A comment from Karl:
After much consideration on the subject of moving from 35mm to medium
format for my main camera, I ended up going with Hasselblad. The Pentax
645 also was considered, but I felt that for the long haul, the
Hasselblad would hold its value, perform for many, many years, and that
the German-made Zeiss lenses are simply unbeatable. Then due to my
desire to do studio portraits (along with other types of photography) I
decided to get the 503 for it's ability to meter flash exposure off the
film. The 503 also allows for a wider range of accessories than the
501.
I couldn't be more pleased with my choice. From day one, I've loved the
way this camera feels in the hands, and the absolute precision of
operation and construction quality. I have experienced nothing but
great results, as long as I do my job as the photographer!
JJ - 23 Jan 2007 03:23 GMT
Good choice, Stephen. There is no reason to go to half-frame MF (645),
and 'blad hardware is getting so inexpensive it's crazy not to have one.
Or two. Three is good, too! :)
Tony Polson - 23 Jan 2007 09:04 GMT
>A comment from Karl:
>
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>operation and construction quality. I have experienced nothing but
>great results, as long as I do my job as the photographer!
Now all you need is a medium format scanner.
The Nikon Coolscan 9000 is the film scanner of choice, especially if
used with the glass negative carrier. However, unlike the Hasselblad,
there are no silly cheap used prices. Budget for $1900 for a new one
from Cameta Camera on eBay.