Who uses Leica, Hasselblad, etc??

[DScience]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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.

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

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]

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.

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.

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

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...

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

 

[Mitica100]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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)

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

 

[Mitica100]

^
Uh, those were scary cars!!!

 

[gsgary]

^
Uh, those were scary cars!!!

Had a drive in one in Poland some years ago

 

[Mitica100]

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