Slow Cameras Can Be A Joy

My Current Medium Format Kit

The entirety of my medium format digital/film hybrid kit.

Preface

I use film, I use digital, I have a thing for cameras that give me joy to hold, look at, and use. There are cameras that I just don’t get along with. The reasons for the acrimony are hard to pin down no matter what features, performance, or output they offer that may theoretically give me an advantage in hypothetical scenarios. Crazy as it may sound, I much rather use a camera that gives me joy even if the consensus judges that particular camera as inferior.

Maybe it’s my preference for simplicity or what I perceive as simplicity. In the land of cameras across all formats, features, and capabilities One could divide them into two arbitrary categories; fast cameras and slow cameras. I am not suggesting this division is something as trivial as a camera that can make three frames per second versus a camera that can make thirty. I’ll go farther and say that division isn’t even a camera that autofocuses at a glacial speed compared to the latest eyeball tracking a person on a rocket sled barreling towards you. Even with manual focus, manual exposure cameras I consider a Leica M camera a fast camera and a Hasselblad 500 with waist-level finder a slow camera.

You may theoretically use any fast camera as a slow camera but you cannot do the reverse right? Logically this is correct. In my journey as a photographer, I’ve found this logical conclusion irrelevant in use and maybe more importantly my psychology. I have found I am a very different photographer and make very different pictures when I happen to use a slow camera instead of a fast camera. I also make very different pictures.

For the neigh sayers out there thinking that “I could make those same slow pictures with a fast camera” I’ll walk through this for you to at least consider my proposal that is untrue. The error in that thought process is that the evaluation is always in retrospect looking at the picture I made with a slow camera. I’ve made the same mistake. The reality is that the vast majority of scenes, subjects, and scenarios can be made with either a slow camera or a fast camera.

In my use, I’ll make very different pictures when using a fast camera in those circumstances that could be made with a slow camera. This is true for compositions, lens choices, handheld vs tripod, camera orientation, aperture selection, and shutter speed. The list of the choices I typically make goes on and on in scenes where either a slow or fast camera could be used.

My Current Kit

I’ve always had a deep affection for my Hasselblad 500 cameras. I think they’re now retroactively known as the V system. I like square pictures. I like optical viewfinders. Naturally, I’d be excited when Hasselblad announced the CFV II 50c 907x. I didn’t care a lot about the 907x part of that alphabet soup of a name. I cared far more about the CFV II 60c part which is not the actual camera but a digital back that fits on all 500 (or 200) series classic bodies. What’s more, it works just like a film back. No wires, no external batteries. Slap the thing on and it works just like a film magazine.

I waited for what seemed like an eternity for Hasselblad to release a model I’d buy. I had to get through the announcement to the availability timeframe. Then I had to get through the special limited edition models. Finally, a “regular” edition with no special nameplate, no special finish, and general availability happened.

I got lucky enough to find one that was “new - open box” at a quite substantial discount to full price. Of course, I grabbed it. That same Hasselblad dealer had an open box 45P f/4 X system lens that was heavily discounted. The price was so low that I grabbed it even though I was primarily interested in the back for use on my 500 series cameras to make a competent film/digital slow camera kit. Something I’ve dreamed about for more than a decade after selling my H2 with digital and film backs.

I have a gaggle of 500 series cameras as well as a bunch of Zeiss glass ranging from wide-angle through telephoto. These cameras and lenses were once my “main work cameras”. When I referred to kit I meant the specific gear to take with me on outings for general photography. I thought I had that ironed out before the introduction of that X series lens. That impulse buy combined with me just playing around with it and the 907x component completely revised my thinking.

Instead of a bunch of Zeiss V system glass or even two V system lenses, I decided on the 45P, the 907x, my 503CX body, and a 120mm Zeiss Makro Planar. That may sound strange but think about this set of components for a moment. I have what could be considered a versatile normal-ish lens for 6x6 square pictures. It’s not so different from the 100mm Zeiss I preferred over the 80mm for 6x6 pictures. The 120 focuses very close for tight shots. The 45P gives me a wide on the 907x when shot 4:3. Stopping there that’s not so bad in terms of versatility but think about what happens when you start mixing the use of 6x6 and the 44x33 digital back. Slapping the CFV II on the 503, now I have something like 150mm short tele. When shot squire with the 500 it’s more like a 180mm on 6x6 and still more real estate than a full-frame body cropped square. Back to the 907x and 45P, it’s more like an 80mm on 6x6 when shot square.

For my purposes, this is probably the most versatile kit in the smallest package with the least weight you could have when shooting film and digital. So far it may also be the most enjoyable slow camera kit I’ve ever used. It’s virtually the same size as my film-only minimal 500 kit that I’ve taken out with me time and time again, vacillating between the 100mm and 120mm.

This unlikely menagerie is a hybrid system that I enjoy more than I could have predicted. The 907x that I originally dismissed and a tiny lens I bought on impulse stimulated the disposal of my prism finder and a return to the waist-level finder that came with my 503CX. I long considered the waist level finder similarly to the body cap.

Now I have two cameras that get out of my face (literally) when making photographs. I find I’m far more in the moment shooting this style of waist-level finder camera than having something plastered against my face. The pictures are very different, especially portraits, when not hiding behind a camera.

I’m still figuring the ultimate slow camera kit out. I may end up substituting the 100mm or even the 80mm for the 120mm. Only experience will prove which way I should go. What about other X lenses? For now, I am satisfied, I’m in no rush. The only lenses that come to mind would duplicate what I already have with the 500 series use. Maybe something really wide? Maybe the 90mm for use when I don’t want to shoot film?

Are any other X or 500 Hasselblad users out there? I’d love to hear how you view the two systems. Better yet, if you are experimenting with a hybrid kit, where did you end up so far?