Why Would ANYONE Want a Hassleblad ?

[jorge_jimenez1]

Question: Why would anyone want a Hassleblad EXCEPT for those

fantastic Zeiss lenses??? I've always wanted an answer because

except for the lenses I just can't think of a compelling argument for

them. Go at it.

[peter_evans4]

Perhaps because a Hasselblad (as I believe it's usually written) is more reliable than other MF cameras for which there are fantastic Zeiss lenses. Also it's quieter than an old Bronica and allows flash at higher speeds. But why do you ask? If you can't think of a compelling reason for spending a pile of money, don't worry about this; instead, congratulate yourself on your good luck and spend it elsewhere, or work less. (Or this is what I always do, but perhaps I'm not a sufficiently obedient and unthinking member of a late-capitalist society.)

[Ed_Ingold]

Hasselblads and yachts - if you have to ask, you can't afford one.

[richard_cochran]

Except for the lenses, Hasselblads are pretty reasonably priced.

Accessories and service are available anywhere, including

virtually every rental counter at a professional photography

store. The cameras are reasonably rugged and reliable.

Ergonomics are good.

<p>

Every camera is a compromise, and Hasselblad is no exception.

You can get more image quality out of a bigger camera, at

the expense of portability. You can get more portability

out of 35mm, at the expense of image quality. You can

get more automation out of some cameras, but Hasselblad

users generally don't use them in situations where they need

the camera to set the focus and exposure.

<p>

But your question seems almost like asking "Except for the

sound quality, why would anybody buy a

Steinway piano?" or "Except for the ruggedness,

why would anybody buy Snap-On tools?" A lot of people

buy Hasselblad to use them with those lenses, and they

don't necessarily need any more justification than that.

[mike_r.1]

I wanted the Zeiss lenses but wondered about whether or not the Hassie system was for me or not; coming as I do from a Nikon F5 and all its baggage. In short I bought a Rollei 6003; which is not for everybody either but I thought was a better fit for me than the Hassie. I do like Hassleblads; but I'm just not sure I could bring myself to buy one even though they can be very reasonable used.

 

HOWEVER, a Hassie is nice & compact; mechanically solid and very precisely assembled. It has a lovely feel in your hands and has a great sound (release & wind). All of which has nothing to do with actually taking pictures; but that's why I would want a Hasselblad.

[cpj]

The Hasselblad is a serious camera for people who are serious about producing high

quality images, composing in the camera, controlling the light and using different

emulsions for different shots---or for the same shot.

 

Touching the last one first, the interchangeable backs add a wide range to your exposure

spectrum. You can go from ISO 50 color transparencies to ISO 800 B&W and back to ISO

200 color negative film, or put on a digital back or Polaroid back if you wish.

 

Generally the Hasselblad is an 85% tripod camera, used by people who want to control

perspective and depth of field through use of the exact lens to shoot a particular image.

 

It is a camera which allows you--even forces you--to think the whole process through

before making the exposure so that your end result comes from a planned effort and not

happenstance. Sometimes you will take 20 to 30 minutes setting up angles, waiting for

the right light, or a cloud to move or a damned horse to turn his head, before making your

first exposure after setting up.

 

Using the Hasseblad is like using 4x5 or larger cameras. The whole "process" is a big part

of the experience. But you have to have a broad knowledge of cameras, lenses, and

emulsions to put the best combination together and produce the results intended. The

Hasselblad is not a "point and shoot" camera. It is a tool to give the photographer as

much control over an image as possible without a rising, falling, shifting, swinging lens

board.

 

It is as different from a 35mm Nikon, Canon or Leica M as those cameras are compared

with the $300 point-and-shoot pocket cameras. If you want to make exhibition sized

prints (20x24 and up) on continuous tone color print paper, then you start with

transparency emulsions and Hasseblad backs and lenses. (The "camera" itself, such as a

503cw, is nothing more than a reflex mirror with a winding crank. The 903 or 905

Superwide doesn't even have the mirror so without the lens and back it is a mounting

platform for a winding mechanism and pretty hard to distinguish as a "camera."

 

Hasselblads, like view cameras, are not for everybody.

[todd_k.]

Since you will most likely never have to replace it, a Hasselblad (referring to the V system) is one of the cheapest cameras you will ever buy. Having said that, if I were in the market again I would get a Rollei SLR ;-)

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

Why a Rollei SLR over a Hasselblad? And which Rollei?

 

Thanks,

Robert

[kelly_flanigan1]

At first many used the Kodak Ektars on the first Hassleblads.

[Aoresteen]

Ergonomics!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

They just fit in your hand. Well made. Interchangeable backs. 70mm film backs. Focal plane shutter models. Leaf shutter models.

 

SLR type.

[christiaan_phleger___honol]

I asked myself the same question, and bought a Rollei. Seriously, I did.

Yes the Hbld was a serious consideration, but the flatter film transport, faster loading and

unloading of the camera, back and insert, the built in matrix, spot and mulit-spot meter,

with the auto expoure (shutter and apeture, as well as both together), shutter speeds

manually set in 1/3 stops down to 30 sec as well as up to 1/1000 (with flash), faster,

easier mirror lock-up, (and instant return mirror!) all set standard (no add-ons for the

above features) in a well designed, sturdy body, along with those fantastic Zeiss lenses as

well as the stellar Schiender lenses,and well gosh, it was Rollei. Never regretted going the

Rollei route, despite the cost, although you can find the deals around right now. It was

worth it to me to get what I believe is a better camera for my uses. A Hasselblad would be

excellent for someone starting in MF and probably be pursuing photography further, with

the prices low and lots of gear around.

 

Its like driving a 1974 Volvo versus a 2000+ BMW.

They both gettcha where ya wanna go.

[carl_glover]

I used to own Hasselblads but I fell out of love with them when BOTH bodies started

misbehaving on a crucial shoot. Luckily I had my Plaubel Makina around to just about

scrape through. I didn't want to get a third body so I started looking around...

 

I use a Rollei now. I like 1000th of a second with the PQS lenses. I like the fast

Schneider lenses and I love the Zeiss 110 f2 lens that the blad also has. I've used it in

deserts, construction sites, rock concerts and on mountains, at sea and in freezing

conditions. It has not let me down. I have a spare body. Just make sure that you have

a spare battery or two as well.

 

It's not perfect but I prefer it to the more handsome Hasselblad easily. I have to have

equipment I can trust.

[steven_roberts1]

While working as a photographer in the Royal Australian Airforce in the 90's I used a Hasselblad 2000fcw and 500c/m constantly. They were used regularly to photograph events and items that couldn't be re-shot. They were used for air-to-air shoots, groups, people, portraits, accidents, advertising and just about any other subject you could think of. They were used indoors and out, in shine, rain and even snow conditions. The fantastic range of accessories meant that any subject could have been shot successfully - even small cracks on circuit boards using the bellows together with 2 extension tubes plus proxars to get an acceptable image size. I was totally confident with the gear and was never let down by any of it and this was well used but looked after gear. The optics were just superb.

 

When it came time to buy my owm equipment for professional use there was never any other choice but Hasselblad - not out of any image or snobbery considerations but purely based on my experiences with the equipment. (I did look at and have used Mamiya & Bronica MF gear as well)

 

Best

Steven

[jorge_jimenez1]

Richard Cochran provided the best answer. However the comparison to the Steinway is not proper. Steinway makes all parts of its piano and you can't get their music box in anyone else's piano. Zeiss makes the most important part of this camera. I have found it to have some very irritating quirks. The lousy waist level finder and the awkward magazines are two. But I will admit that if one had to get used to those it would be hard to fault it. I am quite entertained by the wide spectrum of people who post here. Some of you try to be really helpful; others just want to hear themselves. I read the thread about the jam yesterday and I was amassed at how many comments were there. After all, that subject is covered extensively in this forum. I prefer the Rolleiflex SLX but I am having to make myself over with a 6003 since the SLX went bad after 23 years. Here I do think the Blad has it over Rollei. No matter how old, one can get a Blad fixed. Not my SLX!

Thanks for the answers.

[steve_swinehart]

Needed a medium format camera to supplement 4x5 for industrial / architectural work. Had to be able to be used hand held, have interchangeable backs, Polaroid back, compendium lenshade/filter holder, lots of readily available accessories, specialty lens availability (Imagon), large base of used equipment.

 

Hasselblad had the smallest form factor that fit the requirements. I have a kit that will fit in an aircraft overhead compartment - incuding the tripod.

 

Rollei is a nice camera - look at the used market - about 1/50 the amount of equipment available. At the time I purchased the H-blad, there were NO Polaroid backs available for the Rollei.

 

Best tool for the job. It's going on 16 years old and has never failed to function. Can't argue with that...

[ellis_vener_photography]

1.) Because you like versatility of the format and the system.

 

2.) Because you like how it handles and how it feels.

[christopher perez]

Hasselblad has deep history and boatloads of accessories and lenses.

Couple this with the fact that the 'blad legend is kept alive through continued sales (both new and used) and that photographers continue to crank out wonderful images.

 

If the community of photographers who talk amoungst themselves, write in the popular press, and spread the tribal knowledge of such things were to discuss Mamiya RB/RZ, Mamiya 7, Rolleiflex TLR/SL66/600x cameras in the same glowing terms, then more people would perhaps be equally vocal about their choice of non-'blad photographic tools.

 

Hasselblad was first to market by several decades. And their reputation grew thereby. When it was the only game in town, it was difficult to beat.

[keith_laban]

<a href="http://www.keithlaban.co.uk">Keith Laban Photography</a><p> Hasselblad cameras have probably been used to make more stunning images than all of the other medium format cameras put together. If you use a Hasselblad there are no excuses, it's down to you.

[erik scanhancer]

I asked myself that exact same question 16 years ago. I was to get into MF and wanted the

absolute best and most comprehensive camera system. Many months of research and

talking to other photographers to hear their experiences finally led to the purchase of a

Rollei 6008. Of course any camera system is a compromise, but I have never regretted my

choice. But if I would have wanted to be seen as a "real" photographer by the would-be's

of the world I should have gone with a Hasselblad (and a Gitzo tripod of course). To me

Hasselblad is mostly a product of marketing, like Levi's, Chanel, Harley Davidson, Benetton

and MacDonald's.

 

CPeter wrote: "The Hasselblad is a serious camera for people who are serious about

producing high quality images, composing in the camera, controlling the light and using

different emulsions for different shots---or for the same shot." Would the photographers

using any other camera brands be less serious? I doubt it. They might be less serious

about their public appearance though.

[msitaraman]

I have a Rollei 6003 because I thought it was a generation or two ahead of a Hasselblad 503 in design with just as good lenses.

 

But a Hasselblad feels much, much better in the hand (ditto Rollei TLRs) and is actually more practical to take outdoors...

[l_a_k_h_i_n_d_e_r]

<i>If you use a Hasselblad there are no excuses, it's down to you</i><br><br>

Keith Laban said it very well above, and I will only add that for photography, camera brand is not that important -- it is visualization.

<br><br>

Perhaps there is no professional grade camera which has not produced stunning images. It all depends on the photographer.

 

If you are looking for Zeiss lenses, then you have two more alternatives: Contax and of course Rollei.

[john_amiet2]

Well, I didn't read all the posts above, but I got the drift.

 

Some of my reasons for using Blads for probably 40 years is that they are still going, just like me. Sure, there have been some problems (me and the cameras!), but to illustrate one situation, this is what happened.

 

I was lucky enough to get the first 203FE to come South of the equator. I worked it hard for about 10-12 years until I noticed and intermittent(FP) shutter problem. Hasselblad had several goes at fixing it, but had trouble. Bottom line. A brand new camera for me at no charge. Some warranty that!

 

That is not the only time it has happened either. After 2.5 years a meter prism played up. A new one off the shelf found its way into my hand.

 

Yep! I like Blads. ... and they make image capture a pleasure.

[benny_spinoza]

I agree with most of the comments made...excep two. First, a Hasselblad is not a "85% tripod camera". It is very easy to use hand held. In fact, that is one of its main advantages over other waistlevel MF. Camera shake isn't much of a problem, and one can always pre-release the mirror and fire the shutter handheld. For landscapes, though, of course tripod use is best. Second, waistlevel viewing has its advantages. Composition may be easier. And for some subjects, like my children, the camera is at the proper position. In fact, even for shots of "grownups", a waislevel finder puts the camera at a nice position. For portrait shots in a studio, using a tripod is of course convenient and a good way to go.

 

The Hasselbald is a joy to use, and its reliability is superb. With the digital craze, if there is one remaining MF camera maker, I would place my bet that is would be Hasselblad.

[geoffrey goldberg]

The Hassy is a good fine mechanical camera, a joy and a wonderful piece of system

architecture. Having owned and used one, I gave it up years ago and went to the Rollei

6003. It wasn't that much larger, was steadier in the hand, and with the meter and auto

settings, very easy and fast to use.

 

I've also found film flattness to be superior, loading of film much easier, and ergonomics

to be much better - the Rollei fit to the hand, and with the side handle, is steady as a rock.

I travel all over with it, and love it. I also own Rollei TLR, but prefer the 6003 actually. The

info in the viewing window is just wonderful - spot vs. avg meter, etc. The motor drive is,

for me, an extra, and not necessary.

 

Also, the Schneider lenses for the Rollei are that much better (to my eye) than the famed

Zeiss lenses. The 60 mm Curtagon is just amazing.

 

Just one person's take. But I'll take the one freeze up I had with the Rollei in 10 years

(which took 30 seconds to clear up), some spare batteries over having to fiddle with

loading film in a Hassy A12 back. I dare anyone to load a Hassy back on the run!

 

Best,

Geoff Goldberg

[e_b7]

It's a versatile camera system that has everything you need, including digital backs, and nothing you don't. You don't have to buy the whole system. If you live in a major city, you can rent the occasional component that you just need here and there. The cameras work, they don't need batteries, and the TTL flash on the 503CW is fantastic.