studavis

It is made for people that like to carry a big camera and have a big wallet.

blacks2 Loc: SF. Bay area

To me it's like this, a friend of mine, a watch collector, showed me his $10,000 Rolex watch, I ask him, now does this realy run faster as my Timex? :lol: :lol:

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

Mike Royko nailed this issue back in the mid 80's

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1985-12-13/news/8503260426_1_rolex-watch-wrist

blacks2 Loc: SF. Bay area

Thank you so much, that's so funny, I was going to print it out and give it to my friend but he might be offended. :lol: :lol:

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

More reason to give it to him!! :wink:

prayingmantis

I just want to round out the discussion with a few facts regarding the newest offerings of digital medium format cameras. The two companies that offer the highest price cameras and/or digital backs are Phase One and Hasselblad. The Pentax Z is a bargain at $8500 for a 51mp on board sensor and for most fashion photographers and product photographers is really all that they need. It is worth noting that in the year 2014 all three mentioned medium format digital camera manufacturers came out with CMOS sensors in their newest models having relied on the ancient technology of CCD sensors up until now. The new CMOS sensors are much more efficient, much quicker to spit out the files and move on to the next image, have much greater dynamic range and wider availability of ISO's which now can go up to 6400 having been limited I believe to ISO 800 in the past. As WISNER mentioned above Hasselblad has a totally new technology in which the sensor is a 50mp sensor that has 3 different shooting modes. With each mode the sensor shifts its position within the camera 1.5 pixels and does so in a millisecond or so. At its highest capacity setting it takes the base image and then shifts the sensor 1.5 pixels to the left, 1.5 pixels to the right and 1.5 pixels directly upward. This generates the same image quality as a 200mp sensor with the light sensitivity and dynamic range of the native 50mp sensor. Editing one of these 200mp sensor images in RAW and converting to tif format yields a file size I believe around 600 mp. This of course requires a very powerful computer. With this highest setting and the aspect ratio of 1.33 that Hasselblad should be able to produce very sharp enlargements to 60x80 inches if not larger.
I believe that a significant proportion of pro fashion and product photographers are not purchasing the Phase One or Hasselblad digitals, rather they are leasing them and of course deducting the lease cost from their taxes. Is this then a costly investment? Consider the lowly taxi driver who is an independent and who either purchases his taxi new and pays for it with a 60 month loan. He may be driving a
$30,000 car which is not a vast amount less than the pro photographer might be spending for the Hasselblad. Nevertheless I think the Pentax is the way to go as a complete package with 3 prime lenses sells in the neighborhood of around $20,000 and leasing such a system would be an affordable business expense for many pros.

4ellen4 Loc: GTA--Ontario

Quality is the main answer and the type of shooting you do. The digital 'Blad is used best in studio work. From anyone working in the pro-field they say that if you are going to shoot action shot then stay in the 35 mm [dslr] range. I wish that I had kept my kit since a digital back for the model I had is only $5,000. Do I miss my film 'Blad-certainly.

And unless you have had one of these cameras, you will never understand the reason for getting one. Are they will worth the $$$-yes, and if I had the money would get a full kit again.

I hope this answers your question

BobHartung Loc: Bettendorf, IA

Ditto and I did. My photography is essentially all landscape and I love the digital blad. However, it does lack some weather/sand/dust protection so you do need to be careful changing lenses in the field.

I will not however carry it overseas, especially to Iceland due to Iceland Airlines overly restrictive carry on policy. I am not about to check $60K worth of camera gear, even if fully insured.

P.S. Been shooting Hasselblad since 1973 when I was stationed in Keflavik, Iceland with the USN except when I took both the Hassy and a Ron Wisner 4x5 into the field.

ebercovici

I believe that Hasselblad also has an APS-C model for much less. It appears to be a dressed-up Sony NEX-7. There is a wooden panel on the side. It would be a great gift for a person who has everything.

bwilliams

I still my film Hasselblad from 1974. The photos were great but I was a pro yearbook photographer and did over 10,000 shots in one year without a single problem The were built like tanks. I don not know how many shots are on it now as a wedding photographer in the past I had it serviced every 2 years and no problems.

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

The only reason to pay that much for a Hasselblad camera is so you can use Hasselblad lenses.

brrywill

Exactly! My love affair with Hassy started way back in '65 when I was in High School. I worked for a Hasselblad dealer during summers and bought my first Hassy through them. Hasselblad inscribed my name in the camera, I still own it.

As someone mentioned, it is the quality that captivates. The quality of the camera itself, the incredible lenses, and the amazing quality of the images they produce. Once smitten, it becomes a lifetime love affair.

I became an architectural photographer and used Hasselblads my entire career. I think I can safely say the 38mm Biogon used on the Hasselblad Superwide cameras was probably one of the finest, if not the finest, wide angle lens ever produced. The images it produced were stunning.

Over the years I accumulated every focal length lens Hassy ever produced. With great regret upon retirement, I sold everything but my original signed by Hasselblad body and four original silver lenses. One day I might pick up a digital back just so I can have the enjoyment of once again shooting what, in my opinion, is the greatest camera system ever made.

erickter Loc: Dallas,TX

Nothing, except seller greed and buyer stupidity.

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

My first (and only) Hasselblad was a 500 CM with an 80mm "standard len and two A12 backs. Total cost about $1500. I loved the camera and the pictures. The only reason I didn't keep it was because, in a period of less than three months, the A12 backs went from $125 each to $300-400 each and I wanted several backs for various films.

JJFR

It is also worth noting the image is true 16bit color not 12 or 14.
So what right?
The difference is less interpolation means truer colors and sharper images

14 bit color has 16,384 colors and the rest get interpolated
16 bit color has 65,536

Huge difference and it does show in the details of the image.

The said part of this expensive camera is that they do not use Carl Ziess lenses andmory. On the upside for those who have older manual lenses you can use them with your digital camera using a special adapter