ChrisN
Striving
Does the Bronica system use leaf shutters? If not, that's a plus for the Hasselblad, if you are likely to use flash. Leaf shutter syncs at all shutter speeds.
First MF camera: Bronica VS. Hassy
- Thread starter grapejohnson
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 85
- Views 18K
kanzlr
Hexaneur
the SQ uses leaf shutters.
leicapixie
Well-known
So many opinions and experiences!
well here is my 2cents worth.
When i went MF in early 60's, it was for portraits and fashion.
Going from a 4x5 Linhof, a great camera, but NOT for me.
Not for someone bouncing along like a 'roo at max.
i purchased a Bronica-C.
The biggest piece of rubbish/garbage/trash ever built.
I finally returned it, with film, still in pieces all over it's insides!
My first paper shredder.
It was exchanged for my Leica M3, brand new with Summicron.
So at that time, the Bronica-C was not cheap...
I used the Advertising Agency's Rollei.
Later added the Mamiya TLR, in C3,C33,C330.
A wonderful but somewhat HEAVY camera.
The lenses simply superb.
The film running in a straight line, definitely made it very sharp.
This is an important feature.
Later the Pentax 6x7 system.Except for poor flash synch,
one of the finest camera systems ever constructed with amazing lenses.
I surprised the OP has not looked at the 645 series of Mamiya and Pentax.
There are digital models using their lenses.
Things i learnt..
One only recently with my eyes changed from old age,
i can actually focus a Hasselblad! So before you buy,you try!
The Rollei Planar is a nicer Planar than on a Hassie.
Maybe the less diaphragm blades, the different construction.
The Hassie Planar is good, the Rollei Planar exquisite.
A Rolleiflex is somewhat limited, but when i cleared all MF,
it was the one i kept.Small,light and a joy to LOAD.
Bronica soon after the "C" model was taken in line by Nikon,
who were less than happy with QC. It was using Nikkor lenses.
Things did radically improve. I still would not even touch one!
Hasselblads do need attention from time to time.
The magazines a wonderful feature.
The loading of film, deemed, cruel and unusual punishment!
The Pentax 67,6x7 are even less expensive than Hasselblad,
the film in a straight line. The lenses more than equal to Zeiss.
Less complicated as no shutters in each lens.
Shutters being mechanical, mean they are prone to variation..
Some slower, some faster in shutter speeds.
This is a fact! I had tapes all over my Mamiya/borrowed Hassie,
advising me to underexpose or overexpose for same results..
as lenses gave different results. TG for electronic shutters.
In the end it's your money, spend wisely.
The creamy look of medium format is unsurpassed, until Large Format.
Let's not go there...for now.
well here is my 2cents worth.
When i went MF in early 60's, it was for portraits and fashion.
Going from a 4x5 Linhof, a great camera, but NOT for me.
Not for someone bouncing along like a 'roo at max.
i purchased a Bronica-C.
The biggest piece of rubbish/garbage/trash ever built.
I finally returned it, with film, still in pieces all over it's insides!
My first paper shredder.
It was exchanged for my Leica M3, brand new with Summicron.
So at that time, the Bronica-C was not cheap...
I used the Advertising Agency's Rollei.
Later added the Mamiya TLR, in C3,C33,C330.
A wonderful but somewhat HEAVY camera.
The lenses simply superb.
The film running in a straight line, definitely made it very sharp.
This is an important feature.
Later the Pentax 6x7 system.Except for poor flash synch,
one of the finest camera systems ever constructed with amazing lenses.
I surprised the OP has not looked at the 645 series of Mamiya and Pentax.
There are digital models using their lenses.
Things i learnt..
One only recently with my eyes changed from old age,
i can actually focus a Hasselblad! So before you buy,you try!
The Rollei Planar is a nicer Planar than on a Hassie.
Maybe the less diaphragm blades, the different construction.
The Hassie Planar is good, the Rollei Planar exquisite.
A Rolleiflex is somewhat limited, but when i cleared all MF,
it was the one i kept.Small,light and a joy to LOAD.
Bronica soon after the "C" model was taken in line by Nikon,
who were less than happy with QC. It was using Nikkor lenses.
Things did radically improve. I still would not even touch one!
Hasselblads do need attention from time to time.
The magazines a wonderful feature.
The loading of film, deemed, cruel and unusual punishment!
The Pentax 67,6x7 are even less expensive than Hasselblad,
the film in a straight line. The lenses more than equal to Zeiss.
Less complicated as no shutters in each lens.
Shutters being mechanical, mean they are prone to variation..
Some slower, some faster in shutter speeds.
This is a fact! I had tapes all over my Mamiya/borrowed Hassie,
advising me to underexpose or overexpose for same results..
as lenses gave different results. TG for electronic shutters.
In the end it's your money, spend wisely.
The creamy look of medium format is unsurpassed, until Large Format.
Let's not go there...for now.
Johnmcd
Well-known
I have the SQ A and the SQ Ai. The latter might have a little more plastic in some areas where the SQ A had leatherette but to say it is 'plastic' is taking things a little too far. While it's good ergonomically it weighs a bit and it is all metal that is causing that heft 🙂
Cheers - John
Johnmcd
Well-known
Some more taken yesterday with the SQ A and 80/2.8
Portra 160 220 developed in Tetenal C-41
Cheers - John
Portra 160 220 developed in Tetenal C-41
Cheers - John
fer_fdi
Well-known
splendid examples shot with the SQ A, wow!
