Holy price drop - ever looked at Hasselblad lenses lately?

[sc_rufctr]

Even the SWC, 903 and 904 have taken a hit and these bodies don't do well with digital backs.

But looking at eBay you wouldn't think so. They're still asking high prices but are they actually moving any?

 

[Austerby]

Can't see it myself. I bought a 500CM (made in 1987), with 80mm and A12 for £500 in 2007 and that's very much at the lower end of recent ebay completed listings. Same for the prices I paid for my 50mm and 150mm lenses - same ballpark prices.

As for servicing, I had to get mine done but no problem finding someone to do so for a reasonable price.

I'd like prices to drop as I'll pick up a 40mm and a 120mm macro if they do but these are too expensive for me to justify a purchase at present.

 

[Frank Petronio]

But are entirely usable with current production digital backs, the film bit is a bonus.



Early digital backs are affordable coming in at or below D800 body prices, define "affordable".

The digital back option for the lens is via adapters, at the top the H system :angel: Sony A7 series offers an option as well. Yes, crop frame but then there are no true 6x6 MFDB anyway, the definition of medium format in digital has been the subject of "economical with the truth".

You'd want to do some research to determine where the $3000 price point digital back image quality intersects with a Canon/Nikon/Sony full-frame performance, factoring in your need for simplicity and high ISO performance.

If you visit the GetDPI forum you'll see 2005-era Leaf backs selling for $3K and under studio conditions they might give a D800 a run for the money at low ISO and careful use. But I doubt it.

Once you spend sufficient money to get the benefits of a MFDB - say $8K and up - then saving a few hundred dollars on a cheaper medium format system becomes kind of silly, especially weighing the clumsiness of the V500 platform versus the purpose built 645 digital bodies. Same holds for view cameras, guys get 4x5s and bloviate about how they could stick a digital back on them - and they could - but it's really crude and clumsy to do in reality.

You're a lot better off - photographically - using film cameras with film and digital systems with digital. Kind of like all the guys spinning their wheels trying to use old lenses on their new digital bodies (obviously I am trying to scorch as many people as possible with one post ;-p)

 

[hepcat]

Once you spend sufficient money to get the benefits of a MFDB - say $8K and up - then saving a few hundred dollars on a cheaper medium format system becomes kind of silly, especially weighing the clumsiness of the V500 platform versus the purpose built 645 digital bodies. Same holds for view cameras, guys get 4x5s and bloviate about how they could stick a digital back on them - and they could - but it's really crude and clumsy to do in reality.

You're a lot better off - photographically - using film cameras with film and digital systems with digital. Kind of like all the guys spinning their wheels trying to use old lenses on their new digital bodies (obviously I am trying to scorch as many people as possible with one post ;-p)

No scorching here, Frank. You make some good points, but the crude fact is that I don't WANT to use one of the purpose-built 645 bodies. I don't like 'em and I don't want to mess with 'em. I want a competent, affordable back for my V series bodies. I know the equipment inside and out and I'm comfortable with it's limitations and eccentricities. I am really at a point that I don't want to learn the limitations and eccentricities of the electronic bodies. And to be honest, I really don't like 645. I like square format shooting.

I'm probably a dinosaur, and I may be the last man standing shooting "V" system equipment. But I doubt it. And there's really no good reason I can see why I shouldn't continue shooting it as long as I want.

 

[ChrisLivsey]

You'd want to do some research to determine where the $3000 price point digital back image quality intersects with a Canon/Nikon/Sony full-frame performance, factoring in your need for simplicity and high ISO performance.

(obviously I am trying to scorch as many people as possible with one post ;-p)

Nice try 😀

The price/performance comes a lot sooner, in fact with those "cheap" backs. Where did high iso come from BTW as a requirement, that counts out digital backs.
The fact that, up to the new Phase One, all MRDB are CCD devices and cannot be compared with the DSLR CMOS. Simply the MFDBs are designed for colour fidelity, gradation of tone, and the malleability of the file. DSLRs are "Jack of all trades" with high iso performance traded against quality for marketing reasons. Pixel density and count advantage lies with the DSR and indeed for much pro work are entirely suitable. No one pretends MFDB is anything but a niche market, even more than digital rangefinders.
The point is for not too much money a venerable much loved 'blad can go digital. High iso performance and pixel count is not relevant, much as the "essential" autofocus is not relevant for a Leica M digital.

 

[Godfrey]

When there is no more film, how about a digital back?

Maybe for the 500, but the SWC lens does not do so well with MF format digital backs. I'd lose the very reason I have the Hassies in the first place: the 6x6 format. No, I'll just stockpile a few years worth of film (which at present rates of consumption means about 50 rolls of 120 in the freezer) and hope for the best.

I will have a digital back of sorts soon anyway ... I've got a Hasselnuts iPhone adaptation back on the way, soon as they get into production, from the Kickstarter project.
Kickstarter: Hasselnuts
That should do 'well' with either camera... ];-)

G

 

[agoglanian]

I love my Hasselblad. I really do. I for one am enjoying the lower prices as I have access to things I wouldn't have previously. I acquired my initial kit through a family friend, and this specific camera has sentimental value to me as it was used to photograph my parents' wedding over 35 years ago. It's an early 70s model with the same age bags, but I recently decided to sell the older C lenses and upgrade to CF lenses which I like considerably more for ergonomic purposes.

So while I realize that this kit doesn't have the value it used it, it has personal value to me and I am going to spend the money progressively to have David Odess tune it up (Probably the body first then the backs).

 

[sparrow6224]

Roger,

Having moved, experimenting, through several 35mm SLR and RF systems and into MF, first with Mamiya 7 and now with Hasselblad C/M systems, I've been closely following used prices across a range of products for the last 6 years or so. What you say is generally true but specifically, often enough, not. Since the advent of adapters, first for Canon digital (especially the 5d I, II, and II) and later mirrorless systems (plus adapters now for digital M's, I believe) Leica R glass has doubled and tripled while the R cameras have tanked (I "invested" $200 in a non working R8 some years ago, sent it to Leica for repair, paid with tax and shipping like $575, all with a mind to sell, only to discover over the two years or so this half-assed project took me, R8s had gone from $900+ to five and change. Oops. You can now get R4's, of which I have one, for like $100. The only great lens in the system to hold its price and not skyrocket, for some reason, is the 60mm f/2.8 macro which is the only lens I have at the moment for my R.)

Similarly, M bodies have dropped in actual dollar numbers and in adjusted for inflation terms even more so. Not hugely, but notably. The glass, with the M9 and later, and with mirrorless systems, has climbed and climbed. Interestingly enough, the Hasselblad lenses are lower than they were but the C/M bodies have stayed the same and the more desirable wides and later F bodies are untouchable by wastrels and loiterers such as I.

Minolta prices -- the SLR system I started with when I returned to photography -- were rock bottom five years ago and are higher now for the stuff that gets written about -- the MD Rokkor 24mm f/2.8 for example, which I was lucky to get cheap back when, has at least doubled over the last five years, in terms of lowest available price. Same with the Rokkor 20mm and 21mm f/2.8's. The Rokkor 135mm f/2.0 now sells for $1000 -- triple the price for the same lens from Nikon and five times at least for the gorgeous equivalent Canon. It must be awfully good.

Nikon, the SLR system I've invested in most heavily, has its glamour babies (plain prism F, eg) and many specific lenses and bodies (the FM2n, the FM3A, where heart-swelling bargains could once be found, now are not to be had for less than premium prices) and certain lenses have gone up because of collective breathless reviews online. I just discovered happily that my Ai-S 300mm f/4.5 ED is selling for more than twice what I paid. Among the bodies, F's and F2's have gone up, while F3's, Nikkormats, FE's , F4's and F5's have come down, in some cases dramatically. For FM2's and FM3A's, see above.

Your category of "collectible" might cover all this -- but to me, what is or isn't collectible is a super-fluid notion heavily affected by two factors -- online chatter and adaptability to new digital technologies.

 

[hepcat]

But are entirely usable with current production digital backs, the film bit is a bonus.



Early digital backs are affordable coming in at or below D800 body prices, define "affordable".

The digital back option for the lens is via adapters, at the top the H system :angel: Sony A7 series offers an option as well. Yes, crop frame but then there are no true 6x6 MFDB anyway, the definition of medium format in digital has been the subject of "economical with the truth".

Well, here's the deal, Chris. Manufacturers are throwing entire 18mp cameras into the marketplace for $100. I'm not looking for an 80mp back for doing fashion. A 20-25mp back would do me just fine... I'm not an engineer, but I'm kind of at a loss as to why Sony/Panny/whoever can't come up with a satisfactory, current technology, self-contained MF 25mp back under $1000. Maybe there's something about the physics of doing a 6x6 sensor or something that I don't understand, but it just seems to me that if they can package cheap 18mp P&S cameras... why not cheap MF digital backs?

 

[KM-25]

If you are one of those gear-centric collector types who bought or held onto Hasselblad V system components thinking the prices would stay stable or even go up, there is likely a bucket of sand with an impression of your head in it...🙂

I have a good sized system that I started building since 2007 and have lost perhaps $600 on it given current pricing and I really don't care if it drops through the floor. I did not buy it for it's collector value, and especially did not buy it to put some stupid digital back on it either, no point if they can not fill that 6x6 frame and I am just not into it anyway. I amassed my system because out of everything I use, 35mm, Xpan, 6x6 and 4x5, it is by far the most powerful and productive camera system I have ever used.

I work with 2x 501CM's, a 500ELX for aerials, 40mm FLE CF, 50mm FLE CF, 60mm CF, 80mm CF, 100mm CF, 120mm CF Makro, 180mm CF and the 1.4XE converter. I have one A24 back and 8 x A12's, a couple of extension rings, pro shade, two NC2 finders, waist level, chimney and all kinds of other goodies.

It's an amazing time to be a Hasselblad shooter whether you kept your gear from when you paid more for it or are like me and took full advantage of building a *sick* system for a fraction of what it would have cost 15-20 years ago.

But there is no point in hanging onto it waiting for prices to go back up, it will likely continue to drop a bit or stay the same so pass it on to someone who actually wants to shoot with it.

Best camera system ever made, I love it...

 

[CliveC]

Well, here's the deal, Chris. Manufacturers are throwing entire 18mp cameras into the marketplace for $100. I'm not looking for an 80mp back for doing fashion. A 20-25mp back would do me just fine... I'm not an engineer, but I'm kind of at a loss as to why Sony/Panny/whoever can't come up with a satisfactory, current technology, self-contained MF 25mp back under $1000. Maybe there's something about the physics of doing a 6x6 sensor or something that I don't understand, but it just seems to me that if they can package cheap 18mp P&S cameras... why not cheap MF digital backs?

I'm not a scientist/physicist either, but from what I've read in the past, the biggest reason why larger sensors cost that much more is that it is very difficult to produce a physically large sensor without flaws. With smaller sensors, they produce a high yield of chips (with flawed chips tossed) and it decreases as size goes up. If in a batch you're producing 100 chips and have to toss 20, no problem because you can still sell 80. In a batch of 10, and you have to toss 2-3, that's very expensive.

I'm sure pixel density figures into it as well, but it's not the primary reason medium format digital backs are not affordable. Also, of course you have to factor in that whereas they will sell millions of a 1/1.7" sensor, they may only sell a couple hundred 2"x2" ones. R&D, tooling, production, marketing etc has to be spread across a much smaller number of units sold.

 

[bobkonos]

I found this same truth about Hasselblad sales a few weeks ago. So rather than try to sell it I ended up trading my black 500 C/M kit with 50,80, and 150 lenses towards the chrome M6 "Big M6" classic I posted for sale here last week. I offered that M6 at a really good price, got 700 hits, only one offer, and decided to keep it. Medium format film cameras are apparently a slim sales market. But I am old enough to rtemeber when Hasselblad ruled the medium format market.

 

[ChrisLivsey]

I'm not a scientist/physicist either, but from what I've read in the past, the biggest reason why larger sensors cost that much more is that it is very difficult to produce a physically large sensor without flaws.

The wafer used for chips is a finite size fitting 6x6 sensors on it gives a low yield, very low allowing for flaws. The market is not large enough, most want to shoot a ratio that is not square and would crop loosing "real estate". You can "stitch" smaller sensors into a large one, again expensive a prone to low yield.
Never say never bit a 6x6 chip is not on the horizon with current technology. (remembering Leica " no full frame M digital" 😉

Look at the new Phase One CMOS back, smaller than many MFDB and premium price, Sony make and sell the chip but I can't see them making a back themselves. The niche players have the expertise to implement, I suppose Sony could buy one, but they are mass market orientated and with the best will in the world no one is going to say MF is mass market even counting every MF camera made.