Do I join the elite or stick within my budget

[simann]

Having owned a Roleiflex for a few years, I have grown to love the

6X6 format.

I would like to buy a Hasselblad and I have been thinking about it

for a long time now, however my budget will not run to a complete

system all at once, so it would mean purchasing the bits over a time

as money becomes available, but where does one start, obviously the

body, but which one?

The other alternative would be the Russian Kiev 88, which I could

buy complete with an 80mm 1;2.8 lens for about the price of two

cassettes for the Hasselblad.

I would like your thoughts on this, and if anyone owns the Russian

model what do you think of it?

[peter_evans4]

I've never used it, but as was pointed out in another thread recently it's a very iffy copy of a design that was too much trouble even for Hasselblad.

 

How about a Bronica S2a? It's a lot cheaper than a Hasselblad and seems to be a lot less trouble-prone than a Kiev 88.

[john_wintheiser]

Buy used. Check out KEH. I bought a complete Mamiya 645 system in very good shape for about $225.00. A Hassy will run more but may still be within your budget.

[q.g._de_bakker]

Simon,<br><br>First, Kiev is the captical city of the Ukrain, which should tell you something about where these cameras are from... ;-)<br><br>Frankly, i think you're nuts even considering getting a Kiev, because you believe you cannot afford Hasselblad, while you already have a Rolleiflex, and for thinking the Rolleiflex has not already put you "in the elite".<br><br>No matter how many people will protest, and no matter where you get them from, "Kiev" equipment is nothing but worthless junk.<br>Cheap, yes. but not cheap enough. And besides, cheapness is no substitute for quality.<br>Have you considered a second hand Bronica? They, unlike Kievs, are serious cameras.<br><br>However, since you say you want Hasselblad, anything else will be and remain second choice to you. Your lust for Hasselblad will keep nagging you. So why not do what you suggest, and get the bits you want one at a time (used), building slowly until you have the complete system you like?<br><br>Which body to get depends on what you want. A 500-series (lens shutter only) body would be a good start. And from this series, the 500 C/M is common, very good, and affordable. But obviously the still current 503 CW would be the best you can get.<br>Next, you need a film magazine, and that will have to be an A12 magazine.<br>What lens to get depends entirely on what you want. What version to get however is another matter. The 'chrome' C-lenses (Synchro-Compur, knurled metal focussing ring) are rather old, the black C-lenses are a bit newer, but the CF-series (rubberized focussing grips) are propably the oldest version you should look at.<br>What accessories (finders, tubes, etc.) you need to get will become apparent when using the thingies. Sunshades however are a must.

[eric friedemann]

You are already shooting an "elite" camera. I had a college professor whose images are in major collections and who shot album covers for major recording artists. He made the images with Roleiflexes.

 

 

Coated Roleiflex 80mm lenses will produce images every bit as sharp, contrasty and distortion-free as Hasselblad 80mm lenses. Kievs are o.k., but I'd rather shoot a Roleiflex 80mm lens than a Kiev 80mm lens.

[mike_barger]

I had a Kowa Super 66 system, 40mm through 250mm, extra backs and was very happy with it. However, as pointed out above, I couldn't withstand the Hasselblad pull.

 

I'm using a late 500C with interchangeable screens and have 50mm through 250mm, with the old C backs. These old backs work just as well as the A series, I don't don't think there is a parts issue. I've had David Odess service all the Hassy equipment.

 

Hasselblad "feels" better built than the Kowa 66, but honestly can't see a difference in negative quality at the size I print, no larger than 11X14. Ross Yerkes worked on my Kowa stuff.

 

You just have to make your mind up to move over to Hasselblad equipment, or find peace of mind with the equipment you have.

 

Mike

[catherineadams]

I bought a Hasselblad as my first MF camera, as I'd been wanting one for

several years and wanted the 6x6 format. It's the only serious MF camera I

have, so listen to what others have to say about serious options. The

hasselblad system will cost much more, which means acquiring lens more

slowly. But you recognize this, and it doesn't put you off. I suggest a less

expensive body than the 503cw, since you can add an additional body later.

Perhaps a 503cxi or 503cx. I'd also suggest purchasing a focal length that

doesn't replicate your Roleiflex, such as a 60mm or a 50mm. I own the 60mm

and 120mm and find it covers me in all but the most extreme circumstances. I

feel a 60mm and 150mm/180mm would do the same, if I were to start over

again. In truth, the real advantage of the system (or ones like it) are multiple

backs. I'd rather carry two or three backs and one lens than multiple lens.

Being able to change film quickly and without waste has taught be a great

deal about matching film with subject.

[simann]

Ahh. I think I missed out three important letters from my post regarding the Roleiflex, they were TLR.

This is where the Hasselblad comes in, the ability to change lenses and film. Sorry if I was misleading, but I think I get the gist of your replies, so now it means searching around a bit.

[stephen hazelton]

I'd stick with the Rolleiflex. Buying into film gear in general is an iffy proposition, as no one really knows what film products and developing services will be around 5 years from now. If it's a few bucks you're spending, no problem. If it's a major investment for you, I'd wait. If you have extra money, set it aside for a digital camera later on.

[dan_fromm1]

Simon, do you want interchangeable lenses or to focus through the lens AND work fairly rapidly?

 

If interchangeable lenses and focusing through the lens BUT slow working will suit you, go up to 4x5. Crappy old view cameras don't have quite the cachet of Hasselblad, but if you want good results more than expensive tools one will do very well for you.

[ken_kuzenski]

Simon, I can really sympathize with your issue. My own first MF camera was a Yashica-C that cost practically nothing, and it actually took very fine pictures. But I wanted a Hassy and finally bought a 500CM kit with the 80mm, and then got the 50mm (don't use it much) and the 150mm (LOVE it!) over time.

 

Now, if I used a tripod and medium aperture, I'd be VERY hard pressed to tell the difference between a neg shot with the Yashica and one with the Hassy. I got the 500cm a few years ago, when prices were much higher than they are today.

 

You, with a very nice Rolleiflex, have even less "need" to upgrade than I did with the Yashica. So logically, you should just forget it. BUT: I love the Hasselblad, love the smooth quality and lovely feel, love the huge negs, love the 6x6 format. I don't use it much these days, but I LOVE the thing and using it gives me a great deal of pleasure. So if you really crave a Hasselblad, Simon, DO it. :-) If you're as lucky as I have been, you'll have years of great pleasure out of it, and what's more important than that? The last time I looked at KEH, prices on the 500cm seemed darned cheap--call 'em and ask about putting together a bargain-priced kit for you. Or Midwest Photo Exchange, if they're still around--also darned nice people and easy to deal with. Good luck, and HAVE FUN! --Ken

[andy m.]

Stick with the Rollei (assuming you want to stick with a standard lens). May people prefer them to Hasselblads, myself included

[fpa]

Just as an aside, to confirm what some others have suggested: prices on Bronica SQ-A seem to have cratered in the past couple of months. Lenses are less expensive, focal-length for focal-length, than those of my Mamiya TLR. If you really need/want the SLR operation, then that's an option. A KEH Excellent, with back, finder, and lens will set you back less than $350.

<br>

<br>

I understand the pull of the 'blad, but you'll hgave to ask yourself whether you'll use the 'blad, or be too afraid of scuffing it to take it out of its case.

[derek_stanton2]

Get the hasselblad. From KEH.com. Build the 'system' slowly, as you can afford it. That will also allow you to make better choices of components, rather than buying an entire kit at once, before you really get a feel for which lenses will be most useful. You may be used to a various assortment of lenses in the 35mm format, but you'll probably find that the Hasselblad doesn't 'demand' that many options. And, unless you're working strictly in the studio, you probably won't want to carry very many lenses (and film backs, etc.).

 

There are many people making fantastic photographs with Kievs (and Bronicas and Prakticas, and whatever) on www.altphotos.com. But, as an investment, i think you're best served by going with the Hasselblad. Nothing to do with 'elitism.' The Rolleiflex is already an 'elite' machine. Penn and Avedon and Newton and Weber and Bailey all made most of their careers with that TLR....

[john_photo]

How about a bronica SQ-AI? youll be hard pressed to find any differences at all optically with a Hasselblad. However, a Kiev might be another story.

[thomas5]

Save.

<br> <br>

I have an old 500C, two old non-A backs, and CF 50mm and a CB 80mm. I started with an

80mm C lens and a 150mm C lens. I sold those to pay for the 50. The equipment will

always be there.

<br> <br>

I'd be curious to hear from anyone who uses a Pentacon Six, though. I've seen some

amazing work done with them, but have never even seen one in real life. Q.G.?

[OCULUS New York]

Excuse me, but what, or who, ever made you think that you can step "up" from a Rolleiflex? Better take a look at their line.

 

http://www.sl66.com/slx/index.htm

 

Cheers,

Ray Hull

[hugh_crawford1]

The New York City stores are full of very clean and cheap Hasselblad gear these days. With the pros and the rich dentists all trading in for digital the prices are very low. Every time I walk into Adorama I am tempted by a case full of Hasselblad gear and prices that make me very sad because I have so much of it at home that I'm not using any more.

 

If you want a cheap body, the ELMs are super cheap these days. The 80mm early T* gives you the most bang for the buck I think. The 60mm seems like a good buy as well and might be a good first lens if you like wide.

 

It's funny though, I was always thinking of trading my Hasselblad for a Roleiwide. If you don't work with an assistant who is loading backs, shoot lots of Polaroids, or use lots of lenses , you probably won't benefit from a Hasselblad.

[simann]

Thank you all for input, its given me quite a lot to think about although I seem to have been thinking about this forever.

Don?t get me wrong, I?m very pleased with my old Rolleiflex Automat, it still works perfectly, but it has seen a lot of use and is not in the best of condition. So maybe an upgrade to a more modern one (the 3.5F or 2.8 F) model could be a better idea. I also have joined the digital crowd, and tend to shoot more now with my Canon DSLR than with film, but when I find something that?s really worth photographing guess which camera I take?

I know there are lots of good deals in the USA, but as I live in Austria I would like to if possible buy locally, and to test and examine the camera before parting with the money but prices here in Europe are still quite high for quality gear.

[m_elek]

If you like the Carl Zeiss lenses and the 6x6 format, consider an SL66. Same great Zeiss lenses, great camera and plus you'll have huge muscles from lifting it. Seriously though, an excellent camera.

[m_elek]

... that would be a Rolleiflex SL66.

[fwstutterheim]

<i> I also have joined the digital crowd, and tend to shoot more now with my Canon DSLR

than with film, .... </I><br><br>

Well, that may lead to expulsion to the lower classes...... :-) <br><br>Ferdi.

[michael_bach2]

If you are on a budget, stay with you Rolliflex and spend you mony on film and

prints.

 

www.micbach.dk.............."Art photography workshops in Spain"

[simonpg]

Simon, ditto what QG said.

 

If you have a budget (who does not); plan your next kit accordingly - BUT, never buy something you don't really want. That will result in you wasting your budget - a self-defeating thing.

 

The best plan is to select a body, prism and back you have decided will meet your NEEDS. Then map out a lens family that will cover your shooting needs - assigning a order of priority.

 

Then research prices and buy the best condition gear you can find with the features that meet your needs. You may use the whole budget getting just one lens - BUT it will be gear your NEED and WANTED and not gear that will continually remind you of why you wanted something else only to quit it later, get little back and start again!

 

The process and best advise is about clear logic and not photography itself. I started with a 501CM, WLF and one near new back with an 80mm lens. I thought this would be all I could afford for many years but it was exactly what I wanted and needed. I have never looked back. The over 5 years I progressively added the lenses according to my original plan. Today I'm still in love, never wasted a cent, use all of it regularly.

 

I hope I have helped.

[paul_neuthaler]

As an amateur who has used Rolleis & Hassies for years, I can tell you that IMHO there is no normal MF lens sharper than either Planar or Xenotar 3.5 or 2.8 Rollei lenses on an F model. Unless you are a studio pro, you will tire of Hasselblad backs and lenses. I even found my Hassie SWC/M lost its "luster" in a relatively short time. I stick with my beautiful Rollei 2.8F "Whiteface" Type 4, Xenotar & my Nikon F3 HP with an assortment of Nikkor primes -- 20mm 1:3.5, 24mm 1:2.8, 50mm 1:2, 105mm 1:2.5 & 180mm 1:2.8.