Bronica vs. Hasselblad, revisited (ignorable frustration venting)

[harpofreely]

6x6 is my favorite film format, and over the last few years I built up an nice Bronica system: S2A, S2, 4 backs, 3 lenses, etc. But the siren song of Hasselblad would reach my ears at weak moments, and a couple of months ago I pulled the trigger on an accessibly priced 500 C/M, 80mm CF outfit.

My rationalization was that, though I love the Bronicas, they are "dead men walking" in terms of repair and maintenance at this point, whereas the Hasselblad is not only likely more robust to begin with, but also classic, beloved and ubiquitous enough that service and support should continue to be available.

Now my dilemma: after running a few rolls through the 500 C/M I love the build, the handling, the size, and other than finding the Bronicas easier to focus, feel very comfortable with my shiny new toy. However, after some comparisons of similar subjects, I cannot deny but that I much prefer the Bronica lenses' rendering - the Zeiss Planar is simple too perfect, clinical, and a little sterile. I also tried the original C version, and that got a very little closer, at the cost of the most unpleasant focus ring I've ever laid fingers on.

So what to do now? Sell the 500 C/M and shoot the Bronicas till they die? Keep it all and have too much $$$ tied up in idle equipment? Accept that I'm spoiled for choice and stop whining? I know the internet cannot help me here, just wanted to vent a little. Thanks for reading...

 

[DominikDUK]

If you prefer the results from the Bronica sell the Hassy for the Money you'll get from the sale you can buy a few new Bronicas if the ones you are currently using croaks.

Comfort and personal Preference trumps name dropping any day

 

[harpofreely]

I suspect you are right, Dominik - chalk it up as a failed experiment, and sell. The Hassy would pay for at least 4 more Bronicas; I don't shoot _that_ much. And I can always swagger around with my M3 if I'm in a name-dropping mood 🙂

 

[Moto-Uno]

Being an owner of Bronicas and having run almost countless numbers of rolls through
them both, I'm not too sure there's anything questionable about their build quality . They
may not have been Hasselblads, but when new these were not cheap cameras. I've a good selection of the lens for my ETRS(& I ) models and there's not a dud in one in them.
Peter

 

[KM-25]

the Zeiss Planar is simple too perfect, clinical, and a little sterile.

One can easily overcome that by making a photo with such amazing light, form, tone, composition, emotion and moment that none of those things will matter anymore. My Hasselblad system is by far my favorite.

 

[CK Dexter Haven]

• Maybe try an older 80mm Hassy lens.
• Yeah, just keep shooting the Bronicas until they fall apart. Replace whatever you need to, with the Hassy money. Find a repair person. Someone must be out there. Have you contacted Nippon Photo Clinic in NYC?
• You've only run a few rolls. Keep trying. You may find you either get used to the Zeiss look, and the issue now is only that there's a difference and you're more familiar with something else. When i look at Hasselblad pictures, i never think they look 'too clinical.' Try a different film, maybe. You're not shooting TMax, are you? No one ever said Anton Corbijn's work was "clinical." Try Tri-X and HP5 and Portra.

 

[lawrence]

Now my dilemma: after running a few rolls through the 500 C/M I love the build, the handling, the size, and other than finding the Bronicas easier to focus, feel very comfortable with my shiny new toy. However, after some comparisons of similar subjects, I cannot deny but that I much prefer the Bronica lenses' rendering - the Zeiss Planar is simple too perfect, clinical, and a little sterile. I also tried the original C version, and that got a very little closer, at the cost of the most unpleasant focus ring I've ever laid fingers on.

Yes, the early 'Blad lenses can be painful unless you get hold of one of those stick-like things to attach to the focussing ring. Are you using the PS series Zenzanons or the earlier ones?

 

[mfogiel]

Hasselblad lenses are rather well balanced across the line in terms of sharpness, contrast, bokeh, etc. The Planar is certainly not too clinical in my opinion. That said, if you don't like it as much as your Bronica, then there's no point in insisting. I have a Bronica RF and these lenses are very nice indeed, particularly in the shadow detail department.

 

[shimokita]

Sometimes the first cut is the deepest... and it might be unfair to judge after a few rolls... since it's bought and paid for, one approach is to shoot nothing but the Hassy for a couple hundred rolls... it's probably a adequate camera ; )

I had a similar experience with my F3P and MP... I lived and breathed the F3 and can shoot with my eyes closed ; ) while the MP takes some concentration on my part... and not that I am going to give up on the Leica...

Too many choices... enjoy!

 

[nanthor]

sell the Hasselblad

sell the Hasselblad

and buy one of the EC TL bodies with automatic aperture one of these will cost you about three to $400 and it'll make shooting even more fun. The ec-tl is also easier to wind and has a quieter shutter than your current cameras

 

[jslabovitz]

I too found the Hassie lenses to be too clinical. It was quite disappointing, after years of looking forward to them. I went back to my Rolleiflex for 6x6, and was much happier.

 

[teddy]

I have a Hasselblad and a Rolleiflex with a Xenotar 75/3.5. The Planar 80/2.8 is a touch warmer and wide open isn't as sharp as my Rolleiflex, and this makes quite nonclinical images compared to the Rolleiflex. The Xenotar is quite charming and for some reason renders better for black and white - the bokeh is more pleasing to my eye.

I don't find the Planar too clinical, neither the 150/4 Sonnar (truly a great lens), so maybe why don't you try different film and this could take that clinical edge of the Planar?

Planar 80/2.8 CF T* and Fomapan 100

Planar 80/2.8 CF T* and Kodak Ektachrome 100

Planar 80/2.8 CF T* and Kodak Ektachrome 100

 

[Rob-F]

Don't be in a hurry to dump the Hasselblad. Try it on a variety of subjects before you decide the lens is too clinical.

 

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

6x6 is my favorite film format, and over the last few years I built up an nice Bronica system: S2A, S2, 4 backs, 3 lenses, etc. But the siren song of Hasselblad would reach my ears at weak moments, and a couple of months ago I pulled the trigger on an accessibly priced 500 C/M, 80mm CF outfit.

My rationalization was that, though I love the Bronicas, they are "dead men walking" in terms of repair and maintenance at this point, whereas the Hasselblad is not only likely more robust to begin with, but also classic, beloved and ubiquitous enough that service and support should continue to be available.

Now my dilemma: after running a few rolls through the 500 C/M I love the build, the handling, the size, and other than finding the Bronicas easier to focus, feel very comfortable with my shiny new toy. However, after some comparisons of similar subjects, I cannot deny but that I much prefer the Bronica lenses' rendering - the Zeiss Planar is simple too perfect, clinical, and a little sterile. I also tried the original C version, and that got a very little closer, at the cost of the most unpleasant focus ring I've ever laid fingers on.

So what to do now? Sell the 500 C/M and shoot the Bronicas till they die? Keep it all and have too much $$$ tied up in idle equipment? Accept that I'm spoiled for choice and stop whining? I know the internet cannot help me here, just wanted to vent a little. Thanks for reading...

You haven't mentioned why you disliked the early Planar focus ring. Is it the long throw? Is it in need of service? As Lawrence mentioned you can get a handle or lever to assist. I've never felt the need myself.

You're the one who has to look at your shots and be happy with them. So if you prefer the Bronicas, you prefer the Bronicas. I wouldn't try to persuade you otherwise. All I would suggest, is that you say you've been using the Bronicas for a few years. But you've only had the Hasselblad for a couple of months. So many times, we read of a member who buys camera A, sells it for camera B, (or even camera C, D, E, F and G!) only to desire another A. It seems some of our members have repeated this whole cycle several times! So, consider giving the Hassy just a little bit longer, before you part with it. Just in case you should decide later that, in hindsight, perhaps you should have kept it. Prices for Hassy stuff are quite stable these days, KEH never seem to have much stock any more, which says quite a lot. You'll lose little, if any, value by hanging onto it for a few months, first. And if your inclinations to stay with Bronica remain unchanged, by all means let the Hassy stuff go. 😉
Cheers,
Brett

 

[harpofreely]

Thanks all for your thoughts.

Though I still suspect I will not keep the Hassy long-term, I probably will continue shooting it until my KEH warranty nears its end. Perhaps it will win me over; it is certainly well within the powers of my GAS that I eventually rationalize it as "extending my 6x6 pallet" or some other specious nonsense. Or maybe the right Bronica EC-TL will finally come along to tip the balance.

I'm not feeling like film type is really a factor; I've only shot the Hassy with Tri-X. As ACROS is my most-used film in MF, Tri-X is pretty much my "warm and fuzzy" selection. Also, I tried both the C and the CF - if they made a lens older than the C, I'm pretty sure its shutter is not something I want to deal with.

The 150 Sonnar might be worth a spin; I've liked other Sonnar designs and it seems to sell cheap by Hasselblad standards.

One can easily overcome that by making a photo with such amazing light, form, tone, composition, emotion and moment that none of those things will matter anymore.

This is true, but it is also only part of the many ways to make a picture, and in some aspects, not a way that my brain is particularly wired for. Particularly in my film work, I see artifacts of the process, particularly lens rendering, as a legitimate and engaging part of the content. In other modes, I _do_ value the clinical precision of, say, my Fuji 23mm f1.4, pared with the speed and flexibility of digital. But sometimes I just want a lens that helps me draw the banal into the sublime.

Being an owner of Bronicas and having run almost countless numbers of rolls through
them both, I'm not too sure there's anything questionable about their build quality

I do suspect that the reputation for fragility of the Bronicas is exaggerated, particularly in the context of hobbyist workloads, but they _are_ old and complex, and I'm pretty sure no one works on them regularly. I have owned and used a C, S2, S2A, 3 ETRs, a GS, and quite a number of backs, lenses, metered prisms etc. with no isssues, knock on wood.

I too found the Hassie lenses to be too clinical. It was quite disappointing, after years of looking forward to them.

So I'm not imagining things, at least! And its not as if my Bronica (and Nikkor for Bronica) lenses can't be sharp; they simply have character - I see it plain as day, and not (yet) in the Zeiss.

 

[harpofreely]

You haven't mentioned why you disliked the early Planar focus ring. Is it the long throw? Is it in need of service? As Lawrence mentioned you can get a handle or lever to assist. I've never felt the need myself.

The chrome Planar C I tried has a metal ring with a grip so deeply scalloped, it approaches the serrated. My initial impression of the focus was that it was a little stiff, but some searches suggested that Hasselblad lenses tended to a more damped focus, and when I got the CF lens, the focus damping was about the same, though via a much more comfortable grip. To tell the truth, I didn't miss the older lens' EV lock much, either. The sad fact is, 6 years after leaving manual, factory work for my current profession as web developer, my hands have grown so soft I get blisters cutting my lawn. I used to have callouses I could put out a cigarette on.

 

[aoresteen]

I have two 80mm Planars. One is the first batch of 6 element Planars - single coated - from the late 1950's that I use for B&W - I will never ever sell this lens.

The other is an early 1981 F Planar that is sharp as a razor that I use for color.

Give it some time and I'm sure you will sort it out with a bit of practice.

 

[harpofreely]

For however long I do continue with the Hasselblad, I wouldn't mind improving the focusing. I'm too ambivalent about the camera to pony up for the Accute-Mat and the premium 3rd party screens (Bettie etc.) seem to be mostly discontinued, or no cheaper than the Accute-Mat. The stock plain ground-glass screen I have is bright enough, but I'd love to have a split image, or better yet, some micro-prisms in the center. Did they make anything like that, thats any good?

 

[KM-25]

The stock plain ground-glass screen I have is bright enough, but I'd love to have a split image, or better yet, some micro-prisms in the center. Did they make anything like that, thats any good?

Not sure on the screens older than acute-matte but I have several splits, micros and grids in the newer D versions and they are very helpful. As far as sticking with the Hasselblad, I'd say just sell it and move on.

The Hasselblad V system is the best I have used in my entire career but it is not a gimmicky camera and lens system made to make something out of nothing with Petzval like aberrations. The system I use is big, three modern bodies, 12 backs including a new CFV50c digital, 9 lenses, etc. I use it because it simply gets out of the way of me making the best photographs I can and are very easy to replace and repair.

For when the system is too big to haul or more to the point, the camera too loud, I just grab my Rolleiflex 2.8D.

 

[FujiLove]

If you prefer the results from the Bronica sell the Hassy for the Money you'll get from the sale you can buy a few new Bronicas if the ones you are currently using croaks.

Comfort and personal Preference trumps name dropping any day

I also love the 6x6 format and have looked at the 500C/M longingly. However, having owned a Bronica SQ I know I hate the ergonomics of that type of camera. I also know full well that my Pentax 67 take as good if not better photographs (and my Rolleicord wouldn't be far behind...)

1. Sell the 500
2. Use the money to buy a spare body and a nice big stash of film
3. Take photographs
4. Be happy that you made the right decision years ago