Advice on Hasselblad 500CM purchase

[Francois_A]

This is my first post on this forum! I've been a daily visitor for the past year, and have always been impressed with the wealth of information, as well as the civilized tone of the contributors.

I am facing a dilemma, someone in town is selling a Hasselblad 500CM with a 40mm CF, 80 and 150, 3 backs, prism finder and a winder, all in excellent condition for the low price of $1400 US. I have to make up my mind today!

My questions:
1) Is there a future with such a system regarding digital?
2) I already own a Canon 5D, which I plan to convert for IR and replace it with the Mark II; would a digital back on the Hasselblad be somewhat redundant ?
3) I am not too happy with the result I get from my Epson V700 for 6x7 (Mamiya 7II + 65mm), but it is OK for 4x5. So, would it be better to stick with a 5D mark II for digital, and 4x5 for film (Sinar F2 and Chamonix), and skip the purchases of a better scanner and the 500CM ?
4) Another consideration is that I love B&W and I am somewhat dissatisfied with what I get from digital, especially in the low values, which do not have the smoothness and tonal separation of film. There is also the dynamic range of B&W film, which is not match by the 5D. Do you find much improvements on those aspects with digital backs ?
5) Last, there is the archival aspect; I still have my father's negatives dating from the early 50's. Will the raw digital files still be readable in 50 years ?

Lots of questions and soul searching; any comment would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

François Audet

 

[Jack]

First off, assuming it is all in good mechanical condition, that is an excellent package deal -- I'll buy it if you don't! Second, you did not mention what your specific use or type of shooting is -- IOW the above system will suck for sports or racing, but excel at landscape and studio...

To answer your questions specifically:

1) Yes, but not really much of one -- IOW you can mount a CFV back to it or any number of third-party backs, but you're stuck with manual focus and non-digital design lenses. Also note that "kit" is going to most friendly with one of the 16-22 MP backs. But for landscape, it will give you many years of excellent service.

2) Nope. A 22MP back on the 500 with that glass will kill even a 1Ds3 or Sony900/Nikon D3x in terms of file quality. Of course it won't shoot as fast, focus or set exposure automatically, nor will it shoot at anywhere near as high an ISO.

3) This is a tougher question. The V700 is an excellent scanner for a $500 flatbed, but it aint even in the same ballpark for scanning film as a dedicated film scanner. An Imacon or drum scanner are the best and will do large format, but they are large and expensive (probably on the order of $5K or more used). I use and like the Nikon 9000, an excellent intermediate choice for MF film and smaller at around $2000 new, but it won't do 4x5. (Do get the optional anti-newton glass MF neg carrier ~~$300 for it though!) At the end of the day, well scanned 4x5 or 5x7 is tough to beat for overall image quality, however, well-scanned MF is not too shabby either -- call it on par with 22MP direct digital capture. Since you have the Mamiya 7 and can get the Hassy kit so reasonably -- and given the Hassy can do digital and film -- I'd consider that and a Nikon 9000 before large format and the Imacon or Drum route.

4) IMO only, film is still king of the realm for B&W. Digital can be excellent, but it doesn't have the full juice of a properly captured and processed piece of silver. In fact, B&W is THE reason I bought the Nikon 9000 -- I now carry a few film backs and some Tri-X and Portra whenever I'm out with my MF kit.

5) Sure, as long as you store them and back them up properly to begin with. See the gear garage for LOTS of info and suggestions for long-term digital data storage.

And welcome to the forum!

 

[Francois_A]

Thanks Jack for your advice. I've just sent a email to the the person selling the 500CM that I am buying it! I'll give the Nikon 9000 serious consideration.

I enjoy landscape and studio photography, and prefer to use fixed manual lens with legible depth of field scales (a rarity these days!). I always use a tripod. I enjoy the contemplative and introspective aspect of photography, where the process is as important as the end result.

Regards,

François

 

[Chris C]

... I'll give the Nikon 9000 serious consideration...

If so, I recommend you join the :

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/coolscan8000-9000/

The user group will help you get started. Getting the best out of the scanner might mean making a modification to the Poorly designed scanner trays. There is also a way of doing 'wet' scanning with the 9000 to get optimum scans, I considered going that route myself but didn't want to breath in fluid fumes. I'm out of practice with scanning, but I previously found the yahoo Coolscan Group to be helpful and generous.

Good luck.

............... Chris

 

[Francois_A]

If so, I recommend you join the :
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/coolscan8000-9000/

Thanks Chris. I've joined the group, and there is a wealth of information!

I took delivery of the 500CM last night. What a beauty, everything is in perfect condition. Manual focussing with those Zeiss lenses is pure Nirvana! The depth of field scales are so legible, and one can focus precisely with the waist level finder and the magnifying loupe. One can lock the exposure value and rotate the shutter speed and aperture rings at the same time; by comparison, I find the two wheels on the Canon so unintuitive in manual mode. A Mirror lock-up that doe not require a trip to the custom functions submenu; wow!:clap:

I suddenly realized how much was lost in ergonomics in the past 25 years with our auto-everything cameras. It was also interesting to compare the users guides: the Hasselblad' guide is very well illustrated and only 40 pages, while my Canon G10 for instance, is 300 pages, plus an 80 pages Software Starter Guide, and a 77 pages Direct Print User Guide!

 

[Paratom]

Congratulations. I still find the V system to be THE classical MF camera.

 

[fotografz]

Welcome to the Hasselblad V club Francois!

I've used a V camera for all of my adult life, they just keep going and going. Most every digital back made will work on your camera, but there's just something extra about the V when shooting film.

Here are a few sites to explore:


http://www.hasselbladinfo.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=136


http://www.hasselbladinfo.com/forum/showthread.php?p=28947#post28947



http://www.hasselblad.com/planet-v/start.aspx



http://www.camerapedia.org/wiki/Hasselblad


Enjoy your camera, and for a nice selection of films visit:


http://www.freestylephoto.biz/c403-Black-and-White-Film-120-and-220-size

 

[Geoff]

Congrats on your purchase. FWIW, I use the Rollei system as another film based system. Scanned film is pretty hard to compete with, but with a digital back also, you can have the best of both. Try finding a used Imacon 3xx scanner (I can't remember the exact number, but its for 6x6 up to 6x12). Makes amazingly good scans, like 4x5 prints. Captures nuance very well.

Enjoy - and if you have the need for the digital back, the CF22 is no slouch and will give you lots of operating pleasure as well. No need for the newest and greatest - unless you plan to print larger than ....well, let's say 20 x 24?

 

[Stuart Richardson]

To be honest, I am considering selling my 22mp digital back. I just find that I prefer film for medium format. I thought it would make my life easier and give me better results, but I find it a pain in the ***, and the results from film scans are better (to my eye). If I want digital, I go for the D3 or the M8, they seem to do it a lot better than the back that I have (not the resolution or dynamic range, but everything else).

And frankly, the cost to benefit ratio for anything other than professional studio shooting is really out of whack. You got a 500cm, 40mm, 80mm and 150mm, 3 backs and other things for 1400 dollars -- the 40mm alone is worth more than that, but in any case, you got an insane deal. I also got a really great deal on my medium format digital system, but the 22mp back (latest version) was still 10,000 dollars. And I am not sure it will take better pictures...in fact, I have seen little evidence that it does from my own shooting.

I am not sure why I am posting this here...I guess just because I think film in medium format still offers me everything I want in a picture -- I have no criticisms of the image quality whatsoever. If I need to do a job where things must get done, no matter what, I will grab the D3, but barring that I think film is really what works best for me.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Stuart is the back and software just too much hassle or not liking the whole process of it.

 

[Stuart Richardson]

I am not sure how much of it is the back and software (though clearly, they are not for the faint of heart), but I think the bulk of it is the whole MF digital experience. I find the color and the tonal range of film to be more to my liking. I don't like squashed 645, I prefer 6x6 and 6x7. I just find that film gives me results I like, and the medium format digital that I have does not. And I will say that I honestly don't think it is the particular brand or software that is the cause of it. I think it is the nature of the beast. I should ad that most of the software work I have done with it have been in lightroom and in capture one. The back itself has operated flawlessly, it's just that I don't really like the results. And there is the extra weight (it weighs a lot more than a film back), carrying along batteries, base ISO being 25 (though stated as 50), and anything above that gains noise very quickly, having a maximum exposure time of 30 seconds, having to worry about running out of storage space, having to find space to archive all those huge files (rather than just scanning the ones you need when you need them) and so forth. It does not help that I really like being in the black and white darkroom.

Anyway, I may hold out for the moment, as I am mostly interested in location work and there is basically no light this time of year, which makes it a no brainer to reach for the D3 on location shoots right now.

 

[Francois_A]

Thanks everyone for the warm welcome to the "Hasselblad V club"!
Marc, thanks for all the links.
Stuart, I love your web site! What kind of scanner do you use with film?

For the price of a MF Digital back, one could get a new Hasselblad X5 scanner, which could also scan 4x5.
For someone like me, with very low volume, that could be an alternative.

An area where film does very well is long exposure. I seem to get better result with film when I use a 100X ND filter than with the 5D. Michael Kenna, for instance, uses exposures lasting hours with his Hasselblad 500. Could it be done with a DB?

 

[Stuart Richardson]

Thanks Francois -- I use an Imacon 646, which is the precursor to the Hasselblad X1. I bought it several years ago, and I think it does a great job, though at times I would love the diffusor and extra speed of the 949!

Long exposure is a toss up, depending on how long you mean. For up to a couple of minutes, I think digital has the edge -- no reciprocity and you get instant confirmation that the exposure was correct. Cameras like the D3 can be used really effectively at ISO 800 or more, allowing you to use smaller f/stops and still get enough light. The downside is that they eat batteries as they expose, and they build noise, which needs to be subtracted with a darkframe that takes the same time as the exposure. Film with a mechanical camera require no batteries at all, no dark frame subtraction, and no build up of noise. On the downside, you have reciprocity effect, which means the less light you have and the longer you expose, the more time it takes to achieve the proper exposure. Some films are really good about this (Acros for example), others are very poor.

As far as I know, the only back maker with unlimited long exposure is Phase One. My sinar topped out at 30 seconds.

 

[Geoff]

There are other reasons to like film - the analog system (which film is) has the advantage of incredibly easy and concise data retrieval: File the negs by number or date, organize the contact sheets as you wish, and voila: ten years from now, easy to find. No need to update, back up, etc. Its a rather remarkable, and unheralded advantage.

For the amateur (as opposed to the pro) the advantage of digital is are a few: of course, the speed of feedback: instant information, more or less; then the self-processing advantage - no need to fool with finding a lab to process the film. Note the labs are getting harder to find, and the techs are less capable than they were some years ago.

But I think the best advantage of digital is the ability to take essentially cost-free risk. You can shoot anything, take a look, throw it out, and there you are. You can go out on a limb, explore ideas you might otherwise hesitate about.

And film, by the way, isn't quite so cheap. My local lab is about $12 for processing 120 BW, the same for a proof sheet, and then again for some 8 mb scans. So its $2-3 per shot, not to mention the film cost. While there are cheaper and probably better services if one ships, my one experience left me with a rather unhappy taste in the development side. Not so good. Maybe it was the lab, but somehow I don't like shipping the film anywhere....

I've picked up an older dp20 for the Rollei and still getting used to it. But the advantages of MF, the ability to use the WLF and really get vertical alignment and cropping correct, are wonderful to still use. Just one person's thoughts.

 

[tetsrfun]

What a great buy!!! Get a used copy of "The Hasselblad Manual" 5th edition by Wildi..It is fun to read and very useful for people starting out with the "V" system.

Steve

 

[Francois_A]

And film, by the way, isn't quite so cheap. My local lab is about $12 for processing 120 BW, the same for a proof sheet, and then again for some 8 mb scans. So its $2-3 per shot, not to mention the film cost. While there are cheaper and probably better services if one ships, my one experience left me with a rather unhappy taste in the development side. Not so good. Maybe it was the lab, but somehow I don't like shipping the film anywhere....

Geoff, processing B&W is really easy, and one does not need a darkroom; I do it in a small bathroom. You save a lot, and you have control on developer choice (high contrast, low contrast, high-definition, fine-grain, etc.)

I have just purchased The Darkroom Cookbook by Steve Anchell, and I find it fascinating how much control one can achieve when one starts to mix the basic chemicals. I am going to experiment with divided developers (for their compensating effect) and with pyro (very sharp edges and delicate highlights). My objective is to produce negatives that are easy to scan.

On can scan 6 neg (6x6) at a time on an Epson V700, and generating contact sheet/proof is easy with Lightroom or Photoshop>Automate>Contact Sheet.

 

[carstenw]

Is there any advantage of the V750 over the V700? Can someone add some numbers on a comparison between the V700/V750 and something like a Nikon 8000/9000?

 

[Jack]

Is there any advantage of the V750 over the V700? Can someone add some numbers on a comparison between the V700/V750 and something like a Nikon 8000/9000?

The V750 is supposed to have an APO lens while the 700 doesn't? The Nikon 9000 is faster (by a lot) than the 8000 and is a current product with current support. The 9000 is LED light-source (very stable and supposedly superior for scanning B&W) and FW400 connectivity, not sure about the 8000 but i think it's a fluorescent light.

The big difference between the 8000/9000 and the Epson flatbeds is D-Max --- you get e *lot* more light into the shadows with the dedicated film scanner.

 

[PeterA]

Congratulations Francois - enjoy!

 

[Geoff]

Geoff, processing B&W is really easy, and one does not need a darkroom; I do it in a small bathroom. You save a lot, and you have control on developer choice (high contrast, low contrast, high-definition, fine-grain, etc.)

I have just purchased The Darkroom Cookbook by Steve Anchell, and I find it fascinating how much control one can achieve when one starts to mix the basic chemicals. I am going to experiment with divided developers (for their compensating effect) and with pyro (very sharp edges and delicate highlights). My objective is to produce negatives that are easy to scan.

On can scan 6 neg (6x6) at a time on an Epson V700, and generating contact sheet/proof is easy with Lightroom or Photoshop>Automate>Contact Sheet.

You are right, I'm sure. However years ago, my BW processing had more dust on the film than not, and just kind of soured me on the whole thing. Perhaps its time to revisit. On the ohter hand, there is the stack of images, negs and files, yet to be printed, and since I'm the bottleneck, adding more to the plate isn't the best idea! Bu if you're doing processing, keep going. More hands on is better.