[Leica] Wow, are the Mamiya as cool as the Hasselblad?

[mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)]

> from those professionals known to me who used mf, hasselblad was first 
> choice
> (if they could afford), otherwise zenza bronica was mostly second choice
> because of it's reputed Nikon lenses. hasselblads are fine crafted european
> products with some of the the best available mf lenses, zeiss oberkochen, 
> and
> such have their own price level like Leica in small format. Price is a 
> matter,
> so bronica, rollei, mamiya, pentacon, kiev et al were very popular amongst
> amateur shooters.
> Didier
> 
> 
> 
The market opened up in the 90s but before that Hasselblad was more than the
first choice.
It was the only choice.
IN medium format (Brownie film) you either shot Hassy or you shot Hassy.
I do here you'd find people in Europe using Rollei 6000 series,
The Rollei Hasselblad. In the 90s and 80s.
But its darned hard to find anyone ever using one here. In the USA.

In the late 80s and 90's the 645 cameras became an option. The Mamiya and
Bronica.
You'd be looked down upon but as long as the people in your shots were
recognizable they'd say you were ok. Heck they were getting 16 on a roll.
But in many circles a Hassy was really expected. You'd start out with a 80,
then 50 and 150 Zeiss lenses.
The lowly wedding photographer was really better off with a Hasselblad till
the bitter end. 
We hear stories of Anne and Herb using Mamiya 6x7's.
Those slides looked great on the light table. If a 6x6 got caught on the
light table with a bunch of 6x7's they'd throw the puny little thing in the
garbage.

But in the  early 80,s 70's and 60's there was no Mamiya or Bronica.
They represented a very small niche market...

Of people who drove Saabs and wore purple berets.




Mark William Rabiner
markrabiner.com