelevant.

Also: lenses are what constitute the large cost difference between Bronica and Hasselblad, not bodies.

Click to expand...

Unless you have access to a serial #/production date table from Tamron, there's really no certain way of telling how old an SQ-Ai is. With an SQ-B, none are apparently older than early 1996; SQ-Ais go back to late 1990. I think film_man and I were just saying that an SQ-A probably wouldn't be a smart buy unless it was very low mileage.

Yes I meant the SQB is the latest. With regards to the SQA, the SQB is guaranteed to be newer. With regards to the SQAi, without knowing the production runs and serial numbers it could be newer or older than an SQB. The only certainty is:
an SQB is at most 15 years old
an SQAi is at most 21 years old
an SQA is anything from 28 to 21 years old (assuming no production overlap between SQA/SQAi)

I believe Bronica stopped production of everything sometime around 2004...?

This has discontinuation dates.
http://www.tamron.co.jp/en/data/bronica/list_dis.html

lxdude said:

This has discontinuation dates.
http://www.tamron.co.jp/en/data/bronica/list_dis.html

Click to expand...

Now we know. Thanks! Scary to see that my recently-deceased Bronica S got scratched in 1965. Wonder if the descendants will hang on as long?

I've gone away and done some more research, and I have a couple more questions.

I went to my local store to look at some TLR's (they didn't have any), but what they did have was a 2000FCM that was being serviced before being put on the shelf for sale. I did some reading and it looks like the 200 series has all the features I want (except for cheap 2nd and 3rd lenses!) but is a bit out of the price bracket, while the 2000 series seems to be in the price bracket but has the foil shutter curtains.

Is a 2000FCM a mistake? I'm not renowned for being clumsy with my expensive toys. What about a 2000FC if that's all I can find? Worst case, how much would a new shutter cost for one of these if I do manage to stuff it up? Is there anything I should check for in regards to shutter condition?

I was in your shoes awhile ago and did the exact same double-check on the 2000FCM due to the shutter issues one might experience. I came within a nanometer of a 500C but got cold feet.

I then realized that my first foray into MF (and sort of "back to film") would require something more of an investment in 3 lenses (decent glass first) and a decent body, but I did not have to ream in Hasselblad. I'd shoot for the moon later (Mamiya 7, though also came close to buying a body-only locally, but the lens prices made me run away fast).

Finally I just cheaped out and picked up a steal of a deal on a Mamiya 645e and 3 lenses. I need to learn the format and re-learn film before I spend and invest more in the camera itself. Once comfortable with the whole film workflow thing I'll move on up. Or I'll move sideways and pick up a TLR as a 2nd body for a different shooting experience and another format. For me having a starting variety of 3 lenses turned out to be the "let's do this" moment and a path I am very glad I took.

Just another perspective on how to approach this.

Best of luck.

postalman said:

I've gone away and done some more research, and I have a couple more questions.

I went to my local store to look at some TLR's (they didn't have any), but what they did have was a 2000FCM that was being serviced before being put on the shelf for sale. I did some reading and it looks like the 200 series has all the features I want (except for cheap 2nd and 3rd lenses!) but is a bit out of the price bracket, while the 2000 series seems to be in the price bracket but has the foil shutter curtains.

Is a 2000FCM a mistake? I'm not renowned for being clumsy with my expensive toys. What about a 2000FC if that's all I can find? Worst case, how much would a new shutter cost for one of these if I do manage to stuff it up? Is there anything I should check for in regards to shutter condition?

Click to expand...

Yeah, I've thought long and hard about doing it that way (etrs though). The problem is that I really want to get to square format and the etrs isn't compatible with the sq.

And when an sq starter kit is the same price as a 500cm/503cx/2000fcm starter kit, it seems like an obvious choice to get the 2000fcm. But you're absolutely right about the lenses, and on FF digital I exist almost entirely on my sigma 50/1.4 and canon 135/2L, so realistically I'd need a 80 and 200/250. And it's that last lens that is just too darn expensive. So it's down to a choice of solid and widely available, but expensive to upgrade or rare but cheap to upgrade, both costing about the same price. And I still haven't even seen let alone handled an sq.

But the etrs is 1/3 the price of either sq or 2000