pieterdekoninck

I don't have either system. However, I am thinking about the GFX system for later down the road. I currently use Olympus cameras. My thinking is this: if I want ultimate image quality, I should go straight to medium format. That's Fuji's thinking: they sell APS-C and MF cameras, but they will not make a 36mm system. There are enough of those.

 

You will get better shadow detail per pixel count on a larger sensor. For a time, the Hasselblad X1D, which uses the same sensor, was the best low light camera you could buy - not a Nikon, and not a Sony. I don't know if it still is though.

 

I too have been doing some research on using SLR lenses on MF mirrorless. I found this interesting thread:

 

Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX

 

I am only up to page 7. It's a long one, with lots of detail, so get yourself a thermos full of coffee and prepare the fireplace!

 

FWIW, just for the sake of conversation, I had considered the Leica S system. I like it a lot but... reflex cameras are too much of a step backwards. Well, for digital anyway.

I have to disagree there. I dislike a camera that does not have an optical viewfinder, and the Leica S is among the best.

A few observations. I do not think the Nikon lenses will cover the GFX sensor. You will have vignetting. Also, not being familiar with the adapters available, you will most probably lose some of the lenses capabilities, like autofocus and automatic aperture control. Lastly, the size of the MF sensor (not truly MF, but larger than FX) can give a much nicer image than the same number of pixels on an FX sensor. If you do go for the GFX, spring for the Fuji lenses. They are excellent. Otherwise, you might not get the quality the camera is capable of delivering. Older MF lenses don't necessarily have the resolving power needed for digital, plus who knows what image deterioration an adapter might introduce.

Only if they don't charge by printable image.

 

Traditionally, slide didn't charge for mounting blank frames, but for (usually negatives), they would charge for each print.

 

I think at least once (maybe only once) someone managed to print something

that wasn't at all an image of anything.

This whole idea of removing a partial roll is pretty silly. What are you going to do with it? You will have to waste a few frames to reload it and might even introduce issues when doing that as far as I know--I've never done that. Just bite the bullet and either leave the film in the camera or fire off the remaining frames. If the cost of mounting/printing is an issue, maybe you need a different hobby. There are not that many frames on a 120 roll and film isn't all that expensive.

You could argue, though, that often having to find things to take pictures of that you wouldn't have taken anyway, just to fill a roll, is more of a burden than knowing that you wasted a frame or two.

You don't have to work very hard at it. Pointing the camera randomly is not a burden and who knows what you might get. Better than a blank frame, even if it is a blank frame.

I had the same or similar problem with my SWC. I took it to the local Hasselblad repair shop and they replaced a spring in the cocking mechanism. They did a complete CLA as well. Not an arm and a leg but not dirt cheap either.

Is it really that much of a hardship to snap blank frames? Maybe just shoot something random, you might end up with something you like.

I'm looking to buy my first medium format camera and struggling to decide between the options I've found at an online camera shop. While I love to collect cameras, I can't justify the cost as I'm just an amateur though I'm really keen to build up my skills and portfolio, and hopefully take jobs when I have enough confidence in my abilities. Therefore, I am looking to buy one camera that will suit my needs, and last me a good few years.

• I currently shoot in natural light, mainly street photography, and portraits.
  
• I may move into studio portrait photography at some point.
  
• I want a camera that is easy to take around, with sharp glass, and reliability.
  
• For example, if and when it breaks a few years’ down the line, I want it to have replacement parts easily available, and be able to find people who know how to fix it.
  
• I only want SLRs as that's what I'm familiar with and how I like to work.
  

These are the cameras I have a choice between from the camera shop - the Mamiya 645s and Hasselblad are around the same price, and the Bronica SQ is a little cheaper, the Bronica ETRSI a lot cheaper.

 

My choices are:

• Bronica SQ-A w/ 80mm F/2.8
  
• MAMIYA 645 PRO W/ 80MM F/2.8
  
• MAMIYA 645 AFD II W/ 80MM F/2.8
  
• HASSELBLAD 500CM BLACK W/ 80MM F/2.8 C
  
• BRONICA ETRSI W/ 75MM F/2.8
  
• or wait and save up for the Mamiya 7
  

The Hasselblad is fully mechanical but I don't like the 6x6 format, and I like the Mamiya 645 but I know can develop issues with focusing due to its mirror - so that feels risky. I really like the Mamiya RZ67 but it's not portable, and I've looked up a few cheaper, Russian options but they are notoriously unreliable. There is also the Mamiya 7, which seems perfect, but expensive.

 

I want to buy one camera and invest in that system for a good few years, so I’d rather pay upfront for what will be right for me, rather than buying a cheaper option and then wanting/needing to buy another camera in two years’ time. So I'm unsure whether to get one of the above, or save up for a Mamiya 7.

If your goal is to get assignments and sell photos, I would recommend you skip film and invest in a good FF digital camera. Or if you have deep pockets, a MF digital camera. No one assigns film work unless you have an outstanding look and style to your work that cannot be achieved with digital.

I was one of those dreaded advertising art directors until I retired a number of years ago. I have worked with photographers with in-house e6 processing show me test transparencies, let alone Polaroids. I never had a photographer refuse to make a Polaroid--even when shooting 35mm and using a 330 or such camera for the test--but if such a situation occurred, I would be have been happy to walk out as long as the the photographer would guarantee to reshoot the same day I saw the film--picking up all expenses along the way. A Polaroid was something of an assurance the art director and the photographer understood what to expect.

Cameras are disposable.

 

Lenses should last a lifetime or more.

Not necessarily ones with leaf shutters or electronics such as VR.

Dave Feely at Key Camera in Longmont, Colorado. I believe he is the only one left in the US. 303-772-7690

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Rollei 6008. Although it is heavy, it is well balanced and easy to hand-hold with the action grip. I use it hand-held all the time, More sophisticated and less finicky than a Hasselblad. Downside is you will most likely have to rebuild the battery with NiMH cells, and service is difficult to find in the U.S.

So typical PNet. It was and it still is a real pleasure to share...

 

I wasn't deriding anything or anybody. Just sharing my thoughts on why i think i never had any serious problems with Hasselblad gear.

That Hasselblad design was and is so finicky that NASA trusted it to use on critical occasions. It has served many professionals for 70 years, gaining and keeping a reputation (and a reputation based price- "Why", the then CEO was asked in an interview once "are Hasselblad cameras that expensive, compared to other brands?" "Because we can ask that much", he replied). Must be, i trust, Ben, because these thingies are so finicky.

Are they perfect? Do they never fail? Of course not. But not as much as we are made to believe reading PNet comments. I know. I used them quite a bit for about half a century. That's what i was saying. Your Mileage May Vary.

 

I'm sure that a lot of bad experiences using Hasselblad equipment nowadays are due to the amount of really bad cameras and other bits of equipment that is for sale today.

It always was a matter of knowing what to buy, what to look for, because you could (and still can) ask and get quite a lot for gear that needed service or even repairs. So it is tempting to find a buyer for something that really deserves to put to eternal rest. And not every seller was or is that honest about what they are selling.

And now that Hasselblad cameras aren't used that much by professionals anymore, a lot of the gear that is doing the rounds hasn't seen service for quite a while, etc.

 

You experienced a lock-up, Ben, "before you knew what you were doing". Are you deriding everybody who had a lock-up, because they do not know what they are doing?

And what happened ever since, Ben, using those finicky machines?

I have a couple of thoughts on the matter of Hasselbad's reputation. As a former advertising art director, I expected the photographers I gave jobs to to have current, pro-level, reliable equipment and back-ups. Those professionals usually had experience with that equipment and knew what was necessary to maintain it. A failure on the job did not bode well for the photographer, me or go over well with the client and talent involved. Hasselblad equipment (bodies, lenses, backs , etc.) were readily available from rental houses to provide additional equipment as needed. Not that there weren't other brands available, just Hasselblad was the best-known.

An option to the well-known California repair service is Key Camera in Colorado.

Now that we're on the subject of cars, I remember once being at my mechanic's shop when one of his clients stopped by in his new-to-him 7-series BMW. He was crowing about how he got the car for a low price. The mechanic then reminded him that he was still going to have to pay for a complicated, high-tech $80,000-car maintenance, parts and repair costs. I guess the same goes for cameras: you might be able to buy into a Hasselblad system relatively cheap (compared to the original price), but you still have the same cost of maintenance for the body, the backs and lenses.

Recently I have come across several 500 EL/M bodies at what seems to be bargain prices. Is this a problem-laden camera? I know the batteries can be replaced with an adapter to take off-the-shelf ones. I cannot find anything much about the Hasselblad 500 EL/M online, which leads me to think I should shy away from buying one. Anyone out there know about this camera?