# Who uses Leica, Hasselblad, etc??



## Vicelord John (Dec 4, 2009)

I'm just curious. This stuff is EXPENSIVE and I'm hard pressed to see how it creates any better images than say a D3X or Canon's equivelent. 

Enlighten me.


----------



## DScience (Dec 4, 2009)

Well when you say 'better' that's completely subjective. I also am curious to know if people use these brands, and who.

I looked into it a while back, and there is one definite use for the hasselblad. Ever been to a museum and seen GIGANTIC photos? Well, if they are huge, like the size of the wall, then chances are they are hassy's. I mean, no other camera can make such enormous photos, as the hassy has 50 megapixels!

As far as Leica, it's all about the german engineering.


----------



## icassell (Dec 4, 2009)

Leica S2 Field and Studio Review


----------



## usayit (Dec 4, 2009)

A BMW, AUDI, Mercedes, Lexus takes yah from A to B... just like my econobox.   No one seems to ask about those purchases... 

There are several discussions but I am having trouble finding them:

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...s/126583-leica-m8-just-little-too-pricey.html

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...639-leica-m9-noctilux-m-50mm-f-0-95-asph.html

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...reviews/183852-perfect-camera-lens-combo.html

Hassy's are a different story... that discussion is more along the lines of MF digital versus...


----------



## Garbz (Dec 4, 2009)

That's a good read icassell. And for those who want the important part of that entire review just scroll to the very bottom. 
"The real issue is determining whether the difference is worth the price. For some it will, and for others it won't. "

And that's the kicker. I feel like just hitting rich kids with hassleblads doing point and shoot style photography, but if you're in the studio where the resolution and reliability are both critical to the success of the shoot, and you get paid a small fortune for your work and can thus tax deduct it, it may be a nobrainer to go with the medium format digitals.


----------



## Sam6644 (Dec 4, 2009)

usayit said:


> A BMW, AUDI, Mercedes, Lexus takes yah from A to B... just like my econobox.   No one seems to ask about those purchases...




Haha, you're obviously not really into car discussion. As a German car enthusiast, I'll tell ya there is plenty of heat thrown at German car owners for spending more for cars. 


but yeah, Leica, Hasselblad = BMW or Mercedes Benz of Cameras

Canon, Nikon = Honda and Nissan


they cost more for a reason.


----------



## Vicelord John (Dec 4, 2009)

so you're saying I purchased a Nissan? I guess if I did, the D90 would have to be an Altima.


----------



## Sam6644 (Dec 4, 2009)

Vicelord John said:


> so you're saying I purchased a Nissan? I guess if I did, the D90 would have to be an Altima.



and my D50 is a Versa. 


I plan to upgrade to a Honda S2000 soon... (canon 7D haha)


----------



## DScience (Dec 4, 2009)

lol no no no...Nikon and Canon are BMW's and Benz's. Hassy's and Leica are Ferrari and Lambos!


----------



## Vicelord John (Dec 4, 2009)

that makes more sense and maybe pentax, casio, etc. are the honda nissan toyotas.


----------



## Sam6644 (Dec 4, 2009)

mass produced in Japan.... they're Honda and Nissan for sure. 


just means the D3x is a GTR and maybe a 1D is an NSX.


----------



## epp_b (Dec 4, 2009)

People who don't have time to waste on forums, that's who


----------



## SrBiscuit (Dec 4, 2009)

ever watch americas next top model?....that dude uses a hassy i think.


----------



## Sam6644 (Dec 4, 2009)

annie leibovitz


----------



## Mitica100 (Dec 5, 2009)

Again, it's not how expensive the gear is, it is what you do with your gear. One can take a great photo with a Diana type camera and another one can take lousy pictures with a Hasselblad. Sure, the optics of the latter help in some way but you need to know how to put that to your advantage. I own both Hasselblads and Leicas as well as a Canon 5D and I use them all, although in all honesty I have used more of the digital equipment as of late due to time constraints. Using film cameras will make you slower and more careful in selecting the right exposure/composition.


----------



## DScience (Dec 5, 2009)

Mitica100 said:


> Again, it's not how expensive the gear is, it is what you do with your gear. One can take a great photo with a Diana type camera and another one can take lousy pictures with a Hasselblad. Sure, the optics of the latter help in some way but you need to know how to put that to your advantage. I own both Hasselblads and Leicas as well as a Canon 5D and I use them all, although in all honesty I have used more of the digital equipment as of late due to time constraints. Using film cameras will make you slower and more careful in selecting the right exposure/composition.



LOL who cares, this is not what the thread is about. The topic isn't about what one can create with what gear. It's about, who in the hell shoots with a $50,000 hassy, or $10,000 Leica lenses.


----------



## jbylake (Dec 5, 2009)

Vicelord John said:


> I'm just curious. This stuff is EXPENSIVE and I'm hard pressed to see how it creates any better images than say a D3X or Canon's equivelent.
> 
> Enlighten me.


Highly paid professionals?  People who are not highly paid professionals, but have lot's of disposable income? And lastly, people who are not pro's but want to look cool? 

People who can afford lenses that start at over 4K U.S. and up?

All of which leaves me out.

J.:mrgreen:


----------



## jbylake (Dec 5, 2009)

DScience said:


> lol no no no...Nikon and Canon are BMW's and Benz's. Hassy's and Leica are Ferrari and Lambos!




Might as well be, they cost about the same....BTW, _if I could afford one or the other and if _I was good enough to justify the cost, as clumsy as I am, I'd be afraid I'd trip, do a header, and leave my 50K Hassleblad laying in pieces, on the street, in the snow, dying a slow miserable death..a Hemmingway-esque, style of death....at night.

J.:mrgreen:


----------



## Mitica100 (Dec 5, 2009)

Vicelord John said:


> I'm just curious. This stuff is EXPENSIVE and I'm hard pressed to see how it creates any better images than say a D3X or Canon's equivelent.
> 
> Enlighten me.





DScience said:


> Well when you say 'better' that's completely subjective. I also am curious to know if people use these brands, and who.
> 
> I looked into it a while back, and there is one definite use for the hasselblad. Ever been to a museum and seen GIGANTIC photos? Well, if they are huge, like the size of the wall, then chances are they are hassy's. I mean, no other camera can make such enormous photos, as the hassy has 50 megapixels!
> 
> As far as Leica, it's all about the german engineering.





DScience said:


> lol no no no...Nikon and Canon are BMW's and Benz's. Hassy's and Leica are Ferrari and Lambos!





DScience said:


> LOL who cares, this is not what the thread is about. The topic isn't about what one can create with what gear. It's about, who in the hell shoots with a $50,000 hassy, or $10,000 Leica lenses.



=================================

Oh, I'm sorry, I haven't read your mind. I quite didn't know you meant the $50,000 Hassy and the $10,000 Leica. Your mind is probably hard to read and fixated on only the super expensive cameras. I'll make a better effort next time to read your mind...

FYI: The Hasselblad cameras come also in Film format as does the Leica. Those were proven workhorses over the years. The digital versions of these cameras have been developed lately and they're still being worked on. You might be a tad young to remember the good ol' days of film. 

A good Hasselblad film system can be bought for a few thousand bucks and so can a Leica film system. By system I mean a body (plus WLF, Back for Hassy) and two lenses, or even three.

Oh...  Were we talking cars? Apologies...


----------



## Vicelord John (Dec 5, 2009)

Mitica100 said:


> Vicelord John said:
> 
> 
> > I'm just curious. This stuff is EXPENSIVE and I'm hard pressed to see how it creates any better images than say a D3X or Canon's equivelent.
> ...


 Regardless of whom it is directed towards, why are you being rude?


----------



## Mitica100 (Dec 5, 2009)

Vicelord John said:


> Regardless of whom it is directed towards, why are you being rude?



OK, define 'rude' ! I was simply replying to the dismissive reply by Dscience.

Sorry if that offended you. Sheesh!...


----------



## Vicelord John (Dec 5, 2009)

It's all good, I'll probably offend 100 people by the time it's said and done. I just found the sarcasm in the first paragraph to be a little short.


----------



## jbylake (Dec 5, 2009)

Hey, the inference I made, was that this was supposed to be one of those sitting around, sipping a cold one, fun kind of threads... How and why did it get "offensive"....

J.:mrgreen:


----------



## Vicelord John (Dec 5, 2009)

yup, one of _those_ threads you know good spirited. I just want to know about why HB's top of the line camera is about $30K and Nikon's is $7K


----------



## MPSax1 (Dec 5, 2009)

1. More megapixels and more data in the photos (detail) with less noise and bigger sensor. Dude, the guys from NASA use these cameras to take photos of mars. This is no joke, NASA's primary camera is Hasselblad.
2. When you have cameras like a D3 for example, there is a lot of interior image processing that lowers the quality of the image, but it makes it look good on screen and it fixes up the errors like noise that Hasselblads won't get in the first place.
3. Again, with such a huge sensor you can get 100 megapixel cameras that can take pictures beyond billboard size.
4. Film is and will be better for awhile over digital unfortunately. Pros who can afford this stuff afford it because its the best there is. Most of this equipment is for commerical use though. You see those amazing pictures of the bmw in the magazine, good chance the photo was taken with a 'Blad.


----------



## Professional (Feb 25, 2010)

I use one digital Hasselblad, and it is making my studio choice so easy against my best Canon DSLRs [1Ds3, 1Ds2, 5D, 1D3,....], i did a test or twice i think with my digital Hassy against my 1DsIII, i used kit lens of Hasselblad[80, f2.8] against on of the finest prime of Canon lens [50, f1.4], with no doubt the Hasselblad was the winner on color, sharpness, DR, resolution, ofcourse i will not use Hasselblad at high ISO as in studio works i always use lights, so even ISO 100 is more than enough.


----------



## gsgary (Feb 25, 2010)

Sam6644 said:


> Vicelord John said:
> 
> 
> > so you're saying I purchased a Nissan? I guess if I did, the D90 would have to be an Altima.
> ...



No Trabant 
http://www.mediabistro.com/unbeige/original/trabant.jpg


----------



## Mitica100 (Feb 25, 2010)

^
Uh, those were scary cars!!!


----------



## gsgary (Feb 25, 2010)

Mitica100 said:


> ^
> Uh, those were scary cars!!!



Had a drive in one in Poland some years ago


----------



## Mitica100 (Feb 25, 2010)

Yep, I rode in one back many years. Nothing like the exhaust of it!!! Two stroke engine and all.


----------



## Hamtastic (Mar 9, 2010)

I think the car analogy is a good one.  Why is a Hummer better than a Toyota Camry?  It's easy to imagine situations where I'd rather be driving the Hummer.  I don't ever actually encounter those situations in my driving though, so the Camry is a better choice for me.


----------



## Sbuxo (Apr 25, 2010)

let me tell you who uses them.
rich people.:er:


----------



## Mitica100 (Apr 25, 2010)

Sbuxo said:


> let me tell you who uses them.
> rich people.:er:



Really??:scratch::scratch:

I must be rich and don't know it...


----------



## Sbuxo (Apr 25, 2010)

Mitica100 said:


> Sbuxo said:
> 
> 
> > let me tell you who uses them.
> ...


:lmao: compared to me, you must be.


----------



## Mitica100 (Apr 25, 2010)

Sbuxo said:


> Mitica100 said:
> 
> 
> > Sbuxo said:
> ...



Well then... Thanks for letting me know! I'm gonna have a different view on life now after this epiphany! 

Seriously now, Hasselblads can be had for a fraction compared to say, 5-10 years ago. You can get a system for under $1,000, the basic one. Leicas are not that expensive either, unless they're rare. You can get an old IIIc for under $300.


----------



## usayit (Apr 26, 2010)

For many of us.. it is setting priorities and saving.

You can either buy many affordable things.

or

You can either buy a few expensive things.

Choose ONE!

I am fortunate enough to have an M8.  My buddies say.. wow you have money...  you paid that much for a camera.   My response is usually along the lines...

How much did you spend on that flat panel TV?  (I still have my 10 year old CRT)

How much did you spend on that new BMW? (I drive a 9 year old Audi purchased used for $15k 19,500 on the clock)

How many cell phones have you purchased?  (Prior to my current, I had my Palm 650 for 6 years)

Where do you shop for clothing?  (I have no problems going to Target or Kohls).

How many jobs have you worked?  (Until this past year... 2 jobs)

etc...

See.. my buddies are in terrible debt.  Why?  Because they Buy Many Expensive Things.  There's nothing wrong with spending your money on luxury...  its how you do it.


----------



## icassell (Apr 26, 2010)

usayit said:


> For many of us.. it is setting priorities and saving.
> 
> You can either buy many affordable things.
> 
> ...



:thumbup:


----------



## c.cloudwalker (Apr 26, 2010)

Mitica100 said:


> Sbuxo said:
> 
> 
> > let me tell you who uses them.
> ...



+1





usayit said:


> For many of us.. it is setting priorities and saving.
> 
> You can either buy many affordable things.
> 
> ...



Totally agree with that. And it is valid whether the purchases are made for business or personal use.

I imagine most digital Hassies are in pro studios where they are needed for business. Plus they are a business expense thus tax deductible.

For personal use, the film ones work just fine if you are willing to deal with film. My 500CM with an 80 T* and 2 backs costs me $600. I would not call that a camera for the rich considering there are not that many DSLRs for much less...


----------



## gsgary (Apr 26, 2010)

Hamtastic said:


> I think the car analogy is a good one.  Why is a Hummer better than a Toyota Camry?  It's easy to imagine situations where I'd rather be driving the Hummer.  I don't ever actually encounter those situations in my driving though, so the Camry is a better choice for me.




Only if the brakes work


----------



## gsgary (Apr 26, 2010)

I use this now and again


----------



## Professional (Apr 26, 2010)

I am thinking if buy the cheapest digital back [used] to use with one of my film MF [Mamiya or Hasselblad] is a good idea while i have a digital medium format already, and i will check with the salesman if my trade-in is still there or canceled, so if you have say 3 film medium format cameras and one digital medium format, will you buy a digital back [Phase One, Leaf, Mamiya,...] for the film body or you be happy to use that digital medium format [H3D, H4D, ZD, DM,..]?


----------



## Breaux (Apr 26, 2010)

Until recently, I used a (film) Hassy, because a digital SLR couldn't give me the same quality.  That is no longer true.  Unless you're doing super-critical professional work, the DSLRs are now just as good and MUCH more convenient to use.  I can't vouch for the Hassy digital setups; they're way out of my league.

BTW, I successfully resisted the digital temptation - I'm now shooting 4x5 polaroids!


----------



## Professional (Apr 27, 2010)

I am also planning to get a large format even i have digital Hasselblad and film Hasselblad.


----------



## eriqalan (May 6, 2010)

Ever hear of megapixels?

Noise?

Lens quality?

Although you missed Mamiya - cheaper than Hasselblad, uses some Hasselblad lenses, has aftermarket 60 MP back, etc.

This is a quality issue - frankly a good photographer can get a good photo with your decent DSLR and a good lens - the lens is more important than the camera - but you might take a hasselblad Into space (they did in the 70's) or to Mt Everest, the Leica to the alps; etc. but you really would not take anything less


----------

