If you're just going to stare at your camera, then the Hasselblad looks nicer. That said, I had very few problems and I went hiking all over the place with my SQ-A and SQ-B (I sold my SQ-Ai pretty quickly). Even if you did break a Bronica, you can buy three Bronicas for the price of one Hasselblad, and your Bronica will probably be twenty years younger. Some might state that the Hasselblad is easier to repair, but I've had my Bronica bodies and lenses all successfully serviced and repaired without any problems. I've owned and used both systems, and in photographic terms, the Bronica SQ-A is difficult to beat-great cost to performance ratio, less quirky than the Hasselblad with better ergonomics, and photographs look great. Motorized hasselblads are a pain to carry.įor a number of reasons, Hasselblads are the sexier or more desirable purchase, hence the higher cost. Hasselblad is very very good (jamming is frequent but just because of user using it wrong and you can fix it with a screw driver.) ![]() Regarding parts: i saw hundreds of bronicas taking millions of photos in wedding photography and no cla´s since the 80´s and i really never saw many broken ones. If you like to carry fashion statments and you mind the look of your camera and you like to look premium and think you are part of a heritage thing that goes back to the prussian empire and the vikings or whatever: go for a hasselblad, if you don´t care choose bronica. If you do not have a good scanner (imacon, nikon, minolta or drum) and you don´t print in a proper enlarger and your technique is mediocre altogether: you will never tell the difference between the negatives or positives made between the two cameras. Also it also carries a bit more charm and the lenses are carl zeiss. ![]() Hasselblad costs more because everyone prefers it over bronica.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |