Long, long time ago, I shot both - the Hassy in 503 version with different lenses plus an SWC. The 67 was nice, but the curtains in its focal plane shutter fly so slow that it's not very pragmatic for anything except static subjects in ambient light. The Hassy's Zeiss lenses with leaf shutter OTOH X-sync with your strobe at any speed up to 1/500 sec. They're nice pieces of history and you should have great fun with them. Once you "get" the process of a shoot with film, see if you can copy that to how you shoot with your digital camera. I also shot large format up to 8*10 - talk about slow. For size (dimensions), weight, and convenience, I would not go back from my "full frame" digital, though. Oh, now you have these "medium format" cameras, in the old film school, we defined "medium format as anything too large for 127 film under 9cm * 12cm (slightly smaller than 4*5). As 127 film has a width of 40mm (36 usable) this means that almost all digital "medium format" cameras are "small format" by that standard. That's what you get when you pair lying marketers with naive influencers.
Dude, I wish that I had the time to just spend an entire day just taking pictures with friends. My life right now is composed entirely of school work and nothing else. This looks so fun, and I wish I could just waste time messing around like this 😢. Beautiful shots by the way.
I'm just finding these videos now. When I was about to graduate college I saw hasselblad going for what I thought were thirty cents on the dollar. And now, Jesus 20 years later, it's insane. I would love to be able to teach anyone film at this point. And I still have my four by fives and development tanks and what not to do stuff.
I’d be great to learn more about film cameras and stuff like that, I have a Minolta 3000i. I haven’t used it yet but I’m getting film and batteries for it rn
My RB67 can do both of those formats (with an optional third party film back) along with 6x4.5, horizontal and vertical without rotating the camera (just turn the back 90 degrees) -- I have a total of six film backs that fit it (the 6x9 doesn't really gain anything over 6x7, though). I have waist level (like the 'Blad), eye level prism (like the Pentax) and a "chimney" finder (waist level-ish, but with a magnifier and blocks outside light, really great for macro). I have lenses that will stand up to either of those (including a combo wider than anything you can put on either one without going fisheye), and I've got less into the whole outfit than I would for the 'Blad with waist level, one lens, and one film back. Oh, and the whole outfit works with no batteries at all. Partly kidding -- I wanted a Pentax 6x7 or 67 in the worst way when I first saw one, but back then (early 1970s) they cost as much as a used car (and so did an RB67). The "run and gun" Pentax held value better than the primarily studio-oriented RB67 -- but that means I have an *awesome* camera and lenses without spending thousands of dollars.
@@SilntObsvr I want a mamiya really badly, was thinking of a 645 pro but they’re over a thousand pounds on eBay. Hard to justify when my Sony camera was only twice that and shoots high resolution stills and near cinema grade video. 400 would be doable but the 35mm point and shoot I wanted, mju ii goes for nearly that so idk where I’d get a mamiya for 400.
@@Drpftnst why not? They seem to have admitted it’s on the table after this first one. Film is super hot right now and medium format is where it’s at besides point and shoots. Medium format will be even more popular if you can get a new and not expensive camera.
@@definingslawek4731 that's the thing, "not expensive" the amount of money even a 645 shutter would cost would never make it a cheap camera, also medium format lenses cost a lot more to manufacture so there's that.
