Newsgroups: rec.photo

I bet this is a F.A.Q.   :-<

I have been using 35mm for 20 years.  I am planning the purchase of a
medimu format camera.  I have so far been looking at the Hasselblad
and the Mamiya RZ67.  The Hasselblad seems to have: a very wide range
of really superb lenses; 20 year old metering technology; light
weight; and a very hefty price tag.  The Mamiya seems to have: (maybe)
OK lenses; a very large negative (6x7cm); a high weight (compared to
any of its competitors); and a reasonably wide range of useful
accessories, such as an add-on motor drive.

I plan to use my camera to take B&W photographs of my the excellent
scenery available in my home state of Colorado: landscapes; foliage;
rocks and rock formations; streams; and sunsets.  I plan to use my
camera to take color negatives in my basement studio by photographing
flowers and glassware (non-commercially) under Tungsten lighting.

Hasselblads are areally expensive.  Mamiyas are really heavy.   I got
that far on my own.  :-) 

I am struggling with a number of value judgement questions.

1) The Hasselblad rep says that the Zeiss lenses are so much better
   than the Mamiya lenses that Hassleblad's 6cm by 6cm negatives
   cropped to 6cm x 4.5cm will enlarge to a 20" by 24" print which
   will look just as good as the same sized print made from the
   Mamiya's 6cm by 7cm negative.  The Hasselblad people have a
   stunning portfolio in the Denver Robert Waxman's camera store's pro
   section to back up their claims.  The Denver store's sales people
   say that the prints from the Hasselblad blow away prints from the
   Mamiya 645, and equal those of the RZ67.  Are the RZ's lenses that
   much poorer than the Zeiss lenses that the Zeiss lenses and a 30%
   smaller cropped Hasselblad negative (6cm by 4.5cm) can overcome the
   size advantages of the Mamiya's 6cm by 7cm negative?  The Mamiya
   reps claim that the new Z series of lenses for the RZ67 are
   significantly upgraded and tilt the advantage in favor of the RZ67.
   Does anyone in netland have data or first hand experience comparing
   the Zeiss CF T* lenses against the RZ67's Z series of Mamiya Sekor
   lenses on the same size negative (apples to apples)?

2) Do people really shoot their Hasselblads handheld?  I think that if
   I have to carry around a tripod it seems to me that the weight of
   the camera is not all that big a deal.  Am I really missing
   something here?  Even though I weight 230 lbs and lift weights,
   horsing the Mamiya RZ67 around at the dealers is a grunt.  Do
   people get around this weight problem with sophisticated monopod
   technology?  Do people carry their Mamiya RB67s and RZ67s in the
   field (in backpacks, maybe) or do they leave them at home in the
   studio on a tripod?


Hasselblad and Mamiya RZ67 (and RB67) owners, please educate me.  I am
really struggling to understand what is important to me.  The blad
weighs 1/2 as much as the Mamiya and costs 2x as much.  I have found a
cherry previously owned (but virtually unused) Hasselblad 500C/M with
two 120 backs and a polaroid back, a 50mm, an 80mm, and a 150mm, and a
45 degree meter/prism viewfinder for $5,500 (which seems like a pretty
good price to me after looking at the used prices in the Shutterbug).
I don't expect the kit to stay in the dealers for more than a few
days.


Marc Illsley Clarke, mic@hpesmic.fc.hp.com
Hewlett-Packard Company, 3404 East Harmony Road
Fort Collins, Colorado 80525-9599 USA
HP-TELNET: 1-229-3376  BELL: (303)-229-3376

            It's no use saying, "We are doing our best", you have
            to succeed in doing what is necessary.

                                       --- Winston S. Churchill
Newsgroups: rec.photo