To buy an SQ-Ai or 500CM?

[jim_peterson2]

<p>If having a metered eye level finder is of any interest to you then Bronica is the way to go. Combine that finder with a speed grip and it works very well as a handheld unit. The concerns about mirror slap are somewhat off the mark at this is a lens shutter system. At least I haven't have any trouble hand holding my SQ-A at a wide variety of shutter speeds.</p>

[david_smith35]

<p><strong>Jim, not quite sure what you are getting at with your comment about mirror slap being off the mark - the mirror (and rear auxilliary shutter) contribute far more vibration than the leaf shutter in the lens with this type of camera. The same applies to the Hasselblad, which is of a very similar design.</strong><br>

<strong>Sure, if you use a wide aperture and fast shutter speeds, you can get away with hand holding, but for those of us who take landscapes using small apertures (and slowish shutter speeds) a tripod is a must - preferably with mirror lock up.</strong></p>

[jim_peterson2]

<p>All I meant was that image degradation from mirror slap vibration is much more of an issue with focal plane shutter systems than lens shutter systems. Of course there is a limit to hand held shooting and if shutter speeds are slow enough a tripod is always needed. But when people categorically state that tripods are an absolute requirement for this type of camera I think they are missing out on half the fun of using such a machine.</p>

[dionysios]

<p>Dave, so it is the Hasselblad back that jams sometimes? How often or annoying would you say that happens? And the Bronica doesn't jam at all or as much?<br>

I saw the metered prism on the SQ-A and it could be a future addition, I think it could be useful for me. Does Hasselblad not make one?<br>

As for vibration due to mirror slap, I can logically see how it can cause blurriness. Is it true, or at least the consensus, that the action from the mirror in a MF camera would be more of a concern than in a leaf-shutter of a 35mm, and so I might not be able to hand hold at very low speeds and get a "crisp" image? I haven't noticed that before, but I haven't done enough MF work.</p>

[jim_peterson2]

<p>Mirror slap can be an issue in any SLR of any format. Medium format cameras have larger mirrors so naturally there will be more vibration. So the surest solution is a rangefinder or other mirrorless design. But if you are using an SLR system, then one that has lens/leaf shutters such as the Blad and Bronica are less susceptible to mirror induced vibration than cameras that use focal plane shutters such as my Pentax 67.</p>

[david_henderson]

<p>Hundreds of thousands ( maybe millions) of people have used Hasselblads and Bronicas quite happily without getting blurred pictures caused by mirror slap or something else. I suspect the biggest cause of unsharp photographs with either camera result from failure to focus the camera properly. I think you need a different set of reasons to choose one or the other. There's not much going on here. </p>

<p>I think Ian Gordon Bilson's argument above works just as well in reverse- buy the cheaper one first and only move to the more expensive solution if you become unhappy with it. You might lose a smaller percentage on a Hasselblad , but more money. </p>

[dave_wilson1]

<p>No DP, sorry, it's usually a mishap between the mechanical lens and the body upon pressing the shutter button a bit too slaggy/lazily that causes a jam and then you have to remove the back and use an appropriate tool, similar to a long screwdriver to reset the mechanism. Bronicas, as a rule, don't jam. There's quite a load of fruitful/colorful discussion on here about that. As for the mirror vibration, either camera will give you mirror slap, although I tend to find the Hasselblad better dampened hand held. Again if you want top results, use the tripod and lock the mirror.</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

That jam thing again...<br>Yes, Hasselblads can jam. It's cause is 'user error', and it would have been better if it was impossible. But it's not easy. Doing what you say, Dave, will not be enough to get one to jam.<br><br>And that "appropriate tool" is appropritae to the seller, as a tool to make lots of money.<br>It's not like a long screwdriver without a reason: a long screwdriver is all you need. Any cheap one will do. There's no need for a hugely overpriced 'special' tool.<br><br>The two things go together: to be able to sell unnecessarily expensive 'special' tools, you must first convince people that they really need such a thing. And for that, the they-will-jam thingy has to be fed and kept alive.<br><br>Could be that i'm particularly good at handling my cameras, but in many decades, using quite a few Hasselblads, i only managed to jam a camera once. The jam was caused by an automatic bellows units that was 'kaput'. And unjamming was accomplished using a particularly cheap small screwdriver.<br><br>This is indeed 'discussed' a lot, i.e. the myth is repeated a lot. But "fruitful" these discussion apparently are not. The thing keeps being repeated.<br>Hasselblads as a rule don't jam either.<br>And should you fear jamming one anyway, don;t throw away money buying a supposedly 'special', but complteley unnecessary tool.<br><br><br>Another thing that is often repeated: mirror induced shake.<br>When on a sturdy tripod, i.e. having ruled out any other possible source of movement, you could begin worrying about that a bit.<br>But when handholding it's pure madness to even think about mirror induced shake. Your hands shake several orders of magnitude more than that mirror could shake the camera. So just forget about it. It's not an issue.<br><br>Mirror shake is also often discussed re MF cameras. As if the larger mirror, compared to 35 mm format cameras, would be a bigger concern. That larger mirror has to set a very much heavier camera into motion. What matters is not the size and mass of the mirror, but the ratio of its size and mass to that of the thing it has to shake. And it would not surprise me at all if it turns out that that ratio is more favourable in MF cameras than it is in 35 mm cameras.<br><br>Same for handholding, by the way. The greater the mass, the harder it is to set the thing in motion. And lighter 35 mm cameras are harder to handhold than hefty MF cameras. Being bigger and heavier only becomes a problem if the size and weight becomes too much for you to hold without setting your muscles into a strain induced tremour. Else it's an advantage (as far as handholding is concerned).

[david_smith35]

<p>"But when handholding it's pure madness to even think<br />about mirror induced shake"<br>

Really? Try handholding a Bronica or Hasselblad at a slow shutter speed and then use a camera such as a Rollei or Mamiya C330 - I guarantee youwill have a much higher precentage of acceptably sharp images from the cameras with fixed mirrors. Sure, your hands shake more, but the effect of movement is cumulative and the mirror (and don't forget the rear shutter) add a significant amount of vibration.</p>

[dave_wilson1]

<p>If pushing the shutter button too tentatively, and thus causing a mis-step and "jam" is user error, then I am indeed guilty on three different bodies and five or six times. BTW, I use a long handled screwdriver too, but there has been discussion about folks wanting the "Hasselblad" tool. I have never triggered a jam with ext. tubes or other such things, only and solely from the tentative habit of leaving my finger gently on the button, which I have since refined, and have not had a jam in some time. Q.G. we never will quite line up on this topic... 8-)))</p>

[jason]

<p>Wow! Reading all the ins and out between the Bronica and Hasselblad has left me tired! I've used both. The Hassies were very difficult to focus(for me), the Bronica I had, simply the worst camera ever. The Zeiss lenses in a league of their own. I went to Pentax 6x7. Hardly used. I simplified and sold all my medium format equipment in 2000.<br>

I kept the Rolleiflex TLR. No extra lenses, no magazines. A few filters. A joy to use and carry. The most reliable camera I own. See the work of Avedon and Penn. Sure they used larger format but many shots were pure Rollei! Compact, light and a joy to use.</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

David,<br><br>You think i haven't tried? ;-)<br>You're right that the effect adds up in some way (may even be in a way in which one cancels the other, for a bit), but the difference in magnitude between mirror induced and hand induced shake is such that it really (yes, indeed) is pure madness to worry about mirror (and shutter) induced shake when handholding.<br>Yes: really.<br>With all due respect, i know (yes: really ;-)) that a guarantee like the one you offer is not worth the paper i could print it on.<br><br>It's not a matter of having to believe what someone says. Tape a laserpointer to your camera, put that camera on a tripod, and see the point projected by the laser dance when you release the camera (using a cable release). Then take the camera off the tripod, support it with your hands, and just try to keep the movement of the projected dot anywhere near as small. Good luck trying. ;-)<br>You will not even come near just 10 times as bad. And that's just holding the thing, not even pressing the shutter release.

[david_smith35]

<p>Quinten, I am not trying to put forward an argument for handholding - quite the opposite in fact. I can't remember the last time I used my camera without a tripod and mirror lock up.<br>

But there are rare occasions when the use of a tripod is not possible, and there are also ways to minimise camera movement by bracing your body against a tree for example, or pressing the camera body (if you have a waist level finder) against your chest - both methods I've employed with varying success. If you are lucky enough to own a camera without a moving mirror or rear auxilliary shutter, then your success with hand held images will just that bit greater.</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

David,<br.<br>I agree: you can't always use a tripod.<br>But there is no reason why handholding would yield better results without a moving mirror.<br>But though it is quite clear why anyone would think so, the effect of the extra moving bits is very small (put the camera on a tripod and test for the effect then and you will be extremely hard pressed to find a difference it would make), and is nothing compared to hand induced shake.<br><br>I too know the tall stories about razor sharp images produced handheld at amazingly low speeds, supposedly made possible by not having a mirror (and gun shooters or archery breathing techniques). But as a "lucky" owner of cameras without mirror and rear auxillary shutter (i.e. not only from understanding why that would not work), i know them for what they are: 'baloney'.

[jim_peterson2]

<p>Interesting debate. I think the majority agrees that with either camera it is almost always better to use a tripod, and yet also agrees that these cameras can be used successfully handheld in many situations. The whole reason we got on this topic was because I reacted to a comment back on the first page in which someone suggested that the bronica is no good for handheld work.<br>

The laserpointer method of observing movement (or lack of it) is very interesting. And while I tend to agree with the obvious; that holding something still in your hands is next to impossible, the only movement that really matters is that which occurs while the shutter is open. If that is only for 1/30 of a second, I wonder whether the human eye can even see how much movement takes place in such a short period of time. I likewise doubt that the naked eye could in any way observe the effect, or lack thereof, that mirror slap might have on the laserpointer. But I don't doubt that such an effect could, at least in theory, impact image quality. <br>

I guess some objective testing would be the only way to know for sure...</p>

[dionysios]

<p>Ok, I made a couple of mistakes. It isn't " leaf-shutter of a 35mm" but "focal plain -shutter of a 35mm" and besides I was talking about the mirrors. <br>

Maybe we're all going into minutia here. Stability is always a concern at low shutter speeds with any camera I think. Just like I got used to my other cameras, I'll get used to the new one and learn how to use it well, if I pay attention to what it does in relationship to me. I have a tripod and use it, not always, and like many who do photography have developed techniques, methods to be as stable as possible like arm position, stance, breathing. No? I know I asked and I get it so I'll pay attention to it.<br>

So,<br /><br />- an SQ-A system is less expensive overall than a 500 CM, and so replacement is less expensive<br /><br />- the 500 CM is of better build quality but it is really the lenses that steel the show, <br /><br />- Bronica lenses are also pretty good for the money<br /><br />- I, personally, will probably not notice the difference in lens performance (especially since I don't look for perfection)<br /><br />- both will give good quality images (which I can attest with the ETRS)<br /><br />- Hasselblad is not a dream for me<br /><br />- Prism finder with a SQ-A, but not a Hasselblad? <br /><br />- KEH can be trusted and their ratings are advantageous to the buyer <br /><br />Someone contacted me and it was sympathetic and helpful<br /><br />Q: Has it been more difficult to find someone to repair an SQ-A and easier to find someone to repair a 500CM?<br>

Is that right? Did i forget something?<br>

Thanks all, D.</p>

 

[jim_peterson2]

<p>Yes, yes... you are forgetting one of the biggest factors. It's hard to describe, but a few years ago I explained to my daughter all the objective facts that undeniably proved that my Sony mp3 player was clearly superior to her iPod mini. Her response was, "Ya Dad, but your Sony just doesn't have the <strong><em>cool factor</em></strong> like my iPod does."<br>

I think many would contend that the hassy has the cool factor and the bronnie doesn't. <br>

As for me, I love my Sony music player and I love my bronnies (all four of them!) and I simply can't afford a hassy. :)<br>

Good luck! And I'm sure you'll thoroughly enjoy which ever one you get!</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

Jim,<br><br>Re the laser pointer test: you of course don't have to see how much the camera moves in a fraction of a second (unless you assume that it's not a continuous thing, and the camera might not move during the exposure), just how the movement handheld is so much bigger than whatever movement there is caused by the mirror (and rear shutter) with the camera on a tripod.<br>You can safely 'assume' that during the brief period the shutter is open, the difference will be the same.<br><br>There is another test though.<br>On YouTube there is (or was) a movie-ette showing a coin put on end on top of the lens of a camera sitting on a table. When the camera was released (mirror moving up, rear shutter slamming open), the coin did not fall over, nor even move.<br>Now anyone thinking that mirror slap is a problem could try the same with the camera of their choice.<br>But that's not the important test. Anyone thinking that mirror slap is a significant problem even when handheld should just try to even balance a coin set on end on a handheld camera (with or without moving mirror).<br>That should give an idea of how pointless it is to worry about mirror slap when handholding, and how futile the hope that using a camera without moving mirror would safely allow using slower shutter speeds.

[mark_l6]

<p>Q.G.De Bakker,<br>

I agree with everything you say, particularly about mirror slap, yet somehow we all take sharp handheld pictures. I sometimes wonder how that is possible, yet it is true. I'm nothing special when it comes to handholding a camera, yet I have NEVER taken a handheld shot with my Technika 111 that could not be blown up to 40 inches wide and remain crisp. I tried a crown graphic for a while and could hardly get a sharp picture, it was almost too light and I simply did not get on with the ergonomics of the thing. I personally found the Hasselblad awkward to hold and often had blurred shots, yet I find it effortless to shoot handheld with my Rolleiflex 6006. I have never used my Leica m6 on a tripod and people are constantly blown away by how sharp my 13x19 inch prints are. I would argue that of all the most famous photographs over the last 60years or so the vast majority would have been taken handheld despite what theory might tell us.<br>

It is widely accepted that an Alpa 12 with 38mm Biogon is much easier to handhold than an SWC hasselblad with the same lens ( and at that price it bloody well should be!) and I think that sums up what I am trying to say, that how the camera fits your hand is the biggest factor in how easy it is to handhold.<br>

My point really is that until Dionysios actually runs a few films through either option it will be very difficult to tell if the ergonomics of a particular camera suit HIM.</p>

[david_smith35]

<p>I've seen the 'parlour trick' on You Tube with the coin and a Hasselblad. I thought I would repeat the experiment with my Bronica as it has a somewhat more clattery release mechanism than the Hasselblad. Much to my surpise it passed with flying colours. However, this doesn't prove anything as the mass of a relatively heavy body and lens helps keep it stable.<br>

Try putting the camera on a sensitive weighing scale, firing the shutter and watch the needle on the scale move. Then repeat the experiment with mirror locked up - there's a significant difference.</p>

 

[q.g._de_bakker]

Mark,<br><br>You're absolutely right that the way a camera can be held makes a big difference. Some camera shapes lend themselves better for handholding thean others.<br><br>You're of course also right that you can take sharp pictures handheld. But still, they are always that extra bit more sharp when taken from atop a tripod to make using one of those worthwhile.<br>If we can, of course.<br><br>Anyway, trying the ergonomics of a camera first is good advice. The recommended way of holding a camera isn't always the way that suits us personally, and trying alternate ways may take some time, but may also 'pay'.<br>I hate when i can't use a tripod, so have been 'investigating' ways to keep the camera as still as possible. As far as Hasselblads go, i found the EL(...) models with 45 degree prism on top provide the stablest 'platform'. The thing is then much like a Rollei 6000 model in shape and distribution of weight.<br>I find the much praised for handholdability Rolleiflex TLRs rather awkward to hold, and though i rarely put one on top of a tripod (that's not in keeping with the type of photography i want to use it for, which is 'for fun') i always fear the worst when using one. So indeed "YMMV".<br><br><br>David,<br><br>Now try balancing a coin on a handheld camera.<br>That will proof that it is indeed pure madness to even think about mirror induced shake while handholding a camera.<br><br>You see, nobody is denying that there is mirror induced shake. It makes sense to lock up the mirror, etc.<br>But (as said) it's pure madness to worry about it when holding the camera in your hands.

[dave_wilson1]

<p>All the affection toward these cameras is worth noting, but at one time they were primarily tools for people to use for work and making a living. Now they seem to hold more of a hobby status. It's like going to buy saws or drills. Ryobe, Bosch, Craftsman, Rigid, whatever. You buy saws and cut wood and make stuff. If you're good you make beautiful cabinets regardless of which saw you cut the wood with, if you're not too good you have just cut wood and whatever you do is another story. Scavullo liked Hasselblad, Bennsimon liked RZ67, the Italian guy whose name I forgot used Bronica GS 6x7. They all shot for Vogue, Harpers and Elle etc. so really these are just the saws regardless of what affection we apply to them. </p>

[david_smith35]

<p>Quinten, It is far from madness to think about shake introduced by the camera release mechanism. Placing a coin on the camera hand held proves nothing. If you want to see the effect of mechanism induced shake, attach a laser to the camera body, place the camera on an unstable surface such as a seat cushion or foam, then fire the release mechanism and watch the red dot vibrate.<br>

The point I'm making is that when the camera is in an unstable position (this includes hand holding) the effect of camera vibration is magnified considerably, so what appears to be an insignificant amount of viration is in fact very significant.</p>

 

[q.g._de_bakker]

David,<br><br>You can keep on trying to come up with reasons why mirror slap would be a problem but the simple thing to get is that your hands holding the camera move the thing much, much more than anything the mirror itself can.<br>Your hands will not magnify the effect of camera induced shake to any noticable degree, because the difference between anything the camera can add and what your hands are doing is huge (which is what trying to balance a coin on a handheld camera proves).<br>So yes, it indeed is pure madness to worry about mirror induced shake when handholding.<br><br>But if you still think it merrits consideration, ask yourself too why the two would add up, and not subtract?<br>An old trick, for instance, to reduce the effect of shake, borrowed from the fluid head principle, is to not tighten the fasteners of a tripod head as fast as you can, but leave minimal play. The vibration energy emanating from the camera will then be absorbed quickly by micromovement of the head, which (though you could think that would be a bad thing) produces a more stable camera than when there is no play at all, and the energy and the camera are allowed to resonate. Just like a plucked loose string has no sustain at all, while a plucked taught string will keep on ringing.<br>The "unstable position" helps, not to magnify, but reduce the effect of camera vibration.

[dionysios]

<p>Jim Peterson, thanks for the iPod analogy. Dave Wilson, thanks for the saw analogy. I'm more in tune with these two ideas. I have a need for a camera (well, actually a desire to create) and I'll get what I can afford and not sweat the minutia. The better I get, the more I'll ask of my tools, but at the end of the tool is my hand and my experience. Being informed is important, but experience counts more than technology.<br>

A carpenter I know, now in late 60s, started off with normal tools and spent some years working and practicing, acquiring technique; then when he could afford it spent a bunch of money on very good tools that enabled him to work easier but not better; then he gave them to his adult son and bought other tools to challenge him. He told me, pay attention to the object/the matter and practice your movement. Nice, no?<br>

BTW, I finally did buy an iPod, because I thought the idea of carrying my vast music library with me, exciting.<br>

Please, no more about shaking or vibration.<br>

If anybody would like to add something concerning the topic of the post, it would be appreciated.<br>

Thanks, D.</p>