Is anyone actually using a Hasselblad anymore

[mark_ng]

I use it...and have fun with it while using it.

That's all that matters to me.

[trex1]

Please no mention of Porsches, ok....

[trex1]

OK, you can talk about Porsches, if you have to. But there's a big hole in my life, that a

Boxster would fill very nicely, and I would rather not be reminded of that fact......

 

BTW, how do you get a Porsche when it means the kids go without food? You see that's the

problem with them, you need a lot of discretionar income, and what with everyone being

outsourced, not to mention global warming, I am worried my dream of owning a Boxster may

never be realised.

Nah, better keep Porsches out of the discussion...

[trex1]

Soon it will be internal combustion engines versus cars that run on electric motors make no

sound and run on lithium ion batteries. I saw one with eight wheels that can go 300km/h

here in Tokyo. The motor companies want nothing to do with it, it would kill the gas burners

overnight.

[andre_noble4]

"Absolutely. I learned early on that a Hasselblad somehow encourages a photographic point of view like no other camera."....

 

As a Bronica 6x6 user, I'm feeling left out.

[wayne_crider4]

For a pro, it's a tool in a toolbox and useful as needed. For an enthusiast it's usually a desire spawned by talk or print. The 6x6 Hassie isn't a better tool per se', it's just another tool. Some use it all the time, some once in awhile. It depends.

 

If I were to shoot macro, I wouldn't reach to my CM but my 35mm. If I were to shoot a landscape, again not the CM, but my 4x5. If I were to shoot of a child engaged in sports, not the CM again, not fast enough, but my 35mm or a DSLR. Quick Headshot; No. There's alot of times something else would be a better tool to use, there are times when a 6x6 can fulfill the job. I really don't see it as a 'because I get negs, because i can project it, because I can print it hugh", type of instrument. It's just a tool to either do a job, capture a moment or express a view. You can work in the format and love it as some do, or you can grab it when needed. What's it good for? It's good for what you think it's good for.

[mike butler]

Maybe what we need is a Porsche that has a shutter button on the steering wheel and a

keen Zeiss lens in the grille that takes a 40 MB picture and gives you a histogram on the

GPS screen. But then that techology would migrate down into the Jetta, and then where

would we be?

[mishka]

> BTW, how do you get a Porsche when it means the kids go without food? <br>

<br>

 

kids can beg.

[Ed_Ingold]

Robert said, "Chromes have less visible grain, but the dynamic capture range is too limited for serious work."

What is this nonsense?"

 

You confuse the high contrast and DMax of the finished slide with dynamic range. You refer to the OUTPUT. In terms of INPUT, the capture of an image, reversal film has a dynamic range of about 3.5 stops from black to washout. Negative color film has a dynamic range of 5 to 7 stops. Even though the negative appears less dramatic than a chrome, the finished results prove otherwise.

 

Shawn said, "Can you provide any links to objective test data to support that [the resolution of a DSLR compares well to that of an Hasselblad]?"

 

If you haven't guessed, I use an Hasselblad extensively, as well as DSLRs. For what it's worth, I have an objective example supporting this conclusion on my gallery page. Not newspapers taped to a wall, but a practical situation under ideal circumstances - slow film, tripod and a still subject. The Hasselblad can't come close to my D2x for large group pictures in room light. If you want a link with more examples, see http://www.luminous-landscape.com.

 

Large chromes are indeed a beautiful sight when projected on a screen or viewed on a light table. I agree that a digital projector is little better than screen-saver quality. Unfortunately, projection is mainly for business presentations, traveloques and sharing between dilitantes or relatives.

[bhneely]

Referring to it being "f**king ace," there's a great feeling when a guy carrying a pack full of digital gear through Venice, Italy stops his wife so he can watch you shoot with your Hasselblad. As he walks away he says, "That's a camera."

 

Plus, there's the great, loud THWUMP, the phenomenal detail in the Zeiss lenses and the smell, oh yeah, the beautiful smell of fixer. I s'pose I could sit with an open bottle of vinegar while processing digital shots on the computer, but it just wouldn't be the same.

[Uncle Goose]

I think it's not only the(overpriced yuppie) Hasselblad that is still used but also a lot of Mamiya's, Rollei's, Pentaxes, Fuji's and let us not forget Bronica's. I myself abandoned digital for the greater deal (only webpagestuff with it) and actually returned towards to film, it's just a lot more quality.

[machts gut]

There's absolutely no reason to use a Hassy any more, Darius. Throw it away as soon as possible! It's dangerous. Digital is better. And not dangerous. Everyone else knows, but you.

But make sure, you throw it in my direction;-)

 

Stefan

[paul_chan4]

I had my 500CM as a paperweight on my desk since digital had gone big over the past few years. Yes, my crystal version that is. I'm still shooting with my other 500CM Classic as happily from day 1 with no regrets.

[robert x]

Edward - I don't think that the dynamic range comment was misundertstanding dynamic

range, just questioning the idea that this limited range makes chromes unsuitable for

"serious work". You are lucky to have an Hasselblad, an digital and an large format.....!

[randall cherry]

"Wide dynamic range is a bourgeois concept."

 

--Randall

[peter_evans4]

<p>Last week I had dinner with a man who's been using a single Hasselblad with a single back and a single lens for over twenty years and has got about five published books out of it. And he's still using it just as he did before the digital "revolution". The books win him prizes. If you use one too, you might win prizes. After all, I don't use a Hasselblad, and I don't win prizes: as we all know, <em>it's not the photographer, it's the camera.</em>)</p>

[robert x]

Peter - I bet he has never had it serviced, either.

[uk]

Darius,

 

It's a pain in the ass when you forget to set the scan resolution and end up with a 400 mb file, when you really only wanted a 100mb file.

 

Simple mistake wastes loads of time producing scans that will blow up to the size of a house, when all you really want is a high quality 20"x24" print.

[simonpg]

As ever using Hasselblad 6x6 remains as compelling today as it was many decades ago IMHO. Nothing comes close to seeing a Hasselblad/Zeiss produced 6x6 trannie (except maybe a 6x9, 6x12, 4x5 and 8x10).

 

In the past 5 years as digital has rapidly grown - so too has my 6x6 Hasselblad kit by 5 times!

 

I suggest you buy some beautiful trannie film and take that 501 out and shoot pictures - you'll later have 12 joyous images that will keep for near enough to forever!

 

Yes there is a huge use to it - taking superb images - far better use than "playing around with it a little".

 

I have never ever doubted its usefulness and won't for as long as it makes beautiful images - which ultimately is up to me and not the camera.

 

And by the way, IMHO my 1930s and 1940s Zeiss Ikon Super Ikontas and Ikontas alike are as useful today as they were 60 to 70 years ago!

 

Long live 120 roll film.

[trex1]

Peter thanks for clearing things up. So, if I use the Hasselblad I will become a prize winning

photographer...wow! I always had a feeling it was the camera and not the photographer....So,

that's why people agonise about equipment so much on photonet, having the best equipment

guarantees you getting the best shot....amazing.

[razzledog]

I work in a large camera store and spend most of the time being persuaded that this or that digital SLR together with this or that IS or VR lens is sharper than sharp. Why was this not a consideration when using a Hassy? (or most other larger format film cameras?). In my opinion, digital is great for imaging, but when it comes to serious photography, use film.

I recently heard from a reliable source that insurance companies won`t accept a digital image, only prints with negs, so you can`t fiddle it.

I find the 20D makes for a great Polaroid test, before using film.

I recently shot a street scene outside our store with a Mamiya Universal 6x9 using the 75mm. Checking out the neg with an 8x loupe, I could clearly count each and every leaf on the tree across the road.....I`ve not seen such immense detail in ages!

The Canon 20D with a 28-105mm IS USM, merely smudged it. I won`t even begin to discuss the quality of 4x5, but if speed is what you need then use digital, if QUALITY is what you prefer, use a Hassy. (Or Bronica, Mamiya etc). It makes a change to see one go AGAINST the flow and be an individual, instead of rushing out to buy an electronic marvel that`s outdated before your mobile phone is. Make dirt on your CCD`s a thing of the past and just enjoy the Blad.

[john_hancock]

The only reason I'm not using my 'Blad (500C/M) right now is that it's in the shop getting the light-baffle return spring sorted. In the meantime, I'm lugging around the Mamiya Press with 6x9 back and 75mm wide-angle lens, and I agree with Dean Jones that the images are superb. Unfortunately, the camera is so much bigger and heavier than the Hasselblad that I hadn't had it out of the case in several years. I love my 'Blad for its comfortable size, art-deco design, bright (Accute-Matte) focusing screen, lovely mechanical sounds and big, sharp negs and slides. It's just plain FUN, and it helps me see things I might otherwise have missed. Enjoy yours.

 

John Hancock / Sydney Australia