I think the title of this thread should be changed as it does not appear that there is a "last word." I think perhaps "Ongoing Words: Rolleiflex vs Hassey" would be a bit more accurate.
I'd guess that in reality the last word is which of the two makes a poster in the thread is actually still using. I my case I never had any interest in Hasselblads but have used 4 Rolleiflexes (or Rolleicords) and have an MPP Microcord which is a UK better engineered version ot the Rolleicord III with a higher quality (compared to the Tessar) Xpres lens.
So I happened to go down the Rollei TLR route 6 or 7 years ago, it's about knowing your cameras capabilities and getting the most from them, I have no doubt I could get excellent results from a Hasselblad. I happened to use a Bronica S2a firts in the 1970's and the system was superb but I went for a Mamiya 645 system in preference, it was just what suited me best and at the time I didn't like or rather utlise the square format even when I had mamiya C3 & C33 cameras so 645 made much more sense.
These days after buying a Yashicamat 124 and reviving a mint dried our Rolleiflex 3.5 E I find the square format is wonderful and I always work to it, it's by instinct though I vcan work to many formats and never crop.
Bought a YashicaMat first and then moved to Rolleiflex. Have two now, one is an MXV Automat circa 1954 and the other is a Tele-Rolleiflex from around 1960. Still have all three along with several Ikoflexes. Enjoy them all immensely though I am nowhere near mastering any of them. I cannot seem to live without the view in that glass.
In the meantime I have owned a Mamiya 645. It never worked quite right, I think it was about used up by the time I got it. Sold that, bought a Hassy 501CM. The pix were fine but I sold that and bought a Pentax 645Nii. Most of my best shots have come with the Pentax but I am addicted to the Rolleis so I keep using them.
I keep telling myself I could live only with a Rollei and a 645Nii, and maybe one day I will.
As cheap as film cameras have become, why not one of each?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
I've never gone in for Hasselblads because of the price of the lenses, but I do think in general it makes sense to have "one of each" between TLRs and some kind of MF system cameras. The benefits of each have been decently covered in this thread, and they're quite complementary.
See? *That's* how you do a "last" word. :-)
I can't believe that so many posts CAN be made about something like this.
They are not exactly the same, are they? There's a reason they took Haaselblad cameras to space, used them for scientific photography, and that they were so popular in studios. They are good at applications like that. Extremely competent cameras.
Rolleiflex TLRs are of a different kind. They are smooth, light, beautiful devices that work so well for art photography, more casual and relaxed, every day use, away from the tripod.
They are completely different animals. Both very competent, but apples and oranges, and it comes down to shooting technique which suits the user best. Both cameras are capable of extremely high print quality. Mirror vibration has not been an issue in my years with Hasselblad.