Should I buy Hasselblad

[harald_gaunitz]

Hi John,

I think you shall not buy a Hasselblad. I think the select of everything must be

done with a fair thinking... I mean, this fact that you ask this question shows

something is wrong...

OK, if you buy that camera and folk will see results and will know what for

ideas you have... And you have bought it for status and for adjust your crisis!

I think it will be worse those mid-life crisis if you not have an idea which you

can realize with that camera.

If you had an idea about something photographic it would be easier to realize

with any other camera! Twenty years ago Zeiss were the best but now it has a

very average quality both optically and mechanically. Fuji and Mamiya are much

better! One can get much better quality by using 35-mm cameras e.g. Canon or

Nikon etc. than with any Hasselblad.

What shall you do? I don't know but a good idea would be to ask:

-Where will I go?

-What is my position now?

-Can I find any road?

I have tried to use Hasselblad but the optically quality was to low for my

ideas and now I use Fuji 680. The Fuji lenses are lightyears ahead of chalky

compared with the old-fashioned Zeiss.

/Harald

[peter_olsson]

It has now gone almost one year since John posted his question, I assume that he has made up his mind by now. However, there are some

answers whose contributors opinions I do not share. I would like to

give my opinion too. First, the image quality from my Hasselblad

system has never worried me. Compared with my (now sold) Nikon AF

equipment with pro-grade lenses, the image quality in terms of

sharpness, contrast, tonality, color-rendition and "depth", is

significantly better with the Hasselblad-lenses I own (CF 80, CF 180).

Partly explained by the larger film size in MF. The image quality is

also better with HB and CF 80 than from my Rolleicord.

My only complaint in that respect is that I sometimes wish for a more

round "fingerprint" from the diaphragm, in back-lit situations. This

is not a Hasselblad problem I believe, most MF cameras seem to have

"less than" round diaphragms.

 

<p>

 

For the maximum sharpness etc., short exposure times or a tripod is

necessary, as with all other MF-SLR-cameras. But it works good hand-

held at 1/125 or faster. With experience, 1/60 and a normal lens

works very well too.

 

<p>

 

The light weight of the Hasselblad body is a plus, and an extra film

magazine does not add much to the weight but is a BIG advantage as

an amateur, who do not finnish several rolls in each photo-session.

For me it would not be an option to carry two Pentax 67 bodies.

The 180 is heavy, but the CF 150 and the new CB 160 are more light-

weight. The new acute-matte screens are bright, they work in dim light

too with lenses that has a widest aperture of 2,8 or 4. The HB-system

is large enough to "tailor-make" the personal system of the user.

Being an SLR-system, it carries all the advantages and disadvantages

of other such systems. I believe that the SLR is the most useful of

all compromises in photography.

There are not that many all-mechanical, battery-independent MF-SLR cameras around. With regards to quality, system and weight, I

believe Hasselblad makes the best in this category.

As for HB being "trouble-prone", I have not enough experience to judge

that. I have only had one problem, and that was because I used the

camera in a way it's not supposed to be used (forgot to wind the film to the first frame before I started to shoot, a spring got loose in

the film magazine). It was fixed for free'and without hassle at Hasselblad. As for film-advance problems, that some users report, I

do not believe that the film-advance should be used to rapidly. The

winder for 503 Cxi and CW is for 0,8 f.p.s. I doubt this is the

fastest winder they could make, instead it is probably a speed that

should not be exceeded due to the mechanical nature of the camera.

 

<p>

 

The cost. It is a lot of money for each investment. That is

the most frustrating thing about the system. The large used-market

helps here.

 

<p>

 

Finally, the camera is not ideal for fast, spontaneous photography.

Dennis Reggie, the wedding photographer, can do that but I have yet

to learn. The large size of MF-slrs is in itself a hindrance in

"carry-around", spontaneous photography. Well, you cannot get every-

thing from one system. SLR's are a compromise, like everything else.

If I had the money, a MF-rangefinder would be a nice supplement. But

for me it is better with the SLR-compromise than the rangefinder-

compromise.

[herb_gibson]

Buy the Blad!

 

<p>

 

It's the only one with a view camera body option. I dream of buying a

Flexbody when I have time to take landscapes. Let's pass the arguement

on lens sharpness. If you tilt a Flexbody to achieve in focus effect

from nearby rock to distant mountain, which Pentax, Mamiya, Rollei,

Bronica, etc can match that?! Maybe the tilting Rollei SL66, beautiful

but - be careful - discontinued. Also, a normal Blad or a Flexbody are

more portable than any of the others. No silly batteries to go flat in

cold weather.

Herb.

[michael_j._kravit]

I was pretty much in the same position as John. I know that his post

was made well over a year ago, but I felt my experience would be

helpful.

 

<p>

 

I own and have used almost the entire Nikon line including some big

long and expensive glass. I found that I got bored shooting birds

with a AF-S 600/4. Fun for a while, but not very satisfying for "fine

are" type needs.

 

<p>

 

Enter MF. About 2 months ago I began looking into MF SLR systems.

Finally after hours, days, and weeks of soul searching and restless

nights I bit the bullet and bought Hassy 203FE, FE f/2.8 50mm and FE

f/2 110mm lenses. I am planning to also buy the FE f/4 350mm with

the 2x extender.

 

<p>

 

I am still learning to use the system. It was expensive, but I have

to admit that the image quality is far superior to my 35mm system.

In fact, I am seriously considering selling my F5 and all my AF

lenses. I will probably keep a 35mm P&S or other small 35 such as

the new Hasselblas XPlan for light weight travel and family

occassions.

 

<p>

 

After I got back my first couple rolls of film I almost fell on the

floor. The results were amazing. 16x20 enlargements were sharp, and

dynamic.

 

<p>

 

I have no regrets spending the big bucks. In fact, a friend of mine

who bought a Hassy in college 20 years ago just sold it for roughly

3x what he paid. Can others claim the same with their systems?

 

<p>

 

One other note, I also considered the new Contax 645 w/ AF and AE but

decided not to buy it because I prefer the 6x6 format.

 

<p>

 

Mike

[john_joyner2]

I'm amazed at how much dialog my question of "years" ago has generated. Thanks for all the feedback.

 

FYI, I did purchase the 503CW...the usual package--A12 back and 80mm lens. The motor drive that came as a sales promotion was a problem for awhile, but seems to work fine now.

 

It's still too early to say whether the money was well spent. I'm an amateur and haven't had a real chance to test it out. A trip to the Rockies next month should tell the tale. Of course, it's already obvious that I don't have nearly enough equipment to take maximum advantage. Guess that's what life savings are for.

[david_hofer]

Greetings:

 

I've left Hasselblad twice in 9 years for other systems,notibly Bronica ,Mamiya and Rollie.I recently went back to the BLAD because i like cameras just as much as photography,they are great little machines. Go with Hasselblad and ROLLIE as a second choice.

 

Dave

[ron_dunnington4]

If you are used to looking through a 35mm viewfinder, the Hassy waistlevel finder may be just the thing to change your mind about medium format. I've watched pro wedding photographers use the waist level finders but I'll be hanged if I can. The reverse image left-to-right is something I simply can not master. There is a solution, the eyelevel finder, but once again, it'll cost you plenty.

[kelvin lee]

I have over the years, accumulated 3 MF systems - Bronica ETRSi, Kiev

and Pentax 6x7. I have enjoyed all of them immensely, but am questioning after all this time if it may be more practical to settle on just one - and that might be a Hassleblad. What looks attractive price-wise now is the 500CM + 50,80 and 150. I am just unsure if I will really get any more utility out of a big-brand Hassy compared to the stuff I am already using. I am a general user, of sorts.

 

Decisions, decisions.

[victor_randin]

Kelvin, I have 3 MF sistems too: Hasselblad, Hasselblad and Hasselblad

(2-500CM,1-ELM)+ 30,50,80,150.It is another world of pfotography and image quality.

Best.

-Victor-

[james_hayes]

No you are not crazy. It's always best to buy the best you can afford. I've been shooting weddings for over 15 years with Nikons (FG20,FG,8008 and F4). I wanted to step up to MF. First I bought a Bronica ETRSi. I returned it and swapped it for a Hassie 3 weeks later. The viewfinder in the Bronica was just too dark for receptions. I could not focus.

 

The Hassie was much pricier and I got less for my money, but the pics were great. After 50 rolls the darned thing jammed up on me yesterday! It is a 503CW. Unfortunately I was shooting some commmunity service activity for a major fortune 500 company that they plan to display in over 1000 of their stores. Hopefully there will be some pics from the first few rolls I took that they may be able to use. I also had my Nikon with me. The company currently has my 35mm pics on their website, but they wanted to blow up the pics for thier stores nearly billboard size.

 

I'm not much into status but the Hassie does get a lot of attention. I've also noticed that people tend to move out of my way when I whip out the Hasselblad. I guess they realize that I'm a professional photographer and not just a guy with a nice camera.

 

Hopefully I'll get my Hassie back soon. By the way, NEXT year I'm getting that Harley.

[mike_daly]

Never mind what the others say!!!! Hasselblads ARE the best. The service is that best, and they are the best for all kinds of jobs. I use mine for landscape work and I just wouldn't use anything else. ALMOST better than SEX. You could kill yourself on a Harley, but a Hasselblad won't do that unless it falls on your head!

Regards Mike

[steve_hovland]

Feed your soul. Buy the Hassy if you really want it.

 

I have a similar craving for a Mamiya RZ67. Don't need it, but I like the look of it.

[msitaraman]

Steve, the guy asked the question 3.5 years ago...

[wim_van_velzen]

3,5 years would be a short period for me to scrape up enough money for a Hasselblad :-)

[squareframe]

> the guy asked the question 3.5 years ago...

 

true, but my bet he is still surfing photo.net and trying to decide if he should invest in the Hasselblad, or go with the Mamiya or Pentax, and use the money saved for a hair piece, gold chains, and a down payment on that new Porsche.

 

and besides, after 3.5 years, I was still ramping up into my crisis!

[john_kahrs]

I love this thread, with its thoughtful answers and its marathon duration, so I thought I'd keep it going.

 

It seems most of the people asking and answering are enthusiasts, not professional making their living with the cameras. I fit squarely in that category, and so I value the craftsmanship, the mystique and the feel of the cameras as machines as much as the images they produce. So I don't have a problem weighing these factors into the decision to buy one camera over another. I am constantly swinging back and forth, coveting one MF system over another. I would love to have a Hasselblad, not just for the camera, but for all the other, stupid stuff that goes with it. Just having the clever little swedish machine in a bag, walking around with it, knowing the heritage, admiring its precision. That's important to me, so I wouldn't fault someone for thinking so.

 

I have a lousy Pentacon Six with a flektogon 50/4, Biometar 80/2.8, and a Sonnar 180/2.8. The camera is almost a tin toy, but those lenses are quite impressive. Mine are not even multicoated and some of the diaphragms are a little out of round, but I just got back a roll of Velvia I took in Palm Srpings and was just stunned by the images. Through the loupe, the Flektogon is just glorious. Biometer is OK, and the Sonnar is superb. I couldn't ask for much better performance. I wonder how the western Zeiss lenses compares to their East German counterparts.

 

So that's a working system that I have, and it cost me less than 600 bucks (body, 3 lenses, prism, etc.). I disagree with folks who post that the cameras are "junk". I like using it, and it's always performed well for me, but there's something to be said for equipment that's a little more up to date. I rented a Fuji GA645zi this past weekend, and I think it was too far in the other direction. It makes it too easy, although if I was covering a wedding it'd be fantastic. I'm glad I rented instead of buying, because it just didn't have the right feeling. The format isn't that much bigger than 35mm and the viewfinder is also terrible (my tiny Olympus Stylus finder is better). These days I'm sniffing around the Fuji rangefinders. Not much romance there, but they're the coolest looking cameras around, also the lightest, and probably the best bang for the buck. I like rangefinders, too. Sometimes I'll be scouring Ebay for one machine or another, and my friend will come in and sit down, we'll be chatting about what I'm thinking of buying, and he says, "What do you REALLY want?". I have to admit, I'd probably give three answers: Leica M6, Nikon F5, and a Hasselblad. That covers telephoto action/macro work, silent invisible documentary style work, and super hi-rez MF. But I sort of hate that question, because it's the journey, not the destination. Of course I don't have any of these cameras either. That buying, using, selling, and collecting of (sometimes overlapping capability) cameras is all part of the fun. I would say get the Hasselblad, but you already have.

 

One other thing is that although you may covet additional lenses, I sometimes wish I had only one camera and one lens. Sometimes I think having so many lenses cancels out any picture taking activity at all. I end up wrestling with the idea of which one to use more than just shooting. This is why my Olympus Stylus (fixed 35/2.8) and my Canonet QL17 get more use than my Nikon system. I take the Pentacon with all three lenses (heavy!) and end up not wanting to lug it around, so I take the Stylus. It's also why I keep coveting the Fuji GW690II. One camera. One lens. Manual operation.

[allan_yates]

John,

No, you are not crazy. Hasselblads are much more enjoyable than motorcycles, and won't get you killed or maimed! If you shop carefully, you can find excellent used 'blad lenses for 40 - 50% less than the cost of new lenses. I'm not talking about lenses that have been thrashed - I'm talking about used lenses rated at 9 or 9+ (with 10 being new in box). See www.jackscamera.com and ask for Dan the used dept. mgr. If they don't have a particular lens you want, they can most likely find it. I have acquired a couple of 'blad lenses from Jack's as well as Nikon lenses and have been very happy with their service which is outstanding.

 

I think you can't go wrong with Hasselblad. I know of several photographers, pro and non-pro who have stepped up to 'blad from other MF systems. Of the people I know of who own 'blad, no one has sold/traded their 'blad for another MF system. It is a very different system from any other, but is not difficult to learn - just give yourself a little time to get accustomed to it. And buy yourself a good tripod and head to put the 'blad on for landscape work to maximize the sharpness of the lenses. The #1 cause of unsharp negs is camera shake/movement! Good luck!