tariq_gibran

The quality probably depends on what you are buying. I just picked up two of their $19

SuperClamps which are half the price of the similar Bogen version and the quality of these

seem very good. Enough so that I will try some of their other products.

Mamiyas specs state an 11 shot burst rate at 1.2 FPS so that wait must surely be after the

initial 11 shots which are in the buffer.

Even more funny is that the monstrosity that is now a 645 Imablad/Hasselcon Frankencamera

would be in competition not only with the square Hy6 but also with thousands of inexpensive

used Classic True Hasselblad 6x6 V systems. Thats their worst nightmare. But hey, if it

happens soon enough, perhaps they might keep the V system around a little longer.

"If it does happen, won't that be a hoot? Hasselblad, the long running proponent of the

square format, now facing off against a modernized square format system with a 645 based

digital system ... LOL."

"I do much better chatting while looking down into the finder..."

Exactly! People are much more open and less intimidated when there is not a camera

between them and you I have found, and this will show in the final images. The wide

angle 50G for the Mamiya 6 Rangefinder is probably one of the best 6x6 wide angles ever

made BUT then the above point goes out the window. That said, once you put a SLR wide

angle on a Hasselblad such as one of the 50's, that camera will become much more heavy

and bulky compared to the normal lens. BUT, there is the very nice, smaller 60mm

Distagon which is just wide enough for great environmental portraits. Thats what you may

wish to check out on the Blad. Also look for a Quick Foccus handle for the lenses which

will make a big difference in qucik, spontaneous operation while engagiing your subject.

Reading your post, I don't think you will want to go with the fine Mamiya Rangefinders for

two reasons. First, as you say, your, you will be "hiding" behind it while shoooting and

that can be intimidating to your subject and draw attention to yourself. The Waist level

approach is much better in this regard I have found. Second, you may miss the ability to

focus on a ground glass with the Rangefinders. The Hasselblad is a great camera and with

prices today would be a great choice Except that the noise factor may be an issue as you

have suggested you want a quite camera. The Hasselbald will be much louder than a

Rolleicord/Rolleiflex as will the Rolleiflex SL66 or any other SLR camera. This is where the

TLR have a major advantage. The Mamiyas with interchangeable lenses will be bulky so

unless you really think you need interchangeable lenses, that will be a major consideration

with that camera. In fact, "heavy and unwieldy" would describe the SL66 and the Mamiya

C330 to me compared to the TLR Rolleicord/Rolleiflex and even the Hasselblad which is

very comfortable to shoot using the Waist level viewfinder. The fact that you seem to

really like shooting with the old Rolleicord would suggest to me that you may just want to

buy a Rolleiflex. Look for the E2 which is basically an F without the meter and can be

often found for half the price of the F. I would suggest the 3.5 version with Planar or

Xenotar. You should be able to find that for between $450-$600 or so on the auction site

as one just sold for around $450. If interchangeable lenses are a must, then the

Hasselblad is the obvious choice as it will offer everything you are looking for except is

will be louder than the Rolleiflex TLR.

The Planar as used on a Hasselblad versus the Rolleiflex is of a different design which may

account for some of the performance differences(as well as sample variation as I have used a

few different blad 80mm Planars and some are better than others). The blad Planar uses a

slight Retrofocus modification of the design because the body is so deep whereas the

Rolleiflex Planar does not and is a "purer" original design. And of course, later Rolleiflex

Planars added an additional lens element which some claim improved things even more. I'm

sure others could state exactly what serial number/model that occured with.

True of course about the lenses but the 4 element Tessar/Xenar is a very good performer,

particularly stopped down. I wonder CPeter, if you might share exactly how you held your

Rolleiflex as I could never figure out how to support the camera with one hand only. I always

found that I had to change camera support from left to right hand when cocking or focusing

with a Rolleiflex. Is there another solution? This is also one thing, incidently, which makes

the Hasselblad quicker for me when shooting. I can cradle the camera with the Left hand

with the left index finger on the shutter release in front while my right hand is left to crank

AND focus(which is very easy using a quick focus handle).

The Rolleiflexes and the Hasselblad are both heavy and actually have about the same

amount of bulkyness compared to the much lighter Rolleicords which is what I would

suggest for a take everywhere street shooter. All three are incredible image makers. Both

TLR will be much quiter than the Blad but I think one can be even more "stealthy" with the

under lens release/shutter cock and seperate knob wind of the rolleicord. Its also a heck

of a lot of camera for the $ AND if something happens to it, your not going to be quite as

sad with the financial loss as with the others. I have owned two Rolleicords in the past 20

years. The first was stolen(and I was out $50! plus untold pain and suffering at the loss),

the second I bought more recently for less than $100. I really love the Xenar lenses

personally, even compared to the Planars. Even more, I prefer the ergonomics of the older

Rolleicords to the last Rolleicord V and more expensive Rolleiflexes in that one can cradle

the camera in the left hand with your finger under the lens cocking and firing while at the

same time your right hand is left to focus and wind. This makes much more sense to me

than having the focus on the Left which is where it is with the Rolleiflex because there is

no way to focus, crank and shoot while also holding the camera at the same time!

Speculation only but here it goes. Once current inventories of all new Hasselblad Zeiss lenses

are gone, then these Zeiss lenses will be the only way to buy New. I also don't think that

Hasselblad has officially stated the discontinuation of the V system. I think they will do that

very soon. Also, this "classic" series will most likely be of much lower production numbers

than any of the Hasselblad equivelents making them instant collector items. I suggest that

the real deals right now if your looking to buy a New lens, and not a used one, would be to

grab a current Hasselblad lens before they are gone.

Just out of curiousity and given that Zeiss are subcontracting out many of their ZF and ZM

lenses to Cosina in Japan, does anyone know if these are made by Zeiss in Germany OR if

they are made in Japan?

"5) are comfortable with the awkward hand-held ergonomics that characterises all 6x6 and

6x7 SLR's."

I would completely disagree with this point for myself at least as I find shooting my 500

hand held at waist level much more comfortable than shooting anything else and when

photographing people, its also more comfortable for them as well. No doubt its extremely

subjective but ergonomically, cradling the body with the left hand with the index finger on

the shutter button with the right hand left to focus and crank is very intuitive and quick for

me but I have been shooting this way for 20 years or so. I agree with the crop factor if

wide angle is required. The other points do not matter for me in the least. 16 large photo

site high quality MP will almost always be better than the same amount crammed into a

smaller area. Heck, look at the per pixel sharpness of the just 10MP Leica DMR and M8

which compare nicely with the higher MP Canons, some would even say they are superior

in some areas. Only point being that the quality of those pixels matter more than the

number. 10, 16, 22, 39 whatever. Same per pixel quality sensor requires a 4x increase to

just double the resolution

"2. It needs a cable from the lens's synch socket to the back, this cable comes loose or fails,

not all the time but often enough that you'll be aware of it. If you're in the business of

capturing fleeting moments rather than static subjects this could cost you an important

shot."

This is not the case with the newer Hasselblad CFV Digital back and probably one of its main

advantages over the other options.

As long as it did not weigh as much as the Medalist and injur your index finger with its very

hard to press shutter release!

I would avoid one if you live in a high humidity environment such as say Florida and plan on

using it outside often. I had a 6006 in the early 90's and the electronics did not tolerate

changes in temperture and humidity at all. The camera would just stop working. Eventually,

the electronic shutter in the lens fell apart as well. But, maybe they improved this with seals

or something though I doubt it. Thats why I shoot old mechanical Rolleiflexes and

Hasselblads now and, knock on wood, never ever have any issues.

Simple, sturdy, robust and affordable. Plenty of expensive alternatives out there for a

technical 6x9. Something along the lines of the deceased Fuji GSW/GS 690 roll film series

would appeal to me the most. Definately as close to a "true" 6x9 in actual format size as

possible, Like the Brooks Veriwide 100. That is what I would attempt to emulate, a cross

between the Veriwide 100 and the Fuji. Both these cameras were easily used hand held

and light and small enough to carry anywhere, unlike a larger, modular technical camera.

A folder sounds nice and romantic, but designig a robust, rigid one that was affordable

sounds like a huge technical challenge(read expensive). Most folders are very lacking in

the lens to film plane alignment department and that would be crucial for taking

advantage of the 6x9 format to its fullest.

Kodak custom designed a sensor specifically for the new Leica M8 as well. One of the

reasons they exited the Digital Back business(and probably SLR camera Business) is that it

conflicted with their more profitable CCD Sensor business as it did not look good competing

with their own clients such as Phase One! Ironically, they parchased Leaf and Leaf still uses

Dalsa Sensors.

"as far as I know it does include C lenses, it's a problem with the shutter blades not the

shutter timing mechanism."

I guess I'm now confused as the shutter blades are different on C versus CF lenses with the C

lenses being curved(not outward or inward but creating more of a circular shape) compared

to the completely octogonal shape of the CF blades. OR, are you stating that early CF blades

were curved in their shape. And when you say curved and straight are you referring to the

above OR are you meaning Bowing inward or outward and thus touching the lens element?

So, does this only affect CF lenses and not the prior Synchro-Compur C lenses? Would that

mean that one can buy a SWC/M with a C lens which would not have this issue?

I believe there are some late SWC/M's with CF instead of C lenses. These would probably be

free of this issue?

A very good scan at 4000 dpi(drum or glass carrier on dedicated film scanner) I find the best

way to evaluate lens sharpness when shooting a very high resolution film like Velvia. Thats

how I test a lens once for peice of mind...and then forget about it. On your other question, I

agree that with a very good lens on 6x6(and I"m not sure if your Yashica falls into this

category) with a slow hi res film and at the optimum F stop(usually F8 or F11), 36"+ is easily

doable with critical sharpness up close, nose in the print.

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=000Boh&tag=

Info on CB line.

The CB series and the 80mm CB itself was released for the single reason of being an

inexpensive alternatative to entice people into the Hasselblad system by selling at a

"favourable price level" as has been said here many times. The 80mm CB was in no way an

improvement optically to the 7 element C, CF or CFE version otherwise that design would

have been offered in the latest, more expensive CFE version.

oops, looks like that would be an 80mm CB lens which was not the same optically and had 6

instead of 7 elements. Richard Nordin claims both in different sections of his book

"Hasselblad System Compendium" so my first answear must be a misprint.

Introduced 1997 and Supplied with the New 80mm C lens which had the exact same optical

design as the CF but lacked the F setting for the 2000 or 200 series.

Kal, you can get some great info on the "family" lens charecteristics you are referring to

here on zeiss and Leica lenses and if you look around the site, you can learn a lot about

the look of a lens and how it relates to MTF charts as well:

http://www.imx.nl/zeiss.html

from this page:

"The characteristics of the Contarex lenses are reminiscent of the Hasselblad lenses.

Stopped down a bit they exhibit a remarkable finesse of gradation and depth. They may

not be the sharpest lenses ever, but the rendition of shape outlines and surface details is

most pleasing and subtle like a poem."