Guest Randle P. McMurphy Posted August 29, 2011 Share #121 Posted August 29, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Superb cameras and lenses, but why do I feel better with my MP in hand? Little men use little tools................. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 29, 2011 Posted August 29, 2011 Hi Guest Randle P. McMurphy, Take a look here How many Leica owners also have a Hasselblad ?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Mikael Siirilä Posted August 30, 2011 Share #122 Posted August 30, 2011 I have discovered the Mamiya 7 rangefinder to be a great medium format companion for a Leica M. My Hasselblad 500c/m has not fired a single shot since I got the Mamiya. -- Mikael Siirilä http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikaelsiirila/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted August 30, 2011 Share #123 Posted August 30, 2011 If this is the "nostalgy for LF" thread... I confess that my heart winced when read Pico's quote of Linhof Super Technika ... never had a Hassy... but a 6x9 Linhof Technika YES I HAD ... lot of hassle for an amateur... but WHAT camera it was !!!... You needed TIME, so you had TIME TO THINK OF WHAT YOU WERE TAKING... all another mood... you had finally the sentiment of what means to TAKE A (ONE) PICTURE... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted August 31, 2011 Share #124 Posted August 31, 2011 If this is the "nostalgy for LF" thread... I confess that my heart winced when read Pico's quote of Linhof Super Technika ... never had a Hassy... but a 6x9 Linhof Technika YES I HAD ... lot of hassle for an amateur... but WHAT camera it was !!!... You needed TIME, so you had TIME TO THINK OF WHAT YOU WERE TAKING... all another mood... you had finally the sentiment of what means to TAKE A (ONE) PICTURE... Agreed. Ages ago at work I used a 4x5 MPP technical camera (similar to Technika), and later I owned (and used) a Plaubel Peco Junior 6x9 monorail. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted September 1, 2011 Share #125 Posted September 1, 2011 And if I may add, using a Deardorff 8x10 camera outdoors (set-up, schlepping, all that) is a massive hassle compared to, for example, a Century 1 8x10 field camera which must weigh half as much. If weight in a field camera were not a virtue, then I could find no rationale for the Deardorff. Gawd it's a monster. But I suppose it looks perfect in the corner of an executive's waxed wood floor office. I'm restoring the Deardorff in preparation for passing it on to the next macho photographer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philcycles Posted September 2, 2011 Share #126 Posted September 2, 2011 I have a Bronica GS and S2A and the obligatory Rolleiflex, mine's a 3.5 Tessar. Man that GS is heavy. Phil Brown Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted September 2, 2011 Share #127 Posted September 2, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) The Rollei wins. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinA Posted September 5, 2011 Share #128 Posted September 5, 2011 I've been shooting a lot of MF on the street this year. Don't use a pentaprismm finder, which I have, and don't use a tripod. So far, I've been concentrating on using my Rolleiflex 2.8F, but by design I was out with my Hasselblad on the street this weekend with 50mm and 110mm lenses. Lots of street from the Rollei on my Fickr site. It's just as easy for me to shoot this as it is to shoot a film M. Approach is different and the results are different, moving away somewhat from the quickly grabbed snap. Shooting the 80mm on the Hass would not be much different as the lens is relatively light. Cameras with other lenses become heavier and more cumbersome as the lens grows and the lens throw increases. I like my M's because they are small, fit in a pocket and I don't need to bother with a bag at all. I can carry two that way. With MF, I need a small Domke 803 bag to transport the gear to the location, but once there, it's out and ready. In comparison, I'd agree that the 330 would be a bit of a beast. I don't think you benefit from trying a Hass on the street, or any other serious gear; you have to commit to it and find your way of making it work. Have fun. I tried going out with my Rolleiflex to do some street photography. I got nothing except conversation about the camera, it almost drew a crowd:o Kevin. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted September 5, 2011 Share #129 Posted September 5, 2011 I did not answer the original question. 4 Hasselblads many backs and different viewfiners and sixl lenses. A total pitiy because I haven't used any for a couple years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted September 6, 2011 Share #130 Posted September 6, 2011 I did not answer the original question. 4 Hasselblads many backs and different viewfiners and sixl lenses. A total pitiy because I haven't used any for a couple years. I have been similar. 5 bodies, assorted viewers & prisms, 6 backs (220 & 120) and 8 lenses. Mine lay idle for nearly 10 years. Last month I dusted it all off and re-opened the darkroom. It was like re-opening my eyes! Worth the effort. That gear still sings in performance. I advise you give it a go Pico. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted September 6, 2011 Share #131 Posted September 6, 2011 I tried going out with my Rolleiflex to do some street photography. I got nothing except conversation about the camera, it almost drew a crowd:o Kevin. I got a similar response when I re-launched my 50+ year old wooden surfboard (bananaboard) that I built as a boy. All the old guys came out of the woodwork and wanted to talk about the one they had. I never got it in the water on that occasion because I ran out of time! Had to do a re-run the following day. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Randle P. McMurphy Posted September 6, 2011 Share #132 Posted September 6, 2011 I have discovered the Mamiya 7 rangefinder to be a great medium format companion for a Leica M. My Hasselblad 500c/m has not fired a single shot since I got the Mamiya. If you prefer a Rangefinder Camera the Mamiya 7 a great choice, but if you love lenses above 150mm and need to change magazins because you use different films at a shooting there is no other way as to get a Hassi.......... P.S. I love my 500 C and the Sonnar C 150 (Single Coated). Best Camera ever to make fine art portraits and used on Ebay much cheaper than any singe Leica lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted September 6, 2011 Share #133 Posted September 6, 2011 I did not answer the original question. 4 Hasselblads many backs and different viewfiners and sixl lenses. A total pitiy because I haven't used any for a couple years. Sell them (or give them) to someone who will. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Paul Jenkin Posted September 17, 2011 Share #134 Posted September 17, 2011 I have a 500c/m with 40mm CFT* FLE, 80mm CT* and 150mm lenses. Hardly an original set up but I love the square format which, I know, some will find odd. Some years ago I had a Mamiya C330 and used this for weddings, etc. and got used to the 6x6 frame. These days, I am collecting good examples of the cameras I always wanted when I was younger but could never afford. I have a Nikon F2S, a Rolleiflex 3.5T and Nikon F5 which shares lenses with my D700. It does seem relatively commonplace for Leica owners to also own Hasselblads. I put this down to an appreciation of solid, top quality engineering and optics over frippery and gadge. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted September 17, 2011 Share #135 Posted September 17, 2011 I have been similar. 5 bodies, assorted viewers & prisms, 6 backs (220 & 120) and 8 lenses. Mine lay idle for nearly 10 years. Last month I dusted it all off and re-opened the darkroom. It was like re-opening my eyes! Worth the effort. That gear still sings in performance. I advise you give it a go Pico. I did, beginning with the SWC and C-Back and the back broke. I could not turn it through more than 30 degrees. The camera and back are going out for CLA. (The shutter on the SWC gets sticky in cold weather. Never been serviced, I expect.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted September 18, 2011 Share #136 Posted September 18, 2011 I did, beginning with the SWC and C-Back and the back broke. I could not turn it through more than 30 degrees. The camera and back are going out for CLA. (The shutter on the SWC gets sticky in cold weather. Never been serviced, I expect.) Servicing that gear here in Oz is expensive. I believe in the US you have more facilities and resources for parts. Your gear will be great when it returns. It feels so good in the hand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rcoles Posted September 18, 2011 Share #137 Posted September 18, 2011 Had the Hasselblad 500 Classic and a 80mm lens in the mid to late eighties. Was able to sell it for my cost several years later to a local professional. Bob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knomad Posted September 18, 2011 Share #138 Posted September 18, 2011 I've had three of them over the years, a 503cx, a 501cm, and currently an old 500c that I found at a bargain price. For my purposes there isn't a lot of functional difference among the different versions. I use the Hasselblad when I want to slow down. I also enjoy the square format for composition. It's used more for landscapes than anything else, but I've shot everything from fashion to portraits to street with them at various times. Although I own a 45 degree finder, I actually prefer the waist-level finder because it makes for a much smaller package, and for certain subjects the abstraction of the reversed image can be an advantage. Normally for anything outside the studio I carry just the one lens on the body (usually an 80 or a 60) and a handheld meter. A trained eye often has little difficulty seeing the more subtle tonal gradation of the larger negative, at least a number of viewers have recognized the work as medium format without being told. Admittedly, there aren't as many trained eyes around in this age of instant gratification. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted September 18, 2011 Share #139 Posted September 18, 2011 Owning a 503cx did wonders for my photography. I had an FM2 at the time, and was intrigued at the challenge of MF. It was also an incredible indulgence, I guess. I was rather hoping for a huge Wow factor from the larger format, greater control and fabulous glass (I had a 50 FLE, 80 and 150, if my memory serves me well). I was crushed when I got the first few rolls back - same boring photos, only more of them ... What that camera made me do was think more about the essentials of photography, and most importantly, composition. I also used filters more, and learned to introduce drama into my pictures with careful exposure (I was heavily into Ansel Adams at the time). Over the years that I owned it, my photography improved immensely. On the downside, I was slower, and the kit (even in a Tenba backpack) was huge, and was eventually relegated to the cupboard. Leicas have taught me about the individuality of lens qualities, and what you can do with depth of field. Whereas, with the Hasselblad, I was always shooting with the smallest aperture to get the best depth of field, now I think more about what I want in focus. I don't recall consciously shooting wide with the Hasselbald - my tendency was to shoot as slow as I could, preferring the sharp detail of a stopped down lens, to the softer image wide open. This does not mean that I now always shoot wide open (as Steve Huff and Thorsten Overgaard suggest) - I think that is simplistic. If the object is only partly in focus, that can be distracting. Conversely, if you've taken your picture at a distance where you are wide open, but the depth of field is usable, or if you're closer, you've stopped down, the images are amazing (that's how I view Edmond's pictures). Nothing worse than a portrait with one eye in focus, and the other eye, tip of the nose and ears out of focus. Erl posted a lovely portrait in another thread, but there was an odd plane of focus in the hair which I found distracting - these oddities do detract from otherwise wonderful photography. The Leica M captures a lot of the contemplative nature of using a Hasselblad, without the size penalty - then again, there is the price penalty ... Cheers John 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Negative Posted September 19, 2011 Share #140 Posted September 19, 2011 ^ I have the same three lenses (50 FLE, 80, 150). Great lenses, no complaints! As for shooting wide open all the time, sorry - but that's just dumb. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now