Upgrade in TLRs or go to Hasselblad SLRs

[grant_gardner1]

<p>I currently own a 1956 Rolleiflex MX-EVS with a f/3.5 75mm Zeiss Tessar (with a few filters, rolleinars, and hood) and have been getting fantastic results with it. I'm intrigued by the idea of the planar or xenotar lenses in the 3.5 or 2.8 Rolleiflex models and am curious about upgrading to one of those. The Hasselblad V series with the 80mm Planar has also caught my eye as a potential addition but I cannot afford to get both. Would I be better off getting a Rolleiflex with a higher quality and/or faster lens or investing in a Hasselblad SLR system to complement what I have in a TLR? Thank you in advance for taking the time to respond to this question.</p>

[BrianS1664879711]

Get the slr and enjoy the ability to change lenses

[savagesax]

I agree with Brian. If for some reason you are strapped for money the digital medium format Pentax cameras are

pretty nice with the 40 or the new 50 megapixel sensors. The issue here is the limited lenses available for the

Pentax cameras. If you can afford the Hassy, go for it.

[dhbebb]

<p>Hasselblads are much more versatile but bulkier. A camera plus WLF and standard lens is expensive enough, other lenses, extension tubes etc. are even more so. Hasselblads are also much more complex, they're durable but servicing costs of older models may be high. If you photograph with a standard lens all the time and don't need to focus closer than 1 meter (or can accept close-up lenses as a way of doing this), the Rolleiflex will be fine.</p>

[rjm photo]

<p>I have an early '60s Rollei T (75mm Tessar F3.5) which gives me excellent results. I purchased three years ago a Rollei E3 with the 3.5 Xenotar (which has the improved taking lens with the extra lens element).<br>

The E3 gives me extraordinary results with quality color film or black and white, simply superb edge to edge sharpness and the color is amazing.<br>

I bought a Hasselblad 500 C/M about five years ago with 80mm C Planar and several other lenses including 50mm FLE. The Hasselblad is very clunky, loud, and really should be on a tripod to come anywhere near the sharpness of my Rolleiflex E3. I handhold my film Leicas at 1/8 second and routinely get camera shake fee results - the Hasselblad though is another animal and if it is going to be used less than 1/250th you need a tripod. It probably would be best used in a studio or in situation out of doors where, again, a tripod is available.<br>

I would get the Hasselblad only if you really intend to use the camera with lenses other than the really excellent 80mm Planar.</p>

 

[greg_alton]

<p>I think it all comes down to what you want to do with it - if you're not going to make use of the features of an SLR, and are otherwise happy with the Rollei, I'd incline more to Robert's comments: it will feel large and clunky compared to a TLR. I still find it much easier to pack/take/use a TLR, so I use it more often than other medium format cameras.<br>

Personally I'd say go for it and keep your eye out for one with a Planar or Xenotar. If you shop carefully and don't rush, you should be able to find one in good condition at a reasonable price - reasonable enough that if you change your mind later and re-sell, you shouldn't lose much. (I found a 2.8c on a local listing site a few years ago, for example)<br>

That said, don't raise your expectations too high - the Tessars are also quite good. I think there is a noticeable difference, but to be honest, sometimes I just like the look of some of the Tessar-type lenses. </p>

[mike_earussi1]

<p>You're not going to get better results in the center with the 5 element lens of the Planar vs. the 4 element lens of the Tessar, just the corners will be sharper. If that is important to you then get a Planar/Xenotar, especially if light weight and portability are important (the F3 is my favorite model, especially with the glass plate back which takes sharpness to a whole new level).</p>

<p>But it's really nice to be able to change lenses, though why just a consider a Hassy? If you want to stick with 6x6 then look at the Mamiya 6--superb lenses, light weight, quiet and small, with four lenses vs. just the one of a Rollei. Or if 6x7 then the Mamiya 7 has the best MF lenses ever made.</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>A TLR is not that much smaller than an Hasselblad, it's tall whereas the Hassie is long. If you like the results from a Rollei, it won't be long before you wonder what you could do with interchangeable lenses and an accurate viewfinder.</p>

<p>That's my experience, and I haven't regretting going the SLR route.</p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>I agree that the 'blad is way more versatile, but I also agree that it is a lot heavier and cannot be shot so surreptitiously as a Rollei. As Robert says, the mirror vibration means it is not really a great low light shooter in my experience. Then there is the issue of interchangeable backs - make sure they are not leaking light through the dark slide seals, and that they are spacing the frames properly (common issues). I'd be very tempted to stay with a Rollei TLR and think of the one lens as an advantage not a disadvantage. If you want to get more versatile then I would go for a Mamiya 6 or 7 if I was doing it today, or a Fuji 6 x7 or 6 x 9..</p>

[Jochen_S]

<p>I know nothing about the Planar Tessar issue. The Rollei 3.5 I was given is in too bad state for usage. - I once cranked a roll through an elderly Hasselblad and wasn't overly impressed with the handling / shooting experience. but well you can probably upgrade it to a bright modern screen and even digital... I'm no fan of SLRs for BW outdoors; not much fun to view through your orange or even red filter. <br>

My suggestion would be: Stick to your Rollei for 75/80mm and buy something else <em>around</em> it. - Here I started with a 75mm Solinar and bought a Mamiya TLR with chronologically: 135, 55, (250)mm lenses. Last step was adding a 2nd one with 80mm and a SLR with 120mm f2.8. Disclaimer: I don't praise my Mamiya glas. I usually shot ISO 400 to 1600 and never had an enlarging lens to allow a pixelpeeping equivalent.<br>

If it has to be a new standard lens, I would probably go for a Rollei since they seem light (everything besides my folder weighs at least 2x as much) and I do like their sports finder, but I'd rather broaden my system. - YMMV.<br>

I once was pretty impressed by Mamiya 6 & 7, but too poor. Now I am too cheap and worried about their potential electric failure. So far my mechanical cameras seemed cheaper to maintain than anything battery dependant, but thats just my impression. Personally I don't feel a need for "high end" MF. If I ever need resolution shouting for good glas slow film & tripod, I'll skip good glas & slow film and take LF out.</p>

[dave_wilson1]

My walk-around Hasselblad is 501c (no floating mirror) with 60mm and folding finder. I can handhold nicely to 1/30 with

little problem. I also carry a 180mm with it and that needs 1/125 in general or above to get really sharp.

[benny_spinoza]

<p>As others have stated in other threads in the past, it is not so much the mirror slap as just one's hands shaking. I tested that, and I agree with it. Hand-held pictures with a Hassy with mirror lock up and with the mirror activated produced no discernable difference. That being said, as others have said (why do I keep quoting "others"?) it really boils down to whether you want a camera with interchangeable lenses. And if you want an interchangable lens camera, then as others (there I go again) have said, look into a Mamiya 67 rangefinder. I have a Hasselblad system, but regret that I didn't buy into the Mamiya rangefinder system. But, someday I may bet a digital back for the Hassy, so that is another thing to consider if you think someday a digital back is in your future.</p>

[jeff_bennett1]

If you think you will make use of interchangeable lenses or macro capability, I would say get a Hasselblad. However, I

would suggest hanging on to your Rollei MX-EVS. I own both Rolleiflexes and a Hasselblad outfit, and for some types of

shooting, the Rollei is my preference. I would consider the Rollei to be an easier camera to travel with as well as a less

intimidating camera for street shooting. But the Hasselblad has tremendous versatility, and repair services and

accessories for it are readily available. You didn't say what type of photography you like to do, and that may well

influence your choice.

 

Some have suggested the Mamiya rangefinder system. By all accounts this is a superb system, but not everyone finds

rangefinders to their liking. If you like the reflex approach to viewing, I would suggest trying out any rangefinder system

before you commit to the change.

[phil_brown3]

<p>Have both Rolleis and Hasselblads. These days I find I use the Rolleis. I have a 3.5 Tessar and a 3.5 Planar. I use the Tessar for B&W, Planar for color. <br>

I use a standard lens 90% of the time and the Rolleis are just easier to haul and use.</p>