Practical difference between alpa 12tc and hassy 903/905

hi all,

In a practical usage sense (and yes, ignoring the price difference) how would using the alpa 12tc and the hassy 903/905 be different?

Shutter speeds will be about the same.

Can get sameish width wide angle lenses for the alpa as the 38 4.5 on the hassy.

Can use more lenses on the alpa.

Ok the film format is different 6x6 compared to 6x9...

What’s the difference in usage and in photo subjects/opportunities then?

The Alpa 12TC is a "technical" camera which can take a variety of film and digital backs, and any lens with a shutter. Schneider makes a series of lenses specifically for a camera of this sort, with enhanced sharpness and corrections. Various modules allow tilt-swing action. In all, the Alpa is the ultimate in flexibility and quality for studio and landscapes. www.Luminous-Landscapes.com has several articles and examples..

The Hasselblad 903 (or SWC) is a dedicated wide angle body. The only lens is a 38 mm Zeiss Biogon (with a shutter). Any back which fits an Hasselblad "V" body will fit the SWC. However the lens is so close to the focal plane that digital backs tend to show severe vignetting, color shifts, and swirly distortion at the edges.

Thanks Ed.

Perhaps i should have elaborated more.

Assume having a lens as close as possible to the 38 SWC biogon for the ALPA (not the boigonon made for the ALPA coz i think only 100 or so were made so, dream on) and a 120 film back on the ALPA (granted the alpa will do 6x7 or 6x9, not sure if it takes a 6x6), what would be the difference in use between the two. Both have distorted viewfinders for framing only and guesstimate (or external rangefinder) scale focusing (unless you opt for a tedious ground glass).

Often you hear of the SWC being used handheld, in fact it seems its more handheld that tripod use whereas the ALPA seems to be made for tripod use. Why? This is the point. They are actually almost identical but have such different intended purposes/ways of use. Why?

The SWC is very popular, but a one-trick pony. Many people say they use Hasselblads of any sort hand-held. My experience is that you might as well be using a box camera, unless you work with a tripod and/or strobes. Hasselblad was my go-to choice for over 15 years for landscapes and portraits, half of that digital. I could count on one hand the times I used it without a tripod. Why bother if you don't want the resolution MF offers?

Neither camera has a viewfinder (other than an optional sports finder). The Alpa has an option of a sliding back, which can server two purposes. Fitted with a ground glass, one side can be used for precision composition and focusing. It can also be used to take two shots which can be stitched into one for panoramas. Most of the illustrations you see of the Alpa show it with a MF back, so 6x6 or smaller is certainly an option.

I for years wanted a SWC or a 40mm Distagon for my 500C/2000FC/M but never bought one. Just too expensive. :( I bought the Mamiya 654 35mm lens and a 1000S body and have used it since 2006. The 35mm lens is really good. Works well and now I take it on my overseas travels and leave the Hasselblads at home. If the Mamiya gets stolen it's far cheaper to replace than the SWC or the 40mm Distagon. And lighter.

The 35mm Mamiya 645 manual focus lens can now be found for under $250.