Just when I think you have every camera I have at one point desired, you post a new pic from another great film camera. These were fabulous cameras, and when I think of the prices of medium-format cameras from the 70s and 80s, I cringe to think how inexpensive they have become. Especially when one considers real value of money --- what would a new one cost in today's dollars, I wonder?
The crazy thing is that the Pentax 645 has morphed into a digital camera, and the most recent version is the 645z, which costs $8,500. Yesterday Hasselblad announced a digital back using the same Sony CMOS sensor, but it costs $14,000, and it's only the back, not a camera! Big profit margins there. But one thing that does drop the jaw - it will fit on any Hasselblad V series camera back to 1957. If I were that stupidly wealthy I could put one on my 501c made in 1970. But I could buy a lot of film for that much money so I don't think I'll bother.
I have a 120mm/f4 for the 645n, so I'll try some portraits this weekend, but I'll have to use a monopod as the camera and the big lens gets too unwieldy for hand-holding the shutter speeds I'll need at f4 and ISO200.
Chris
"Je n'ai pas besoin de cette hypothèse." Pierre-Simon de Laplace
“Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?”
― Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
This is still my most sought after camera --- but I've decided it'll continue to be a dream .... I simply don't have the time to invest in film photography these days. Some day, perhaps.