Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,924   Posts: 1,556,673   Online: 1203
      
Page 1 of 8 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 75

Thread: 500 c/m vs. RB

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Jackson. MS, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    225

    500 c/m vs. RB

    I understand that at current prices I should just try both, but setting up my darkroom has gone WAY over budget. I further understand that the Zeiss lenses have that little bit of magic stirred in (I have and use a Contax RTS.) I am also aware that the 'blad has operational 'issues' and that the RB is bigger and heavier So.......

    If you were starting from scratch, which system would you buy into?
    Last edited by Jim Rice; 04-27-2013 at 10:34 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    133
    What operational issues? I'd say if you're already over budget and want a good 2 1/4 cheap, buy a Hasselblad EL/ELM

  3. #3
    Jeff L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Toronto ON
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    494
    For what's it worth - I have an RZ and think its a truly great camera and system. I don't use it, or hardly use it because life has changed, and I travel for work. If I had a 500 and the 2 or 3 common lenses I would use it far more. Just my opinion.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Jackson. MS, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    225
    Lens changing and the occasional locking up. Also having to keep the release pressed during long exposures. I also think that I would not care for an EL in the field.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Jackson. MS, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    225
    My thoughts for the 500 c/m are 50, 80 and 150. For the RB are 50. 90 and something long. :P

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Jackson. MS, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    225
    What I REALLY want is a Rolleiflex 2.8 F but, alas, I will never be able to afford it.
    Last edited by Jim Rice; 04-27-2013 at 11:14 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    133
    A CM can be carried around your neck like a 35, but gets you away from the grain problem pretty well. An RB is closer to a 4x5, but twice the weight of a Crown Graphic. Those things can be real boat anchors. CM's get you away from "should I rotate the back on this shot?" That back rotating question crops up every time you want to take a picture. Phooey on that. But by the time you crop a square C negative, an RB gives you full frame. A sharper, less grainy photo. But a CM can be carried around you neck, or did I say that?

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Jackson. MS, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    225
    What does a 500 c/m weigh (with an 80?) I know the RB, with a 90 is about six pounds.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Jackson. MS, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    225
    Also, what are your thoughts about relative 'mirror slap?'

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    133
    I think a Rapid Omega ends the mirror slap situation AND gives you the RB negative.

Page 1 of 8 1234567 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin