Why is Hasselblad so overrated?

[Deleted member 88956]

... or underrated?

Referring to a recent post elsewhere, it depends which dentist you ask.

 

[voceumana]

Hasselblad is a "system" camera--if you need a certain accessory, Hasselblad was sure to have made it, and they offered excellent lenses. Makes for a strong choice in a professional camera. I think they are neither overrated nor underrated. They have a good reputation for what they are.

 

[MamiyaBronica]

I always thought they were prescribed as tools. Nobody I knew who was an amateur photographer had one. There were cheaper medium-format options for them.

In the late 80s to late 90s, I remember courses (that were very expensive to take) that taught wedding and event photography almost always prescribed a lens-shutter Hasselblad. People taking those courses often were not photography amateurs and signed up for whatever kit was available at a discount for taking the course - It always seemed to be a 'blad kit with some sort of Broncolor lighting rig and a Metz potato masher. It even included a metal brief case to hold it all - and all the pros seemed to have them! If you tried to talk to them about technology or the intricacies of film types, they'd blow you off because they had everything they needed to get professional results and didn't care about experimenting! Most of them did very, very good work, but it was all very repetitive and nobody was really pushing any envelopes creatively in those years.

In those days, I shot mostly 35mm as a hobby, and had a couple nice camera (OM-4 and Yashica 124G) and used to work for company that made little video tapes or audio tapes of the kids singing to their favourite songs. I got to stand around a lot at events, weddings and barmitzvahs and watch them work. The pro-toggers always had a 'blad with them - although a few did carry RZ67 cameras towards the late 90s - maybe they had different teachers?

 

[Kyle M.]

I think a lot of the hype comes from the fact that it was the first successful 6x6 SLR and it was also very high quality with excellent lenses. I owned a 500C for awhile and it was a nice camera but I honestly preferred my Bronica SQ-A, which is odd because I normally try to avoid electronic cameras. I know it's irrational but I tend not to trust them even though I've never had one let me down. I suppose if the two were the same price I'd go for the Hasselblad. But at the time in 2015 I paid $600 for a 500C body, 80mm C lens, and A12 back. In 2018 I paid $300 for my SQ-A body, back, and 80mm, I don't really regret selling the Hasselblad but I regret selling the SQ-A.

 

[DonW]

Don't feed the trolls.

 

[MattKing]

The entire system was high in quality.
The cameras were well supported if you were a professional, including by leasing companies.
The square format and matched pro lab masking systems made it possible to be very efficient if you had a busy wedding and portrait business, or a busy mid-level commercial photography business.
The leaf shutter lenses made fill flash work a practical option, which in turn resulted in easy to print negatives that were easy to turn into pleasing and saleable prints.
And this may seem counter-intuitive to some, but the system was designed to be easily maintained through regular service. Pros knew to budget for service if they used Hasselblad equipment, and in return they got consistent, high quality results.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

The Hassie had higher quality than other 6x6's.

 

[MattKing]

The Hassie had higher quality than other 6x6's.

The Rollei fans would probably disagree.
And even back when I sold both in a camera store, I definitely preferred the Mamiya C330 I still own to the Hasselblads.
I'll agree that Hasselblads had/have high quality, but it was the comprehensiveness of the system and the pro-level support that one could access (at a cost) if one made their living with their cameras that made the difference.
In certain markets, Mamiya had similar level services available to pros, and the RB67/RZ67 was very popular with pros in those markets.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

The Rollei fans would probably disagree.
And even back when I sold both in a camera store, I definitely preferred the Mamiya C330 I still own to the Hasselblads.
I'll agree that Hasselblads had/have high quality, but it was the comprehensiveness of the system and the pro-level support that one could access (at a cost) if one made their living with their cameras that made the difference.
In certain markets, Mamiya had similar level services available to pros, and the RB67/RZ67 was very popular with pros in those markets.

Aren't Rollei's and C330's twin lens while Hassies and Mamiya RB67's are SLR's. I was only comparing SLRs in MF. I have an RB67. I like its 6x7 format over Hassie square. The Hassie is lighter being square. The body and lens can be smaller. RB67's are beasts. So if you wanted a lighter camera to do weddings or run around, a Hassie is easier.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Hasselblad is a "system" camera--if you need a certain accessory, Hasselblad was sure to have made it, and they offered excellent lenses. Makes for a strong choice in a professional camera. I think they are neither overrated nor underrated. They have a good reputation for what they are.

The entire system was high in quality.
The cameras were well supported if you were a professional, including by leasing companies.
The square format and matched pro lab masking systems made it possible to be very efficient if you had a busy wedding and portrait business, or a busy mid-level commercial photography business.
The leaf shutter lenses made fill flash work a practical option, which in turn resulted in easy to print negatives that were easy to turn into pleasing and saleable prints.
And this may seem counter-intuitive to some, but the system was designed to be easily maintained through regular service. Pros knew to budget for service if they used Hasselblad equipment, and in return they got consistent, high quality results.

The Hassie had higher quality than other 6x6's.

Hasselblad was the first camera system. One which until the end of production was fully upward and downward compatible. Bronica was quick to follow, then later Nikon started its system with the Nikon F.

 

[removedacct1]

#trollfood

 

[MattKing]

Aren't Rollei's and C330's twin lens while Hassies and Mamiya RB67's are SLR's. I was only comparing SLRs in MF.

Well, you didn't say you were only referring to SLRs .
But even if you were, there certainly were pros who preferred the Rollieflex SL66 SLR, as there were pros who used Rolleiflex TLRs as well as pros who used Mamiya TLRs.
All were/are very high quality.

 

[MattKing]

Matt, why are Hasselblad lenses are two-three times the weight vs comparable Mamiya TLR lenses? I am astonished by how heavy my CF glass is.

Because of the need to have more retrofocus designs for the shorter lenses (due to the viewing mirror), relatively large apertures for focal length's other than 80mm and, most important, the need to incorporate a focusing helical in each lens.
The Mamiya TLR puts the focusing bellows in the camera instead.
The need to incorporate more complex interfaces between the lens/shutter combinations and the bodies probably factors in as well.
Mamiya TLRs are remarkably simple, compared to a Hasselblad.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

OP reminds me proletariat trolling Leica.
Film Hassie, just as film Leica are cute and with nice rendering lenses.
Where are two lovely medium format cameras. Hassie and Rollei. The rest are just tools.

 

[markjwyatt]

Hasselblad was the first camera system. One which until the end of production was fully upward and downward compatible. Bronica was quick to follow, then later Nikon started its system with the Nikon F.

Maybe the first "medium format" camera system? I think Exakta preceded them in 35mm (maybe Contax, too).

 

[voceumana]

As an interesting, I think, side note: I was on a business trip to Taiwan, and after business got to do a little touring. At one stop we walked along a street that obviously was where the wedding photographer's had their studios--each studio had sample of their work in their showroom windows. The photos had some characteristics that would not have been acceptable for US wedding photographs, including rather blown out highlights. I suspect this was a cultural matter.

I suspect the photographer's who choose Hasselblad, Rollei, Mamiya, or Bronica do so because they perform mechanically and optically to fit their photographic style.

 

[mshchem]

The aesthetic of a Hasselblad in its simplest form is a modern 20th century work of art. The way it lies in your hand, it's just perfect. I have RZ67 II setup as well. To make a 7x7 camera requires almost a doubling in size and weight. I love both my RZ and my blads . Simple, elegance.

 

[polka]

Because of the need to have more retrofocus designs for the shorter lenses (due to the viewing mirror), relatively large apertures for focal length's other than 80mm and, most important, the need to incorporate a focusing helical in each lens.
The Mamiya TLR puts the focusing bellows in the camera instead.
The need to incorporate more complex interfaces between the lens/shutter combinations and the bodies probably factors in as well.
Mamiya TLRs are remarkably simple, compared to a Hasselblad.

There are also SLRs answering these issues : the first Zenza Bronicas up to the S2 and EC systems. However, they have focal plane shutters, not suited for fill-in flash (but SLRs are better suited for macro etc. ponder your needs)
POLKa

 

[mshchem]

 

[Lachlan Young]

Hasselblads have some quirks, some of which are irritating facts of life of their system design. But the lenses, even though some designs are well past the half century mark, are still exceptional - with the distinctive Zeiss MTF behaviour that everyone else has ended up having to chase after. The two biggest reasons to buy a Hasselblad are the exceptional optical family, and the very well made & fully mechanical operation system of most of the bodies (apart from the more electronic focal plane ones) which helps offer a better degree of future-proofing than myriad PCBs & ICs.

 

[macfred]

Peace man !

Reinhold Heidecke and Victor Hasselblad taking pictures of each other.

 

[Neil Grant]

Because of the need to have more retrofocus designs for the shorter lenses (due to the viewing mirror),

...the Mamiya wide-angle TLR lenses are 'retrofocus', but not due to mirror-clearance requirements. The position of the light baffle, when raised, is the reason. Take a look at the 65mm schematic. It's very similar to other early, retrofocus lenses like the Nikon 28mm f/3.5, Nikon 5cm for Bronica, Takumar 35mm.

 

[Craig75]

Don't feed the trolls.

Too late. The line has been cast and the fish are taking the bait.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Don't feed the trolls.

Would you mind expanding on your valuable post?

 

[AgX]

Referring to a recent post elsewhere, it depends which dentist you ask.

As I said in that other thread, I never heard cameras as such been related to dentists, let alone a Hasselblad as common saying.

Moreover, I always saw Hasselblads as cameras for commercial use, and read most of the respective advertizing in this way. All owners of Hasselblads I know are professional photographers, who kept it for sentimental reason.

Maybe I missed something back then, maybe the west-german situation was different from the US one. It would be interesting to have customer-related sales-figures. The photo sales guys I know are too young to know.

We got former sales guys here from both sides of the ocean, having sold to consumers and professionals, may be they know more about that.