Roger Hicks
Veteran
Or every feel of familiarity, and extreme ease of use, among those who used them as assistants in the studios where they were the standard camera. There was a reason WHY they were the standard camera.
Cheers,
R.
Hogarth Ferguson
Well-known
Having used both, the s2a is just a bigger, louder camera. I think both produced exceptional results.
Certain things about the s2a are better, each back can do 120 or 220, just a switch flip, so there is that. I traveled all over Asia with mine, and only got rid of it as I prefer to use a tlr.
The sq-a is more similar in size and weight, as well as leaf shutters, to the hasselblad, but it relies on batteries.
Vince Lupo
Whatever
Not sure if it makes a difference to you or not, but I'm pretty sure the Bronica has a focal plane shutter (hence the 1/30 flash sync speed), whereas the Hasselblad has the leaf shutter. The other thing I remember about the S2a (I had one many years ago) was that it took 4 complete turns of the winding crank to advance to the next frame and to re-cock the shutter. As a result, the gears were prone to failure (I know the S2's had this issue, not sure if it was made more robust in the S2a). The one thing that I can say that was excellent about the Bronicas were the Nikkor lenses - I had that 200/4 and it was an awesome lens.
If it was my decision, I'd stick with the Hasselblad.
If it was my decision, I'd stick with the Hasselblad.
MrFujicaman
Well-known
The S2 had failure prone brass gears. The S2a was an upgraded model with steel gearing and some changes in the design of the workings
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
Depends on which Bronica you're talking about, they made a few models with leaf shutters (SQ series), and plenty with focal plane shutters.
benlees
Well-known
I'm a Bronica fan, but they are "cheap" for a reason: low resale. If you plan to keep forever then i recommend Bronica; very few people could tell the difference in prints. If you plan to use then sell, then get Hasselblad: good quality and you will be able to sell for the same price you bought at, and quickly (depending on the price you paid initially).
Johan what's your budget? Do you need to kit up with all your lenses straight away? The last lens I bought for my Hassy was a C 250mm Sonnar. I paid AUD $56 for it. Gave the shutter a quick clean, it's been terrific ever since. Lots of wear on the exterior, but the glass is almost unmarked. Point is, if you are prepared to be patient, bargains are still out there, even in Hassy land. Right now Igor has a 500C and chrome 80mm Planar (recently serviced) with A12 for $645. USD, obviously.
If you're prepared to go retro and run the gauntlet of curtain repairs, he has a 1000F with 80mm Tessar that's even cheaper at $325. Not sure I'd want one as my only medium format camera these days with the concerns around parts and service (although I have a copy of the 1600F repair manual you're welcome to). I must admit I would love to shoot with one occasionally. Still, if you're feeling brave: FYI.
Then there are the ELs and EL/Ms with all the benefits and drawbacks they bring. I'd actually rather like an EL, personally. Simply because it was, after all, the model the EDC lunar camera was based on. It doesn't get much cooler than that, in my view. But I say that with the luxury of owning a 500C/M, and of the two types, as my only Hasselblad, the C/M is definitely the one I'd pick. I've heard the Bronica lenses are very good but I've had so little to do with them I can't offer any advice, other than to avoid the pretty (but dodgier) early models.
Cheers,
Brett
xia_ke
Established
I was in the same position last summer. For the given budget, the decision for me ended up being buy a 'blad with maybe a spare lens or build a full Bronica kit. I opted for the Bronica kit and am very pleased with my decision so far. I decided to pay a bit extra too to get the best condition pieces I could find. So far for about $1200 I've managed to assemble the following:
I've never used a 'blad before or been able to directly compare negatives between the systems, but all of my Bronica lenses have been plenty sharp and contrasty for b&w darkroom prints. Everyone talks about the mirror slap, but lets be honest, no MF SLR is going to be good for stealth work. The S2a mirror slap doesn't bother me a bit. As for durability, only time will tell. The body I bought was fully serviced and looked barely used. It definitely seems to be a very solidly built system. In the end I have no regrets on choosing the S2a over the 'blad. With that said though, if I had a larger budget I probably would have gone with the 'blad given its reputation.
- black S2a
- 2 backs
- 2 helical mounts
- 50mm, 75mm, 135mm, and 200mm Nikkors w/ hoods
- 100mm Zenzanon w/ hood
- WLF, 45 degree, and chimney finders
- compact bellows
- an assortment of 67mm and 82mm B+W filters
I've never used a 'blad before or been able to directly compare negatives between the systems, but all of my Bronica lenses have been plenty sharp and contrasty for b&w darkroom prints. Everyone talks about the mirror slap, but lets be honest, no MF SLR is going to be good for stealth work. The S2a mirror slap doesn't bother me a bit. As for durability, only time will tell. The body I bought was fully serviced and looked barely used. It definitely seems to be a very solidly built system. In the end I have no regrets on choosing the S2a over the 'blad. With that said though, if I had a larger budget I probably would have gone with the 'blad given its reputation.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
I know someone who repairs cameras. He said the machine-cut gears in a Hasselblad are already worth more than an entire Bronica, with its gears stamped-out of sheet metal. Just sayin'.
eric rose
ummmmm, filmmmm
I used the S2A for many years. Repair issues finally moved me over to the blad and that was in the 80's. Glad I did. The lenses are much better and the leaf shutter makes flash work a dream.
leicapixie
Well-known
The Hasselblad lenses are in a league of their own.
The Nikkors on Bronica are good. Simply not equal.
Here in Toronto, the Annie Leibowitz monster size book,
is available for viewing. The Hassie shots are better in sharpness,
color and saturation than the Mamiya 6x7 and Digital images.
A few 35mm with Nikkor are really good, simply cannot match the Medium format. Annie's pix are all really professional and superb.
You have to shoot with both to really know!
The Nikkors on Bronica are good. Simply not equal.
Here in Toronto, the Annie Leibowitz monster size book,
is available for viewing. The Hassie shots are better in sharpness,
color and saturation than the Mamiya 6x7 and Digital images.
A few 35mm with Nikkor are really good, simply cannot match the Medium format. Annie's pix are all really professional and superb.
You have to shoot with both to really know!
Bill Clark
Veteran
Haven't used any Bronica cameras.
I own a few Hasselblad cameras.
Dave Odess does pretty good work. I've found it's a good reason to own Hasselblad.
Of course there are other reasons.
I own a few Hasselblad cameras.
Dave Odess does pretty good work. I've found it's a good reason to own Hasselblad.
Of course there are other reasons.
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
Yeah, but what does that really mean? I repair cameras, and even an el-cheapo Edixa SLR has really nice machined brass gears. Sure it makes the film advance smooth, but it sure doesn't make it a more reliable camera. Steel is harder wearing too, so if anything the longevity of a camera with cheap steel gears is going to be greater.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Thanks for your suggestions Brett!
Budget is truly limited unfortunately. I'm hoping to purchase a ~40mm lens for 6x6 cityscapes and with that it's down to either Hasselblad or Bronica.
My widest angle in MF currently is a 62mm lens on 6x7 or 6x9 (a Horseman Convertible 842).
I own a Brooks Veriwide 100, which I intend to sell. The 47mm Super-Angulon on it is very wide but the 6x10 ratio isn't suited for my intended photography. Pity, since it's a really nice camera with interesting provenance. I also need to sell it to cover expenses. Anything left after that is my budget.
On the national vending site in the Netherlands I've found a Bronica S2A with 75mm lens and 6x4,5 back, seller is asking EUR 375. That would make my transition a two-step operation, budget-wise. The 40mm and 6x6 220 back would have to be funded with the sale of an additional camera. There are a few contenders left for the block...
Haven't put the Brooks up yet (later this week) and haven't decided anything either.
I have considered building a lens board for the Horseman Convertible and installing a Super-Angulon 47mm on that... But not sure if I have the guts and skills to do that
Roger Hicks
Veteran
For cityscape/landscape, have you considered either a "baby" Linhof or even a 4x5 with rollfilm back. Yesterday I saw an MPP Mk. VIII with 4 lenses, one 6x9 roll film holder and several darkslides for 450€. It would also take 6x12cm... A ratty ST IV with a couple of 6x9 Rollexes (not Super Rollexes) and 2-3 lenses including an Angulon (not Super) shouldn't cost more than 259-300€. And it's not hard to install a 47 SA on a baby Linhof panel: I used to have one.
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
philipus
ʎɐpɹəʇɥƃı&
Hi Johan
The first 40mm Distagon is very large and heavy and often quite costly. Plus from what I have understood researching this recently (I'm also looking for a wide lens for my Hasselblad) that model isn't a great performer, though that's relative when it comes to Zeiss lenses of course.
The later 40 Distagons also cost more (to a lot more) than the 50mm Distagons. The latter CF non-FLE can be found for very reasonable money, esp in the Nordics usually around 300-400 Eur (check classiccamera.se in Gothenburg and kameratori.fi in Finland for instance).
To correct verticals you can use the PC Mutar shift converter with the V series Hasselblads with up to 100mm lenses. It's a really nifty piece of kit but, unless one is a bit lucky, quite expensive so it is not a cost-effective way to get that functionality. Plus it is a 1.4x converter - necessary to widen the image circle enough to allow the shift - so that affects the widest one can go using a shifted Hasselblad.
Just a few thoughts.
br
Philip
The first 40mm Distagon is very large and heavy and often quite costly. Plus from what I have understood researching this recently (I'm also looking for a wide lens for my Hasselblad) that model isn't a great performer, though that's relative when it comes to Zeiss lenses of course.
The later 40 Distagons also cost more (to a lot more) than the 50mm Distagons. The latter CF non-FLE can be found for very reasonable money, esp in the Nordics usually around 300-400 Eur (check classiccamera.se in Gothenburg and kameratori.fi in Finland for instance).
To correct verticals you can use the PC Mutar shift converter with the V series Hasselblads with up to 100mm lenses. It's a really nifty piece of kit but, unless one is a bit lucky, quite expensive so it is not a cost-effective way to get that functionality. Plus it is a 1.4x converter - necessary to widen the image circle enough to allow the shift - so that affects the widest one can go using a shifted Hasselblad.
Just a few thoughts.
br
Philip
Thanks for your suggestions Brett!
Budget is truly limited unfortunately. I'm hoping to purchase a ~40mm lens for 6x6 cityscapes and with that it's down to either Hasselblad or Bronica.
My widest angle in MF currently is a 62mm lens on 6x7 or 6x9 (a Horseman Convertible 842).
I own a Brooks Veriwide 100, which I intend to sell. The 47mm Super-Angulon on it is very wide but the 6x10 ratio isn't suited for my intended photography. Pity, since it's a really nice camera with interesting provenance. I also need to sell it to cover expenses. Anything left after that is my budget.
On the national vending site in the Netherlands I've found a Bronica S2A with 75mm lens and 6x4,5 back, seller is asking EUR 375. That would make my transition a two-step operation, budget-wise. The 40mm and 6x6 220 back would have to be funded with the sale of an additional camera. There are a few contenders left for the block...
Haven't put the Brooks up yet (later this week) and haven't decided anything either.
I have considered building a lens board for the Horseman Convertible and installing a Super-Angulon 47mm on that... But not sure if I have the guts and skills to do that
Uncle Bill
Well-known
Go for the 'blad, you will be thankful you did.
Arved
Member
I know there was a 120/220 back, but unless you have a stash of 220 film, I think it's been discounted a long time ago.
Primary use for 220 was wedding photographers, who've all gone digital.
I used to shoot weddings with an RB67 Pro S. 1 box of 220 (100 frames) plus one box of 120 (50 frames). Only 150 images, and then I'd have to cull it down for an album of 36 or 40 8x10s. Boy, have things changed!
You are asking the wrong question.
Forget the S2A.
The EC-TL is a much better camera
and arguably much better than the 500C as far as camera body ability and features
https://cameraquest.com/bronectl.htm
-- of course the lens debate still continues
Moto-Uno
Moto-Uno
^ This should get those Hassie guys smokin ! Peter
This should get those Hassie guys smokin ! Peter