#1346. Blasphemous thoughts about the Hassy 907x

By pascaljappy | Opinion

Feb 08

Hasselblad and Fuji were once partners. So maybe the Kami and Thor’s brethen may one day forgive the ignorance of my ways.

 

Hasselblad’s just released 907x 100c appears to be everything the influencers claim, and more. Built to humble Credor, designed to humble Brad & George, and with the image quality to humble … well … almost anything anything this side of Arri.

Its modular build even allows you to keep your 50Mp back as a tiny backup if needed. One that shoots gorgeous video, too …

But there’s one terrible mistake that I must take upon myself to correct: using at the rear end of a film 6×6 Hassy 500 series camera. Nope, sorry πŸ˜†

 

It’s not that the 44×33 framelines aren’t there in the 500’s viewfinder, they can be added. It’s not even the fact that, due to its tone curve, Hasselblad is more and more making the lust for film a thing of the past!

No, none of that.

The reality is that, as good as the 500 lineup is, and if you have one to use with your 907x, I’m doubly envious πŸ˜‰ , it is a missed opportunity.

 

Instead, let me introduce the other half of the equation that I will likely also offend: the Fuji GX 680.

My thinking is that using the 907x on a film body will often be a tripod-mounted affair. Yes, the Hasselblad 500 series can easily be handheld, but doing so with the 907x simply reduces its value to that of a lens adaptor, which already exists and is far more convient with a back that doesn’t fit the original format, off a tripod.

If you’re gonna rest your contraption on carbon legs, why not get most of the benefits of a view camera?

 

The GX 680 is a clumsy beast to wield out in the open. But, on a tripod and with a back of the Hasselblad’s stature, I think it would give even 8×10 shooters matters to think about. The 680’s shift abilities, along with automated stitching in PP, make using up the whole coverage of the gorgeous lenses a breeze (though your computer might need its own private nuclear power station). And then there’s tilting, macro, multiple exposure …

For an introduction to this super interesting camera, check out Kyle McDougall’s video about it.

Film is a thing of the past for me, but this contraption, on static subjects, would definitely rank very high in the list of my photographic dreams. Once again, thank you Hassy for the extraordinary work. Of course, there may be no adapter to make that happen, but who’s interested in pesky real-life problems? A boy can dream πŸ˜‰

 

​Never miss a post

​Like what you are reading? Subscribe below and receive all posts in your inbox as they are published. Join the conversation with thousands of other creative photographers.

  • Check out IVG Photography’s video on YT. Your life may be about to get rather “interestingly” complex.

  • PaulB says:

    Pascal

    Be careful what you wish for. One of the commenters to Paul Reid’s video mentioned using the GX680 with a Leaf Aptus digital back. So an adapter may well exist.

    PS. I really like the images presented. The X-Pan format seems to suit you.

    PaulB

  • PaulB says:

    OOPS! I meant Kyle McDougall’s video. PaulB

  • Jon Maxim says:

    Hi Pascal,

    I’m not sure whether to thank you for this post or not. For one thing, you are feeding my GAS, again.

    It is very nice to learn about the GX 680 which I had never come across before (I only used to shoot view cameras). I do have a GFX100 so my mind is swirling. As Christopher Perez’s link also showed me, IVG adapts one to the GX 680.

    But it did occur to me that, if you are lusting after Hasselblad’s quality with movements, have you thought of getting a Cambo Actus for your X1D?

    • pascaljappy says:

      Hi Jon, yes, I have πŸ˜‰ View cameras are a bit beyond my ability and patience thresholds. I owned and used a Master Technika for a couple of years, but the costs and time were too much for me, ultimately. With a digital back, the cost issues would go away, but I’s till be looking at a complex setup. The 680 might (just might) be workable, but even that would probably be a stretch for me. I’m always rushing πŸ˜‰ But the 680 is a lovely camera and still fairly available in spite of the analog gold rush of the past years. Sorry for the GAS πŸ˜€ πŸ˜€

  • jean pierre (pete) guaron says:

    I’m afraid I’ve done everything I ever want to with film. I made a decision 10 or 15 yearws back to spend the rest of my life with digi, so this no longer fits within the frame of my dreams, Pascal. Happy to sit on the side lines and see what you create – but I’ve no desire to jump back into film again.

    The mantra is that film can do X, Y &Z, and digi can’t. Well yah boo sucks – digi can say the same to film! They just do things differently. The end.

    It’s a bit like cars – like any male zonked out on his Y chromosomes and his testosterone, I had 20 years of roaring around the place in cars you wouldn’t lend to your grandmother. These days I drive a Toyota Yaris, a small 4 seater, 4-door hatchback. And I have absolutely no desire to roar around Wanneroo Speedway in my souped up Morgan 2-seater, ever again – or to gun it at the traffic lights and make the cop on “point duty” think someone was firing a maching gun at him! I’m perfectly happy to have moved on, and to do something different.

    • pascaljappy says:

      Indeed, they do different things in different way. And that’s the beauty of it. Film for those who like it (and can afford it) and digital for those who like that. That said, I do believe Hasselblad is dialing in a filmic tone curve into its more recent cameras, probably aiming at a best of both world solution. Those ideal solutions are often illusions destined to crash, but I rather feel Hassy’s done its homework and landed in a nice spot with the colour science of its offerings.

      I still think my 907x would end up at the back of a Fuji 680, not a 500 series, if I owned either πŸ˜‰

      Cheers

  • >