While the Hasselblad is a more silky, smooth mechanically, I don't think you'll notice any real difference in image quality.
After several years of shhoting with a Rolleicord WLF, the Hasselblad felt right at home, and now looking through a prism seems odd to me. That said, after borrowing a Pentax 67, I saw no difference in image quality.
The only really benefit to the Hasselblad is the ability to change film backs. A blessing and a curse.
The first rule of film backs is . . . you can never have too many film backs.
The second rule of film backs is . . . you can never have too many film backs.
The THIRD rule of film backs is . . . ALL of them . . . EVERY single one of them . . . will need to be reloaded just when the perfect, fleeting light condition appears. It doesn't matter how many you have or how many times you train yourself to reload them immediately after finishing a roll.
I don't know ... i do have too many film backs.
I find i only need two. One to use, the other to have a loaded magazine when there is no time to reload the first one.
Four, if i use both colour and black and white.
Could be because i indeed do reload a magazine as soon as possible.
Things were much better still when 220 film was more readily available.
And cheaper - it looks like 220 is going up in price every day. Almost twice the price, per frame, as 120 film now. So even though my favourite colour film (Portra) is still available, i can't bring myself to buy it anymore.
Last edited by Q.G.; 10-08-2009 at 03:02 PM. Click to view previous post history.
With the prices the way they are now and with little patience, you can get a hassy for a very reasonable price.
The optics on a Hasselblad are incredible.....IMO. I am extremely satisfied with the results and the ruggedness of this system.
I sold mine to go to 4 x 5 a few years back and regretted selling the blad to get to 4 x 5. I ended up buying another blad shortly after. I bought a 1997 - 501CM with a 1994 - 60mm Distagon 1982 - A12 back, 70mm back, PM45 viewfinder as well as the original view finder and a bunch of expired film for $800.00 U.S.
This was just last year so deals are out there.
I have both. I am happy.
John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA
Originally Posted by Vaughn
Buy a Kiev 88. The people who ask the question won't know the difference
John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I'd bet few of use use equipment that isn't capable of more than we wring out of them.
I llike my 500's but never use them off a tripod, that's 35mm work.
>I think you should go for the Hassy -- that way when people ask you, "Is that a Hasselblad?", you can answer "Yes!".<
I always wanted a Hasselblad until i got a Mamiya 7
The big advantage of the Hassy in this case is the exchangeable magazines. Would they help you a lot for what you shoot?
Is having exchangeable magazines worth the loss in negative area? If you want to print square pictures, then the Hassy has an advantage, but only in terms of wasted film area; not in quality. If you want to print rectangular ones, the Pentax has an advantage in that it requires a significantly lower enlargement than the Hassy for a given print size. (Yes, I know squares are technically rectangles as well, but you know what I mean.)
As for quality of the optics, I would look at qualities versus quality. They both have fine lenses from a technical standpoint. The key is in that which cannot be quantified. FWIW, nothing I have shot or seen from a Hassy with Zeiss glass blows me away any more than anything I have shot with my Mamiya TLRs, Mamiya Super 23, RZ-67, etc. I find that my Mamiya TLRs have the most unique "signature" out of all my medium format cameras (except maybe my Brownie, of course). Very "3D"...quite like my favorite Barnack Leica lenses. This is a matter of taste, however.
Eye-level versus waist-level viewing is a non issue in this case. Both camera systems have either method as an option. The only issue I can see with WLFs is doing verticals with the Pentax. Personally, I would have a prism on both of the cameras. Wish I had one for my RZ!
As far as what I would do: I would shoot with both if I had them, but I would not get rid of the Pentax in order to purchase the Hassy. I would in no way view the Hassy as a replacement for the Pentax; just an addition to the tool box.
"Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."
- Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)
Could you borrow or rent a Hasselblad? That might help you decide.
Do you use the zone system or multiple types of film? The interchangeable backs really help if you do.
Would you like to use fill flash? The leaf shutters in (most of) the Hasselblad lenses make fill flash much more practical.
Don't you love it when people answer a question with more questions?
More seriously, it is important to concentrate on the differences between the systems, as well as the peculiarities of the ergonomics.
Personally, the ergonomics of the Hasselblad don't suit me, but they may fit you like a glove.