Contax645 or Hasselblad503CW?

<p>Hi everyone,<br>

I am going to buy a 120 camera, but I have gotten some confusions about the camera, which one should I buy? Is contax645 or Hasselblad 503CW? I know the film-format is different between the two cameras, But it is not a matter which I concerned. I just want to know which one could give me a better image quality, product quality, and aslo suitable to travel. I do not want to regret after buying. <br>

PS: I am not willing to use tripod. I am not willing to use electronics.<br>

Thanks in advance<br>

<blockquote>I am not willing to use tripod</blockquote>

<p>Why not?</p>

<blockquote>I am not willing to use electronics.</blockquote>

<p>Why not?<br>

If you can't live with anything other than a fully-mechanical camera then forget the Contax. If you can get past this restriction then my suggestion would be to rent both systems and try them out. Only then will you know which works best for you.</p>

(Bear in mind, however, that only the Hasselblad is still in production)

<p>No electronics = no Contax 645.</p>

<p>Image quality?</p>

<p>If you crop to a square, the Hasselblad will prevail (50% more image area). If you crop to 4:3 proportions, they will be equal. If you don't use a tripod, image quality is a moot point. You will get blurry pictures due to camera shake, no better than 35mm, just less grain. Both cameras use Zeiss lenses, but that won't help you.</p>

<p>Medium format photography costs three times as much as 35mm - gear, materials and time. There is an advantage, but only if you take extraordinary precautions to obtain it.</p>

<p><em>"not willing to use tripod"</em><br>

These two camera are not for you!</p>

<p>You can shoot both cameras without a tripod, but only the Hasselblad is mechanical one of the two listed.<br>

But as stated to get the full advantages that the format has to offer, you will sometimes need a tripod.<br>

Also as stated the Hasselblad s still in production , and you will find a lot more equipment available because of a lot longer production run, 1948 till now.<br>

I am biased because I now shoot with Hasselblad, but I'm sure the Contax is a fine camera. But I too switched from a Mamiya 6X45 to Hasselblad in 1980 get rid of electronic issues.<br>

I have no regrets and love the square images, and never have to rotate the camera, images are great, if I do my part.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I just picked up a mamiya rb67 sd-pro kit for less than a hasse. <br>

It's bigger and heavier, but also fully mechanical. Note: The RZ67 requires batteries whereas the RB does not. </p>

 

<p>Ryan have you shot the RB hand held yet? Just asking......</p>

Contax is out of business. Trying to get parts will get less and less. As far as lens quality they are both Zeiss lenses. Can't be beat.

<p>Shen,</p>

<p>I believe that you sum it the best.<br>

PS: I am not willing to use tripod. I am not willing to use electronics.</p>

<p>That said, I have both cameras and use both when I'm traveling. For all intent, if you are single the weight will NOT matter.<br>

For me, I have to travel with my family, so weight is of the up most importance to me.<br>

What is your overall general purpose for a 120 camera? Is it for travel or candid photos or simple snapping?</p>

<p>I found that with square, I can limit my lenses to either a 60mm and a 120mm. Or even a 50mm & 100mm.<br>

WLF, Minolta Flash Meter and one back ONLY. I will use my digital camera for the other candid photos.<br>

Traveling with the Contax 645, I love the electronics, but hate to hunt for batteries and also question many of the oversea electrical outlet (countryside of Asia) With the Contax I carry just the 45mm & 80mm. Anything else is of course weight dependent.<br>

With the Hasselblad and its leaf shutters you will not have to use a tripod, but it is prefer if you like razor sharp photos. Otherwise use the neck strap to your advantage to help steady your photo taking session.<br>

The bottom line would be how much you want to carry and if weight is of any importance to you. Both camera system have their Pros & Cons and both use Zeiss optics.<br>

Evan</p>

<p>If you want medium format and do not want to use either electronics or a tripod, then there are only TLR (twin lens reflex) cameras to consider.</p>

<p>I suggest a Rolleiflex 2.8F. This has optics to match the mentioned cameras, but they are fixed lens - so only one of them.</p>

<p>The reason that i dont want to use electronics, because the battery problems, and the prices of the second-hands electronics usually drop down very quickly, you will lost money if you buy a new one. even more, Contax has out of business, it will be very hard to find a customer-services. Beside that, The lens of Contax645 have made in Japan, they are not original in blood. I belive the best lens should be made in Germany. However, The hass also have some problems, they have high repair rate, I always hear someone's hass was out of work, but very rare in Contax645. Thus, it has made me very confused to choose.</p>

<p>Shen,</p>

<p>All camera system will have some level of repair when the time comes. If a camera is left sitting around, thew lube dries up.</p>

<p>Contax/Yashica equipment and especially their optics are very good and they are favored just as well as Leica optics and Zeiss optics form Germany. I never heard any complaints when Contax/Yashica was still in business. Don't forget that the optical design for the newer Zeiss optics had to be redesign for the arsenic and lead free formula Also with Kyocera pulling out of the camera business, Zeiss had a good opportunity to redesign the lenses to bring them up to date.<br>

As for Customer Service, I guess that you are located in Asia (Hong Kong?), Kyocera will repair all Contax 645 equipment and they simply do not lack the parts as they have plenty in supply. I had send my entire system to them from the USA and have been very happy with their level of work.<br>

As for battery issues with the Contax 645, use rechargeable batteries OR buy a Quantum Battery pack as an alternate power source.These concerns should not really affect your choices of equipment. All equipment will require some level of CLA during their lifetime. Once done, they will provide many years of service.<br>

Your concerns are being taken to the extreme, as most used equipment purchased privately will always require a good CLA. If you purchase it from a reliable and honest second hand camera shop, I would tend to believe that they will stand behind their sales. The final choice would of course be up to you. Both system have their Pros and Cons and I use both of them. They serve different purposes for my needs.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>This thing about tripods is a little dogmatic. May people out there, including me, travel with MF cameras and don't use tripods. For one thing, some people simply have steadier hands. For another, the cameras are heavier, which means more interia. My Bronica has a huge mirror slap, and I get very sharp photos at daylight speeds--shake is very rarely a problem. In fact, I have more problems hand-holding 35mm. All things being equal, an print of a given size has been enlarged to a LESSER degree than a smaller format, and any shake will be less obvious--just like the grain.</p>

<p>Dear Evan,<br>

Thanks for your pefessional respond. You have done a excellent work and I really get a lot of values from your answers. It's very kind of you!<br />I think I have a idea of what i am going to buy.</p>

<p>Shen,</p>

<p>In the end, whatever system you choose will serve your needs and purpose. I'm guessing that you are still shooting film. Whichever system you choose, there will be a digital option. It would depend if you feel you can justify the cost for your needs. If you are making money from your system, I would go for the one that will serve you best.<br>

I was at that same junction you were at. I choose the Hasselblad for its pure mechanics and i would use a good light meter. For automation, any of the other 645 system such as Mamiya 645AF II, Pentax 645N or Nii, Hasselblad H series, and Contax 645. <br>

I choose the Contax 645 mainly for the Zeiss optics and also with the ability to use my Hasselblad optics with the MAM-1 adapter. That way I can expand on the optic choices. You can buy the Pentacon 6 to Contax 645 adapter and Zoerkendorfer makes a Mamiya 645 optics to Contax 645 body adapter.<br>

Good luck on whatever you choose. You will enjoy both of your choices either way.</p>

<p>If you want to avoid using a tripod then the choice is simple: Contax 645. I have shot the Contax as well as a Hasselblad (203FE) for a number of years, so I have some experience of both systems. The Contax has a much softer "mirror slap" than Hassy, plus it has autofocus. The Hassy really is a tripod camera - you need to use mirror pre-release with any shutter speeds longer than say 1/125s, to be on the safe side (I would even say 1/250s, that is with the 80mm lens). Also focusing the Hassy needs more care and takes longer. Today, the only reason to go for a "V" series Hassy is if you really want to shoot 6x6 film (and that may be a very good and strong reason....and in my view the format choice is a key point on which you need to decide). The Contax is an "electronic" camera and it does eat batteries like there is no tomorrow (but you can get the bigger grip that takes AA batteries, incl. rechargeables). But its ergonomics are superb - no menus and silly buttons, just good old dials. The Contax is also a better choice if you want to upgrade to a digi back at some point, in my view (better electronics integration, autofocus). The lenses are superb on both systems and in plentiful and affordable supply on the famous auction site and at good s/h dealers.</p>

<p>I have owned both cameras. In fact I sold the Contax in favour of the Hassy which I still got. For me, the Hassy 503CW is a much nicer camera; it is an all mechanical camera, no electronics (just for ttl-flash), wider selection of lenses, tougher body, etc.</p>

<p>I guess all of the known <strong><em>(experts)</em> </strong>have spoken so now its up to you to decide........</p>

 

<p>If you want to shoot hand-held, consider one of the Pentax 645 cameras. The mirror is extremely smooth, so smooth in fact that the original 645 and 645N models lack mirror-lockup as it simply is not needed for most situations. See http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/645-mlu.shtml. This makes the Pentax much more suitable for handholding than other cameras which suffer more from mirror slap. The Pentax 645 models are electronic cameras, but they run on common AA batteries so will be easy to replace when travelling. Pentax 645 lenses are also very good.</p>

<p>I too have been using a Pentax 645N, with a SMC-A 35mm f/3.5, for a couple of years now. I'm quite happy with it for shooting MF while actively XC skiing, snowshoeing, and hiking, and can routinely achieve sharp images to 1/15s, and sometimes a stop slower, handheld. These speeds are down in the realm where subject motion and wind is more of a bar to critical sharpness than lack of a tripod. Increase mass helps greatly with handholding. I have been shooting professionally for nearly 3 decades however, and your mileage may vary. <br>

Shooting in cloudy-bright conditions, just about anyone could achieve tack-sharp images handheld with a 645 or a 2-1/4 SLR. Most MF cameras were designed to be used handheld, for event photography by professionals, though they were most often used with fill or main flash. Sunsets and sunrises, macros, or near-far deep focus compositions under a forest canopy will call for the use of a tripod, or a fencepost, or hiking staff, or bean bag and or a cable release-- especially since there aren't the choices of films with higher ISO speeds as in years past.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I have both systems, and I like both.<br>

I think the most important decision between the two systems would be:<br>

1. Lens quality: For what I know, the overall they are on par, althopugh Contax is in general 1 stop faster.<br /> For me the importan lenses are:<br>

-- Contax 35mm vs. Hasselblad 40mm IF.<br>

-- Contax 45mm vs. Hasselblad 50mm FLE<br>

-- Contax 80mm vs. Hasselblad 80mm<br>

-- Contax 120mm or 140mm vs. Hasselblad 180mm<br>

-- Contax 350mm vs. Hasselblad 350mm or 500mm Tele-Apotessar (the newest version).<br>

2. Price: if you consider the 2nd market for both, they are very close.<br>

3. Auto-focus or manual focus: Here Contax has a little advantage. <br /> To me Hasselblad's manual focus is fast and accurate, even for my middle age vision.<br /> The advantage of auto-focus shows only in candite shooting, where auto-focus makes it intrusive.<br>

4. Square format vs. 645 format:<br>

You said you don't care the format, but trust me, once you used the Hasselblad you will care.<br /> This issue has several faces:<br>

a. Composition preference:<br /> All my friends who own the Hasselblad admit it's extremely hard to shoot non-square once get poisoned.<br /> b. Shooting veritical with digital back:<br /> You'll rotate the back on Hasselblad but rotate the camera on Contax.<br /> tryst me again, This is a big deal.<br /> c. Waist level finder vs. eye level finder:<br /> Due to the 645 format, Contax's waist level finder is essentially useless. You'll always use the prism finder.<br /> With Hasselblad, you probably will use waist level finder all the time, with the trouble of external light meter.<br>

5. Battery: Yes, Contax is relying on the battery, but I find the batter L-grip is pretty good, not a problem at all.<br /> Hasselblad can be free of battery, of course.<br /><br /> 6. Film holder precision: Hasselblad's flim flatness and precision seems not as robust as Contax.<br /> So, make sure you get a good Hasselblad film back, it must have the matching insert.<br>

7. Availability and maintainance: Yes, Contax is discontinued, but I don't think Hasselblad V is much better.<br /> If this really bothers you, get two Contax bodies, two Contax film backs.<br>

E.S</p>

<p> </p>