The first two cost around $1500US on eBay now and the ArcBody with the 45mm lens is ~$4500US. Recommendations?
Last edited:
The question is what do you want to achieve with it? The 1.4 TS and the 50 mm will give you a standard focal length. The ArcBody lenses are mostly wide angles with 75 mm as the top of the line. So if you need wider angles and shift
capability, there seems no way around the ArcBody within the Hasselblad system. If you want to use standard and tele lenses, the TS-converter is the way to go. If you´re mainly interested in tilt, I would vote for the Flexbody anyway. No additional lenses, no image degradation whatever so slightly.
What you also may consider is a view camera adaptor for Hasselblad-Backs. At least if you already own a 4x5 camera. This would offer you tilt and shift options in abundance, open up a vast array of lenses and may also be cheaper than the ArcBody.
The adaptors I know of are for digital backs, so no mechanism to transport the film. One would need to put the darkslide into the film back after every shot, then mount it to a Hasselblad, fire a shot with lenscap on, wind on and put it back to the 4x5 camera. A cumbersome procedure, but a "cheap" solution if you only need to take a tilt/shift picture occasionally. The highly praised Rodenstock lenses go for less than half the price without the Hasselblad trademark and can be found more plentiful too.
I can't really see the utility of being able to use 150 and 250mm lenses with tilt and shift (weird planes of focus and telephoto subjects just don't seem to go together in my mind, but I'm happy to be re-educated if I'm missing something obvious.) The Mutar will make everything 1.4x longer, so only the 50mm would end up like a 'normal' lens, and the others short teles. If it's a similar price, and (dare I say it?) more flexible, with both tilt and shift, the Flexbody looks like the better choice. You could certainly get a 4x5 view camera for less, but it would be more of a pain to carry than the Flexbody, and you'd be adding the cost of lenses (need not be expensive), film holders, new developing gear and so on. But there is one thing to remember, the majority of view camera photos are taken without movements. They allow clever tricks, and certainly for architecture are needed, but most of the time view cameras are just used as straight cameras, and it's the large negative that justifies using them. It would be a shame to buy a Flexbody and find yourself using it only rarely. I suppose you could treat a Flexbody the same way, using it for non-movement photos, but the inconvenience of ground glass focusing then putting the film back on for every photo means you'd still want to carry the V series around too. I don't think any of the main camera rental businesses offer them so it has to be a leap in the dark I'm afraid!
I can't really see the utility of being able to use 150 and 250mm lenses with tilt and shift (weird planes of focus and telephoto subjects just don't seem to go together in my mind, but I'm happy to be re-educated if I'm missing something obvious.
"It would be a shame to buy a Flexbody and find yourself using it only rarely." And that is my concern exactly.
You know what it does, you know what a rigid Hasselblad V body does not do and that is allow you to tilt the film plane to get more in focus at a more optimum aperture and utilize a bit of shift to keep things from key-stoning.
I did a shot at an old whaling station in the Faroe Islands of an oil holding tank with my 180mm on the Flex. The part I wanted to photograph was about 7 feet above me so I used a good amount of shift with my 180mm to get it in check.
For me personally I use the Flexbody on more than half my shots, I am glad I own two of them for when one is tied up on a 12 hour long commitment in a sunset / sunrise double exposure.
You either need what it offers or you don’t, pretty simple really.
Then you probably don’t need an Arcbody - it’s basically a mini view camera with limited movements. It has a generous amount of shift and is good for architectural type photography. I love mine but I like the Horseman SW612P a lot more.I have two 4"x5" cameras and have only used front shift an experiment photographing up at a church to take out the distortion so I could see how to do it. One photograph. Period.
Then you probably don’t need an Arcbody - it’s basically a mini view camera with limited movements. It has a generous amount of shift and is good for architectural type photography. I love mine but I like the Horseman SW612P a lot more.
With either the flexbody or arcbody there are no external viewfinders for them and you have to compose/focus with the ground glass adapter - at least with the Mutar you can use it with a 500 series SLR body.
Have you considered a real view camera and roll film back? Might do what you want and be more versatile.
Well… I don’t know about “less money”… it’s just as easy to spend more money than expected on LF gear.
I have a 4"x5"Graflex Model D and a 4"x5" Pacemaker Speed Graphic. Neither of which have appreciable movements and are not as easy to move around as a FlexBody.
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?