mamiya 7 vs hasselblad 500 c/m

S

stip80

Member
Local time
11:34 AM
Joined
May 23, 2010
Messages
33
i need some inputs here. i have the opportunity to buy either mamiya 7 (not 7ii) w/ 80mm lens and strap (both in ok condition) or hassy 500 c/m (late production in very nice condition) w/ a12 back (nice condition as well), extra grid bright screen, strap, box and older 80mm lens for roughly the same price of around usd 900.

i already have bronica rf645 and rz67 and have the itch for camera bigger than 645 that is more portable than my rz. hassy is light enough to be carried around, nice lens, but not as fast to use as mamiya 7, whereas mamiya 7 is not that compact as well and not so fast lens (probably no problem since there will be no mirror vibration), but super sharp lens.

im particularly open to either 6x6 or 6x7, basically i just want bigger negative in portable camera. if you happen to be in my position, which one would you choose? which one is better value for the price? and why?

thnks.
 
Last edited:
I am in your shoe, looking for either at least 6x6 medium format camera. I have look at the Hasselblad and Pentax 67, and I must say the Pentax 67 has a surprising good review in comparison with the Hasselblad, but again both of the camera have mirror reflex that sounds like a slap in your face... and probably not as portable as the Mamiya 7...

I am mainly looking for landscape / night long exposure work.. so it will be good if anyone could upload pictures of these camera with a wide lens , say 60mm and below ?

cheers

Gary
 
To my eye, the Hassy kit is too expensive. As to the choice, it depends on what type of photography you want to do. Mamiya gives you more portability and a bigger negative, while the Hassy gives you an entry to a very flexible system, which you can use for almost anything from makro to portraiture.
 
Mamiya pros- I prefer 6x7 rather than 6x6, Aperture priority+ AEL (both work very well), Quiet shutter, RF focusing. More portable and faster to use.

Mamiya cons- Its ugly. The shutter button feels horrible. The lens' hood mounting system is flimsy. Mamiya lenses for me tend to be on the "cool" side with colour film. 150mm and 210mm lenses arent very useful, camera is best with wide lenses.

----

Hasselblad pros- 80mm standard Planar is exceptional. Fantastic build quality. Wider assortment of lenses. A Better portrait camera.

Hasselblad cons- Fiddly to load film on location, Loud (albeit cool sounding) shutter/mirror assembly. Slower to focus, harder to compose handheld, somewhat higher maintenance requirements.

If i were you id break it down like this- Studio or location portraits or times when youd use a tripod: get the hasselblad. For a street camera or a walkaround camera, get the Mamiya.

All my opinions of course. YMMV
 
Mamiya - Rangefinder - all the known advantages and foibles.

Hasselblad - effectively an SLR - will allow you to easily use polarising and graduated density filters (which are most easily used with through-the-lens viewing. (And it has the ultimate Hasselblad cool factor. :))
 
Last edited:
Moriturii said:
There is one reason and one reason only to get a Medium Format camera, and that is for the size of the negatives and sharpness and all that. And the Mamiya with the 80mm f4 is definitely better then the Carl Zeiss on the Hasselblad.

Check this site;
http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/test/fourcameras.html

Scroll down for the numbers. Amazing.
Click to expand...

Poppycock. There are a lot of reasons to get a medium format camera and resolution is just one of them. The Mamiya lens is not ''definitely better'' then the Carl Zeiss on the Hasselblad. It's just different. The Mamiya may be a tiny bit sharper but I generally find the look of the Zeiss on the Hasselblad much more appealing. Not as harsh as the Mamiya with softer gradations and a more gentle look overall.

It all comes down to personal preference. 6x6 vs. 6x7, slr vs. rangefinder, interchangeable backs vs. no interchangeable, etc., etc. One really has to decide for oneself which is more important.
 
I traded a Mamiya 7 for a Hasselblad, and whilst I don't want to reverse that trade, there are some times when I wish I still had the Mamiya. I think if you're shooting without a tripod, you really want the Mamiya, sure, you can use a Hasselblad without a tripod, but it's nowhere near as easy as the Mamiya. If you're mostly heading out with a tripod and other gear, then I'd certainly go with the 'blad. SLRs have their place, and that's for precise framing at the cost of weight and size. If you're using a tripod, weight and size do not matter so much.

If the handsomeness of cameras is a factor for you, again it's the Hasselblad. If you want to carry around a MF camera like it was a Leica M, then the Mamiya is so very, very hard to beat. The only camera which I maybe prefer for that is the Fujfilm GF670, but that's not cheap, although it is IMHO one of the best cameras you can buy.

My instinct though, is to recommed the Mamiya, you'll probably use it more, if you can get away with a slow lens, then it really can replace a 35mm range finder quite easily.
 
thanks for the answers guys, i think im starting to going somewhere here, though hasnt made the decision yet.

again, the key word probably is lighter camera and bigger negative. as one of you pointed out, i would probably use more the mamiya 7 because its easier and faster to use on the fly.

but, even after bronica and rz, 6x6 is still intriguing me, not to mention those beautiful chrome hassy body with their unique lens color rendition keeps calling me back. im just afraid, even after mamiya 7, im still going back for this 6x6 baby.

btw, no one has commented on the price. is it fair price? which one has better value given the price?
 
Last edited:
thegman said:
I traded a Mamiya 7 for a Hasselblad, and whilst I don't want to reverse that trade, there are some times when I wish I still had the Mamiya. I think if you're shooting without a tripod, you really want the Mamiya, sure, you can use a Hasselblad without a tripod, but it's nowhere near as easy as the Mamiya. If you're mostly heading out with a tripod and other gear, then I'd certainly go with the 'blad. SLRs have their place, and that's for precise framing at the cost of weight and size. If you're using a tripod, weight and size do not matter so much.

If the handsomeness of cameras is a factor for you, again it's the Hasselblad. If you want to carry around a MF camera like it was a Leica M, then the Mamiya is so very, very hard to beat. The only camera which I maybe prefer for that is the Fujfilm GF670, but that's not cheap, although it is IMHO one of the best cameras you can buy.

My instinct though, is to recommed the Mamiya, you'll probably use it more, if you can get away with a slow lens, then it really can replace a 35mm range finder quite easily.
Click to expand...

Just to show that preferences vary, I used to have the Bessa III (GF670) and am now going back to a Hasselblad. Just didn't like the lens on the Bessa that much even though it was probably sharper than the Zeiss. As I said, resolution isn't everything.
 
I had both, needed money, sold the Mamiya. I felt as if what the Mamiya provided as an experience (NOT, obviously, as an outcome) -- as a way of taking pictures -- was exactly like what you get with a 35mm rangefinder. I feel I will learn more from the Hasselblad. I also feel that the Hasselblad is an OBJECT of great beauty -- I've loved them for years and years before I could finally not afford one in a way that allowed me to buy one anyway.... The Mamiya lenses are more expensive than the Hassy's, I believe. Someone correct that if I'm wrong. It was my impression. But for a street camera, the Mamiya is certainly easier. On the other hand, more girls will check out the hasselblad and it is a great great portrait camera. If you ARE a girl, you will look tre butch in all the right ways with a Hasselblad.

Finally, this: I was in Calumet the other day. The high-end Digital guy showed me a $14,000 back -- Hasselblad's own, by the looks of it: looked exactly like the a12 but with a screen and some controls on the rear -- that can go on the c/m body! So like if you have an rich aunt you could slip some arsenic into her tea and end up with a camera that would be one of the finest digitals in the known universe OR a great traditional film camera. I mean how cool is that???

For taking great pictures: well, as Flannery O'Connor said, quoting Aquinas I believe: Purify the source.
 
Jamie123 said:
Poppycock. There are a lot of reasons to get a medium format camera and resolution is just one of them. The Mamiya lens is not ''definitely better'' then the Carl Zeiss on the Hasselblad. It's just different. The Mamiya may be a tiny bit sharper but I generally find the look of the Zeiss on the Hasselblad much more appealing. Not as harsh as the Mamiya with softer gradations and a more gentle look overall.

It all comes down to personal preference. 6x6 vs. 6x7, slr vs. rangefinder, interchangeable backs vs. no interchangeable, etc., etc. One really has to decide for oneself which is more important.
Click to expand...

Done me. Good points!
 
stip80 said:
... hassy 500 c/m (late production in very nice condition) w/ a12 back (nice condition as well), extra grid bright screen, strap, box and older 80mm lens for roughly the same price of around usd 900. ...
Click to expand...

stip80 said:
... btw, no one has commented on the price. is it fair price? which one has better value given the price?
Click to expand...

For the Hasselblad at least, much depends on condition and service history. Check the cost of servicing from someone like David Odess (here), and his second-hand (but serviced) gear. If you have the Acute-Mat D screen and some servicing history $900 is reasonable. I've paid more for a later body and lens.

Sorry I can't comment on the price/value of the Mamiya 7.
 
ChrisN said:
Mamiya - Rangefinder - all the known advantages and foibles.

Hasselblad - effectively an SLR - will allow you to easily use polarising and graduated density filters (which are most easily used with through-the-lens viewing. (And it has the ultimate Hasselblad cool factor. :))
Click to expand...


Best reason so far IMO! :D
 
I've owned both and it was a toss up. The blad is hardly light weight, especially w/ a prism finder on it, and is quite loud. The Mamiya was quieter, and it's lens was sharper, but the blad was more fun to shoot. I also didn't much care for how Japanese glass images, and always preferred the German glass if I had a choice. In the end I ended up going to a 3.5 E3 Rolleiflex w/ Planar that trounced both cameras in IQ. Eventually sold the TLR because even it was too big and bulky. Now I shoot a Voigtlander 6x9 folder w/ a Heliar lens that is much easier to tote (though slower to shoot), and has an IQ that I prefer even to the Planar on the Rollei.
 
On a more serious note I would have the Hassy purely for the 80mm Planar ... the one on mine is pretty beaten up but I just love the look it gives.

I am kind of biased towards Zeiss glass though. :D
 
stip80 said:
........................... basically i just want bigger negative in portable camera. if you happen to be in my position, which one would you choose? which one is better value for the price? and why?
Click to expand...

Actually the choice is quite simple. If you want a RF, choose the Mamiya 7. If you want an SLR, choose the Hassleblad. That is a major difference, all the other differences are minor.

I own and use both a Mamiya 7 and a Bronica SQA. I use the Mamiya 7 about 50X as much as the Bronica because my normal style is more suited to rangefinders. When I am shooting something that is more suitable to using an SLR, I choose the Bronica though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom