Hasselblad

[jasonkwong135]

Hi all,

I do not know much about DSLR, I've heard and read quite a lot about the big 2. but I only came across this brand - Hasselblad - when I was looking at the "wild life photographer of the year" and the winner of the competition uses this brand.
I have did a little read about it, but still dont have much clue about this. Is this a very professional sort of brand? it seem very different from your run of the mill DSLR.

Can some one enlight me on this brand? anyone use them? what's the difference between this and the other brand?

Cheers

Jason

[zona5101]

hasselblad is a medium format camera system. (where most all of the camera systems discussed here are based on 35mm format)
Hasselblad is world reknowned and some of the best gear for it's intended purpose.
I think digital backs for Hassys are running in the neighborhood of us$30k.+!
I think there are some aftermarket medium format backs that are half that at around us$15k. Most non-pros (and even some pros) find the price tag to move to medium format digital not yet cost effective.
As a side note, I see many people offering up their medium format stuff for a song. It may be shrewed to snap those up becasue eventually the cost of a digital back will come down to levels where even mere mortals can afford one. (Then we'll be off to the next resolution race: gigapixels!)

[jasonkwong135]

Am I understanding this correctly. Hasselblad is a film camera but by attaching a "digital back" to it, it become a digital camera?
And the film size use by Hasselblad is larger than the usual, therefore can accomodate a lot more mega pixels?

[jdepould]

Originally Posted by jasonkwong135

Am I understanding this correctly. Hasselblad is a film camera but by attaching a "digital back" to it, it become a digital camera?
And the film size use by Hasselblad is larger than the usual, therefore can accomodate a lot more mega pixels?

Sort of.

The hasselblad+wildlife photog was a bit of a head scratcher for me. Medium format isn't exactly lightweight and portable, it's slow to shoot (not necessarily a bad thing in other genres), and you really don't get the telephoto lenses like you do with SLR systems.

They're optimized for working with artificial light at base ISO, which doesn't give you a ton of flexibility in other situations.

[zona5101]

Originally Posted by jasonkwong135

Am I understanding this correctly. Hasselblad is a film camera but by attaching a "digital back" to it, it become a digital camera?
And the film size use by Hasselblad is larger than the usual, therefore can accomodate a lot more mega pixels?

yes.
These medium format cameras have interchangable film backs...now they have interchangeable digital backs. The 'cheap' ones are capturing about 39megapixals

[Raoul Isidro]

Hasselblad uses a different format than the digital FF and Crop Frames, and the Film 35mm. The size of the sensors are basically similar to the 120 film (56 x 41.5mm, 56 x 70mm, and up to 56 x 224mm on super panoramic cameras).
The cost of the digital sensors on these cameras are not worth considering on a typical DSLR blog like this forum, unless you won the grand prize in the lottery....
Have you seen billboards that are two to three stories high? These cameras would have been used on those shots.
Only big income from big time clients could justify the need for these cameras.

[TerryMC]

A film Hasselblad consists of four components. Film back, Prism/viewfinder, body and lens (some including the shutter).

See http://jackbaty.com/files/hasselblad-500cm-03.jpg

Originally Posted by Raoul Isidro

The cost of the digital sensors on these cameras are not worth considering on a typical DSLR blog like this forum, unless you won the grand prize in the lottery....

Exception:

Originally Posted by Professional

Bodies
Hasselblad H3DII 39mp (Couldn't be happier, so what more i need?)
EOS 1Ds Mark III
Canon EOS 1D Mark III [Blue Dot]
Canon EOS 1Ds Mark II
Canon EOS 5D
Canon EOS 1D MarkII N
Canon EOS 30D
Canon EOS 350D (w/BG-E3)
Nikon CoolPix 8800
...

[LeeR]

As has already been mentioned, Hasselblads are crazy expensive but worth every penny. They are renowned for there reliability and modular design. If you can afford one, there is nothing better in the world. However, in addition to working with a larger format you will also be working in a square format most of the time. Squares do not lend themselves readily to good composition. Take a walk through any museum and count the number of rectangular images compared to square. I'll be the ratio is at least 100 to 1. It's not that you can't compose in sqaure, a look at the Hasselblad website will prove that it is, but there are some special challenges.
Lastly, the stuff is heavy. For that reason it is the choice of pros for studio work, portraits and some weddings, but rare is the wildlife photographer who lugs a Hassy deep into the woods with an assortment of lenses that weigh nearly as much as his car. The longest H series lens Hasselblad makes is a 300mm and it won't get you as close to your subject as a 200mm lens on a 35mm camera. Add to that the fact that the top of the line Canon is a fraction of the price and shoots 22 MB images with a far wider assortment of lenses and you have to wonder about the sanity of lugging a big medium format system with you.

[LoveDSLR]

Originally Posted by LeeR

However, in addition to working with a larger format you will also be working in a square format most of the time. Squares do not lend themselves readily to good composition.

I do V/H cropping at the viewfinder (created my own grid with artist translucent tape).