Hasselblad ..... which one?

Hey all,

I was talking with a salesman here in a local store, and we discussed some things, and he told me that there are few Hasselblad cameras coming in the way [he said 39 and 50], and many times i told him i will try to save and wish to get one, after short discussion about the photography club i am a member and about my photography i told him that i really crazy about Hasselblad H3D, then he told me if i can give him some money then i pay him later every month, he told me if i can give him about $5500 or $6000 then he can give me the body [I am not sure which one, but i told before in the past that i don't want H3D 31, so either 39 or 50], i told him i can give you about $9000 or even 10k, he said ok, but he will check again with the boss or someone i don't know if they will accept that but i think he told me i am a special friend and he will do this offer for me only, i hope he can accept to give me that 50mp, WOW, i will be very happy.

So know, if he will tell me i can't give you 50mp, but i can give you only either 31 or 39, so do you think people i should get 39mp for ahwile and upgrade it later? i was dreaming about 39mp in the past but now with 50mp and 60mp in the future i feel i want that and not 31 or 39 but still so over my budget, but i am happy that this saleman is so cooperative and he will help me to get my first medium format [there are cheaper MF i know, but i want Hasselblad as my dream], so again, 39 or 50?

I will use it only for some work in studio and advertiement in the future when i can get something, and i have some photos i was looking to print up to 2 or 3meters, i know those Canon cameras can do that but still MF are kings for larger prints with higher resolution closer.

Blimey, Hasselblads are way to expensive. Mainly used for putting up large posters and astronauts

400dabuser wrote in post #6877294
Blimey, Hasselblads are way to expensive. Mainly used for putting up large posters and astronauts

So whats the problem? Yes, i is very expensive, but the salesman told me that i can pay about half or 1/3 the price and then i pay later by installment i think, so in this case i can get it as soon as possible and pay later when i can earn something every month.

about large print, i always wanted to print as large as a camera can, not always stay with A5 or A4 up to A2, here in my country some clients and i shoot in a sports clubs want some posters or wall size, so does that Hasselblad for rich and pro photographers only? we can't use or dream about it.

Can I spoil the party here, this is really a Canon based photography forum, ok, you have seen some Nikon threads, but most of us here, are Canon

OK, so you want to print in large format, since I have no experience of large format cameras, I wouldn't really know what to say or recommend which one

Tareq, Hasselblads are beautiful cameras.

Aside from their price, the lens and accessory prices, there are a few things that make them really not for everyday use.

the H3DII's iso options are the highest with (100, 200, 400 & 800) as options. But I believe the other models only go to iso 400. Often that's not practical.

It's shutter speeds only go from 32 -1/800. Obviously that's not really going to make it an action camera.

Time btw. shots is 1.2 seconds...definitely not a speed shooting camera.

It's very heavy so it's not a walk around camera. IMO this is really meant for studios and I don't know that you'd notice a huge (worth the price difference) from a 1dsIII (for less than half the money) for regular shots.

400dabuser wrote in post #6877614
Can I spoil the party here, this is really a Canon based photography forum, ok, you have seen some Nikon threads, but most of us here, are Canon

OK, so you want to print in large format, since I have no experience of large format cameras, I wouldn't really know what to say or recommend which one

Yes i know, but there are threads talking about another cameras, i didn't ask to talk about Hasselblad camera, i asked only for recommendation to choose one of two, so no offend.

Permagrin wrote in post #6877647
Tareq, Hasselblads are beautiful cameras.

Aside from their price, the lens and accessory prices, there are a few things that make them really not for everyday use.

the H3DII's iso options are the highest with (100, 200, 400 & 800) as options. But I believe the other models only go to iso 400. Often that's not practical.

It's shutter speeds only go from 32 -1/800. Obviously that's not really going to make it an action camera.

Time btw. shots is 1.2 seconds...definitely not a speed shooting camera.

It's very heavy so it's not a walk around camera. IMO this is really meant for studios and I don't know that you'd notice a huge (worth the price difference) from a 1dsIII (for less than half the money) for regular shots.

I know about all that, i said i will use it for studio works, and for the sports club some players would like to have their own portraits in so large posters size, so in all those situations i will be using studio lighting with means i will be using ISO 200 maximum, Shutter speed up to 1/250, and with one shot i will never use high FPS, so did i say i want this camera for actions and high speed shooting? i know this camera is mostly used in studios for fashion/glamor, portraits, products,..... so i am thinking to those in the near future.
Heavy? is it really heavier than 1D series + 400/600? i will not walk in the streets or outdoor carrying my Hasselblad, and still i have my Canon gear, i will not sell them for hasselblad.

OK, seems no one here recommend me to get a medium format at all.

I was just pointing out it's downsides. No offense meant. I don't know anyone who wouldn't take one if they could.

I'm just not sure that it's worth going into debt for. But everyone has their own opinions on that.

Permagrin wrote in post #6877776
I was just pointing out it's downsides. No offense meant. I don't know anyone who wouldn't take one if they could.

I'm just not sure that it's worth going into debt for. But everyone has their own opinions on that.

I see, don't worry, i printed the specifications of these cameras and i know what they are look like, i even tried H3D 31 in the store there, and i have a general idea about it, the problem is this camera seems like the Ferrari of the cars maybe more, so i always dream to get one even just to look at it, but i will do everything to work with it in those fields, i started to call some magazines and try to check some agencies or companies that i may get something with them, but i feel this camera is ultimate and i want to own one sooner or later.

Hey Tareq

The others might not know of you, but I do, and I know of your quality work and desire to learn.
My suggestion...go for it and enjoy every minute with it.

Tareq; I used a pair of (film based) Hasselblad 2000FCW's for 25 years & never regretted it. Like Chauncey said, "Go for it" if you can afford it. I'd look at the 39 or 50 for sure.

OK, i will check with the sales guy and see how it will go, if he didn't accept and i couldn't afford doesn't matter, one day i may get one.
Just i should get 39mp or i should try 31 for awhile if he didn't accept the offer with 30 or 50?

Remember that with 39 or 50 MP you will need a very robust computer to process efficiently.
Jim

If it's only the occasional print you want that big, for god's sake spend $600 on a Hasselblad 500 c/m with an 80mm Zeiss CT* Planar, $3 for a roll of film and $3 to process the roll, then spend $50 to $100 on a professional scan and you'll have a 100 megapixel image.

Honestly, it makes no sense to spend $10,000 or more on a camera in order to make 5 or 10 huge prints. You can do it FAR more cheaply in other ways. Do the same thing with a 4x5 system and you can get 350 megapixel images with a $500 camera and a $100 scan.

Not only that, but as long as you have surplus cash you can spend less than $2K on one of the top notch Minolta or Nikon MF scanners and scan all the film negatives you want.

Hasselblads are wonderful machines - I used their analog bodies for a number of years. As good as the new digital cousins are you'd be paying a ton of money for something less versatile and flexible in some ways than our current crop of dSLR's. Not slamming the 'blads - just that machines like you describe have somewhat narrow niche uses as opposed to others on the market. And if you go the digital 'blad route, make sure you have plenty of large supplemental hard drives

DrPablo wrote in post #6879865
If it's only the occasional print you want that big, for god's sake spend $600 on a Hasselblad 500 c/m with an 80mm Zeiss CT* Planar, $3 for a roll of film and $3 to process the roll, then spend $50 to $100 on a professional scan and you'll have a 100 megapixel image.

Honestly, it makes no sense to spend $10,000 or more on a camera in order to make 5 or 10 huge prints. You can do it FAR more cheaply in other ways. Do the same thing with a 4x5 system and you can get 350 megapixel images with a $500 camera and a $100 scan.