A Hasselblad, more than 40 years after first looking.

One of the hurdles with iconic cameras is “living up to” them. Prospective or new Leica owners suffer from this. It’s the opposite of thinking that now with a Leica I’ll be able to take really good pictures. Instead the camera inhibits them. The indifferent negatives from the first roll are deeply depressing, making the guy feel a fool. The Leica goes on the shelf for a month. Digital is probably a freer transition, but the expense is part of the inhibiting shackle. The M4-2, “only” made in Canada, likely gave a new Leica user an easier run in. I bought mine on a holiday in Italy. I was able to throw it around more easily than the M2 my Dad gave me. And Tuscany itself forced better rolls out of me.

The best shots with the Monochrom thread here goes though stages where the shots are nothing much, but they were shot with a Monochrom. On Flickr a lot of Hasselblad shots are like that. Peter from Family Guy might say “Hey Lois, I just took a shot with the Hasselblad.”

But just as a Leica and the interaction with it can indeed draw something less ordinary out of you, the Hasselblad can do it more. The cube of air and metal, it’s awkward suspension on a strap, and the waist level finder, put you in a different place even before you flip the finder open. Mine will often be strapless on a monopod or tripod: that’s a different walk entirely to the one after grabbing the nearest 35mm camera. You actually see different things carrying that rig. With the field of view of some lenses programmed in our heads, the quality of some films embedded there too, and the character of a lens or just of medium format generally, different pictures subconsciously get chosen to be made. You can see that with some of Vince’s shots on the previous page. Getting to grips with the square format is acquired along the way.

I can’t carry mine at the moment. There’s a new roll of Ektar loaded. Soon I’ll be up to it. Last night I charged three M Leica batteries going flat in cameras and bags. Stopped from photography for a bit has been an interesting exercise in seeing. The which camera inspired you to take up photography thread has been interesting for how many members were inspired by photographs rather than cameras, or photographs, and then a camera.

It’s not just a tool.
 
Last edited:
Retro-Grouch said:
I thought I was being decadent with two bodies and four lenses! Now I can point at you and congratulate myself on my restraint. ;)
Of course, that's ignoring the five other medium format systems I have in play, plus random Rollei TLRs. Me? Decadent? Nah...
Click to expand...

A full reveal of all the equipment stuffed into my closets is just too embarrassing to attempt. 🙄 Even if I could actually remember all of it... 😵‍💫

G
 
.. One of the hurdles with iconic cameras is “living up to” them. Prospective or new Leica owners suffer from this. It’s the opposite of thinking that now with a Leica I’ll be able to take really good pictures. Instead the camera inhibits them. ...
Click to expand...

Hmm. I don't think I've ever suffered from that particular issue. I've nearly always had excellent equipment and nearly always just thought of it as just "stuff to work with" ... because, repeating a reply i made in another thread, it was never the equipment that turned me onto photography, it was the photographs I saw starting from when I was a little kid, before I even had a camera and could only marvel at my father's cool camera and, more, the photos he made with it. I just wanted to figure out how to make those kinds of photos.

I figure if I work hard enough, maybe I'll get there some day. Still.

G
 
Richard G said:
One of the hurdles with iconic cameras is “living up to” them. Prospective or new Leica owners suffer from this. It’s the opposite of thinking that now with a Leica I’ll be able to take really good pictures. Instead the camera inhibits them. The indifferent negatives from the first roll are deeply depressing, making the guy feel a fool. The Leica goes on the shelf for a month. Digital is probably a freer transition, but the expense is part of the inhibiting shackle. The M4-2, “only” made in Canada, likely gave a new Leica user an easier run in. I bought mine on a holiday in Italy. I was able to throw it around more easily than the M2 my Dad gave me. And Tuscany itself forced better rolls out of me.

The best shots with the Monochrom thread here goes though stages where the shots are nothing much, but they were shot with a Monochrom. On Flickr a lot of Hasselblad shots are like that. Peter from Family Guy might say “Hey Lois, I just took a shot with the Hasselblad.”

But just as a Leica and the interaction with it can indeed draw something less ordinary out of you, the Hasselblad can do it more. The cube of air and metal, it’s awkward suspension on a strap, and the waist level finder, put you in a different place even before you flip the finder open. Mine will often be strapless on a monopod or tripod: that’s a different walk entirely to the one after grabbing the nearest 35mm camera. You actually see different things carrying that rig. With the field of view of some lenses programmed in our heads, the quality of some films embedded there too, and the character of a lens or just of medium format generally, different pictures subconsciously get chosen to be made. You can see that with some of Vince’s shots on the previous page. Getting to grips with the square format is acquired along the way.

I can’t carry mine at the moment. There’s a new roll of Ektar loaded. Soon I’ll be up to it. Last night I charged three M Leica batteries going flat in cameras and bags. Stopped from photography for a bit has been an interesting exercise in seeing. The which camera inspired you to take up photography thread has been interesting for how many members were inspired by photographs rather than cameras, or photographs, and then a camera.

It’s not just a tool.
Click to expand...
Well said! The tools do matter.
 
Retro-Grouch said:
I thought I was being decadent with two bodies and four lenses! Now I can point at you and congratulate myself on my restraint. ;)
Of course, that's ignoring the five other medium format systems I have in play, plus random Rollei TLRs. Me? Decadent? Nah...
Click to expand...
Guess I should be embarrassed by how many I have -- four 1000fs, one Super Wide, one 500C, one 500C/M and the 907x. Lost count of the total number of lenses.

One bright spot is I have my 500C/M for sale, so I'm not completely irrational....am I?
 
Vince Lupo said:
Guess I should be embarrassed by how many I have -- four 1000fs, one Super Wide, one 500C, one 500C/M and the 907x. Lost count of the total number of lenses.

One bright spot is I have my 500C/M for sale, so I'm not completely irrational....am I?
Click to expand...
Umm... Not completely. But you're the cool kid with the most toys!
 
Godfrey said:
Gads, you're making me feel guilty I haven't taken a Hasselblad out for a walk lately. 😐

G
Click to expand...
Ah man we don’t wanna lay a guilt-trip on you!

But seriously, I’ve been selling off a good number of my vintage cameras and at some point I expect that I’ll only have my Hasselblads left and my Nikon Z7. I’m even trying to sell my 500C/M with a couple of lenses*. Gotta ‘thin the herd’ as they say.

This weekend I’m participating in another ‘photo walk’ with the Toronto Film Photographers group. It’s really more socializing that doing any meaningful photos, but I’m taking one of my 1000fs with some Delta 100. I haven’t shot film with a 1000f in a while so this will be a good opportunity. Just hope that the weather cooperates.

*Edit: The 500C/M kit sold last night, so there’s one less Hasselblad body and two less lenses in the stable.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom