Hasselblad v. Mamiya

[epeace]

As architecture/Interior type photography is among the areas I am considering I have been looking at medium/large format cameras and tossing around the idea of getting one to learn on. I know it will be a kings ransom to go digital in this arena but if its the type of photography i want to do . . well the cost doesnt really matter much does it. Anyway initially i would learn on film. Maybe even get a polaroid back.

From what I can ascertain by reading and talking to pro friends, in the world of medium format cameras and view cameras, Hasselblad and Mamiya are like Canon and Nikon are to the SLR community.

I am curious to the kind of experience you guys have with this type of photography and equipment. And what your preferences are between these two brands (if there is a leaning one way or another among Canon guys/gals like us).

[kb244]

I cant speak for being a MF photographer, but I can least tell you what friend of mine have told me, between the two I hear more about Hasselblad being much more highly regarded. I even have a friend that used to shoot off an older mamiya, but sold it in the past when things were going digital, and is now considering selling his 20D to get a hasselblad, as he just cant kick the 'feel' of shooting medium format. I wouldnt get too concerned about getting into the MF Digital Backs, as the price range those are in, and how they are not the same size as the MF negative, but similar to the area of like the full frame 1Ds, you might benefit best sticking with shooting film with those MF bodies ( adds to the experience ). I think the Digital Backs at their price range will benefit working professionals who shoot a ton of shots during the year, in which case the digital backs make back their money as short as 6 months over film cost, otherwise for personal use you probally would need several years to make back the cost of film you use.

Thats just my feeling, and a breif word of what I heard from others. I'd be interested shooting MF myself, but I have nor the money, nor patience for anything non-digital. But I have seen scanned shots from friends who shot with their MF bodies and I'm quite impressed.

[CyberDyneSystems]

I would not have thought to look at Hassleblad and Mamiya like Canon and Nikon,.

To me both Canon and Nikon are "Mamiyas" and Hassleblad is more of a leica ;)

Of the two,. Mamiya is less expensive,. more bang for your buck. Hassleblad is pretty much the top shelf,. but you have to pay more.

[kb244]

I would not have thought to look at Hassleblad and Mamiya like Canon and Nikon,.

To me both Canon and Nikon are "Mamiyas" and Hassleblad is more of a leica ;)

Of the two,. Mamiya is less expensive,. more bang for your buck. Hassleblad is pretty much the top shelf,. but you have to pay more.

Thats the same exact impression I got from the other folks when listening in on threads and such, Mimaya, few other brands were like consumer-grades, where as like you said Hasselblad was like a leica, or one of those things like "you got money" type of gear even if it didnt have the feature list of the consumer grade stuff ,the optics, feel, general usage was supposed to be top of the line. I mean why do you think a Lecia Rangefinder cost so damn much. :D

To put it another way, I think Mamiya is often recomended for those doing "Budget" MF photography, something you could easily get for under a grand. However something like a Hasselblad 500CM , used even with scratches and such on the body, is considered a steal at 700$ or so.

[Vegas Poboy]

I prefer the Mamiya myself, I often check out the 645AFD from school and love using it for B&W film. Plus the digital backs are starting to soften on price, Once I knock out the rest of my Canon Gear I will purchase one. Now for the Hasselblad it's the has a major plus over the Mamiya and thats the flash sync speed I believe is 1/500 of a second and its a leaf shutter over the Mamiyas curtian style shutter. If you get into work where you have to have a higher sync speed then Hassblad is the way to go. Another thing to research is the Mamiya RZ for the style of work you're looking into the bigger the negative the better.

[kb244]

Oh one way I look at it, if you never done MF photography before, and you are not sure you are gona like it, might wana start off on something like a Mamiya RZ67, Mamiya 645, Bronica GS-1 (6x6/6x7), or even a Pentax 67.

[kb244]

Hey vegas, finally someone who shoots MF, I was wondering bout the technical aspect of the hasselblad that makes it expensive.

[kb244]

Hrm talk about expensive, I just looked at the price of a Hasselblad H1 kit, ( its 2500$ without the viewfinder, film back, grip, lens ), which had a viewfinder, 80mm f/3.5 lens, a grip, and a film back and was like near 6000$ then I look up the price of a HC 4/120 Macro lens (120mm f/4.0) and that things like 5,500$ PRICEY!

[iwatkins]

I would seriously consider whether going medium format is the way to go these days. With the Canon 1Ds MkII already aprooaching digital medium format back resolutions it has to be an option.

One guy I know who just does architecture, and makes a very good living from it, has just switched from medium format digital (using Leaf backs on 'blads) to a Canon 1Ds MkII with the tilt and shift lenses plus a few other choice pieces of L glass. He tells me that the shots he gets from this combo are actually high quality after post processing than the 22MP images he was getting from the Leaf backs. He was also saying that is also a lot easier to handle especially when hanging from the eaves of a house/building etc. trying to get the right shot.

Anyway, something to think about.

Cheers

Ian

[epeace]

right . . and the cost is not that far apart . . unless of course you go with a phase one back . . then you're spending corporate funding to get the same MP . .

so basically to get a decent film MF camera im looking at spending around $1500 to start?

[kb244]

I dont know about the original poster of this thread, but if I were ever going MF , I'd be shooting mamiya ( seems lower cost, but higher functionality is important to me, and something where the manufacture's lens arnt insanely expensive ). Thanks for taking the time to do a little write up bloo.

[kb244]

Far as the 1Ds vs the MF cameras with backs, I think those who go with the 1Ds are using them as cost-saves, also considering compactness versus a MF with a back. But the feeling I get off MF shooters, is that its not just the end result quality you get off most these camera, but simply the feel and experience that none of them could yet to describe to me about how shooting MF just feels different than shooting 35mm. Theres a friend of mine actually getting ready to sell his 20D just so he can go buy a MF camera, to get back that feel.

[ssim]

I still own a Mamiya RB67 ProS and a few lenses. It still is a great camera and would use it again if I were to do a wedding or portraits again. I also have the Pentax 6X7 which is a workhorse of a camera. Both of these provided excellent quality images.

The thing that has always bothered me about the Hasselblad is the square 6X6 negative when everything is printed rectangular. You are immediately applying a crop factor when printing.

Without a doubt the Hasselblad is probably the most highly regarded manufacturer in the medium format area. You end up paying for the name to a certain degree.

If I was making the choice today for a 120 film format camera my first choice would be Mamiya. You then have to ask yourself do you go 6X7 or 645 sizing. If it is 645 Pentax then becomes a real player in the decision.

[Persian-Rice]

Hasselblad.............. I have only used Mamiya once, and Hasselblad quite a few times, so my answer is a little biased.

[Andy_T]

One more advantage in favour of Mamiya is the new ZD11 digital back that they introduced just recently.

Best regards,
Andy

[epeace]

im not really sure if i want to shoot 6x7 or 6x5 . . . i wont really know until i go out there and start shooting with one or the other . . which means i would probably want to get a real cheapo MF/LF camera . . . is that even possible or practical?

i mean . . after doing a little more reading/researching . . it seems that either brand will suit my needs nicely . . . but with an entry level of around $1000-$1500 US to get a decent camera/lens/back of either brand . . i want to be sure i will actually use this format first . . .

i guess where im going with this is is it practical to get a really old MF camera off ebay to play with until i am more certain of the direction i want to go in? or are there features in the newer (more expensive) models that i wouldnt have access to in the older ones?

[Persian-Rice]

e-peace,I love my large format (in my sig) but I didnt have to pay for it, well sorta, its 2 year rental is included in my tuition............ :D

Its a great camera for anything done in the studio.

[iwatkins]

Also consider whether you need lens movements as well. For architecture work, I would suggest that you would, but that depends on your needs.

Ian

[epeace]

My advice to you is that if you want to split from the 35mm scene to a larger film format, go with a Mamiya RB67 or an RZ67. $1500.00 will buy you a great outfit on the used market.



Just know which product you want and learn something about the system before you buy. Not all the systems have interchangeable lenses/accessories.

Go for it.Yah i noticed that some dont have interchangeable parts . . i think that would be a deal breaker for me depending on what they are asking . . and a monorail camera is definitely what im looking at . . due to the nature of alot of architecture photography . .

the wierd thing is the range in prices im finding . . from under $300 US to over $2000 US . . . and the differences in features arent as vast as the differences in price . . . i guess the digital revolusion is making many film equipment owners scatter while others are holding strong . .

[epeace]

One thing to keep in mind is that the concept of a wide angle lens for large format is about 90mm-150mm with the 210 considered "normal.".i have noticed that . . . anyway . . . good tip on the geared monorail . . i liked the look and it seemed better quality but now that you mention it, it makes perfect sense that slippage would be an issue on a friction rail at its widest . .

so i guess what i think ill do is get a super cheapo (antique?) field camera and play with the rotations and what not . . to learn the feel of a large format camera . . and if i can get some jobs that would require it . . . I will spend the 1 or 2 large for a quality piece of equipment . .

thanks for the wisdom

[Andy_T]

Another thing that might or might not be interesting for you to look at, would be affordable MF photography using Russian MF cameras.

One knowledgeable source on this would be our forum member RDENNEY's homepage (http://www.rickdenney.com/kiev_cameras.htm).

In the Pentacon6 format there are a lot of very good, good and mediocre lenses available at very attractive prices (around 200$ for a used 180/2.8 or 300/4 Zeiss lens with great optical performance) that can also be used on other MF cameras (e.g. the the Mamyia 645) or Canon EOS cameras :shock: with adapters.

One example would be the Hartblei 45 mm PCS tilt/shift lens (http://www.rickdenney.com/hartblei.htm) that could be very helpful for architectural photography.

Best regards,
Andy

[Andy_T]

Glad it helped you.

They even have a homepage: http://www.hartblei.com/index.htm
There are links to reviews of the SuperRotator lens on luminous landscape that tells a bit more about the company.

It seems that they chose a German name to convey the image of German manufacture.
Well, marketing... anyway, if the products are good with consistent quality ... let it be that way.

Best regards,
Andy

[HKFEVER]

My Mamiya M645 is built like a Sherman tank. The Hasselblad C500 was built like a Jaguar. It operated very smoothly but it had its quirks and spent time in the shop. It was a beautiful camera.

My Kowa had great glass but it was built like a Fiat (Fix it again, Tony).

If you intend to work as a photographer and if you intend to spend a lot of time USING your camera, I'd recommend the Mamiya. If status is important to you, go with the Hasselblad, but be aware that it will cost a LOT of money to build a comprehensive .

I second this, jsut can't figure out why blad cause that much. But I sold all my Mamiya gear for Canon 1DMKII, 1DsMKII, and L lenses.

But I also miss my Mamiya or MF, because it deliver very rich colour range.

[HKFEVER]

im not really sure if i want to shoot 6x7 or 6x5 . . . i wont really know until i go out there and start shooting with one or the other . . which means i would probably want to get a real cheapo MF/LF camera . . . is that even possible or practical?

i mean . . after doing a little more reading/researching . . it seems that either brand will suit my needs nicely . . . but with an entry level of around $1000-$1500 US to get a decent camera/lens/back of either brand . . i want to be sure i will actually use this format first . . .

i guess where im going with this is is it practical to get a really old MF camera off ebay to play with until i am more certain of the direction i want to go in? or are there features in the newer (more expensive) models that i wouldnt have access to in the older ones?

Go for new Mamiya 645AFD, it just like 35mm + you can add D backing later on.

[epeace]

Another thing that might or might not be interesting for you to look at, would be affordable MF photography using Russian MF cameras.
good tip . . i noticed many of the kiev models while browsing equipment but wasnt sure what the consensus was about them . . uncharted territory for me and all . . thanks

[Steve Parr]

I only saw one person mention Bronica.

My brother had both a Mimaya RB-67 and a Bronica (don't know which model). When he was "thinning the herd", he opted to let go of the Mimaya. He says it was a great piece of gear, he just prefers the Bronica...

Steve

[Ballen Photo]

I only saw one person mention Bronica.

My brother had both a Mimaya RB-67 and a Bronica (don't know which model). When he was "thinning the herd", he opted to let go of the Mimaya. He says it was a great piece of gear, he just prefers the Bronica...

Steve

Steve, I had the Bronica SQa, and it was built like a "TANK" as well, and VERY reliable. Stay away from the early Bronica's though.
I did the research when I went into it, and found that the later Bronica "PS" lenses could go "Toe to Toe" with the Zeiss lenses on the "Blads". Further research revealed that the later Bronica's are less finicky than the "Blads". (Hassy people please dont flame me) Getting back to the early Bronica's, they were referred to as "Hangar Queens", as they just weren't reliable. Like I said though, the current crop of Bronica's can hold their own against other top of the line MF cameras. On the downside, I noticed that nobody was making digital backs for them, not that I could afford one anyway. :rolleyes:
-Bruce

[kb244]

Far as hasselblad goes, seems HB's top of the line H1 camera, isnt what some people would consider the tradition of Hasselblad, but rather then 500 series is more what people would have expected from them. (Something bout the H1 being over-fujitized , and that the camera was meant more with digital in mind)

[Ballen Photo]

Oh, they'll catch up with you as soon as they're finished with me. Right now they're setting up their flamethrowers across the street from my house.

I'm shopping for asbestos garments and fire extinguishers as we speak. ;)

Maybe i just don't read as many trade journals as I used to, but i don't recall having seen many ads for Bronica in recent years.

I dont recall seeing much of them lately either, but I haven't really been looking.
The last new camera I remember seeing from them is a 645 rangefinder, and I thought it was a good idea.
I wonder how many folks knew the later Bronicas are made by Tamron? Could explain why their lenses were so refined. http://www.tamron.com/ :D
-Bruce