Is this a good strategy?

[pixelseeker]

I really miss my Hasselblad 500CM which I sold way back in the late 70's.

My Olympus E-1 gives me great results up to about 16X20 prints but I want to go much bigger. I always had a desire to make 30X40 prints but my color dark room was only equipped to handle 16X20's.

Currently I have an Epson 4800 and want to move up to a 9800 but I need to get a camera system that can give me the resolution for the larger prints.

A digital MF camera is really out of the questions right now but I am considering getting either a Hasseldblad 503 or a Mamiya RZ67 Professional Pro II and scan the negatives with an Epson Perfection V750-M PRO until I can afford getting a digital back.

The V750M scanner is less than half the price of a Nikon dedicated film scanner that can handle the 120 film and the specs seem to be good.

From my past experience with the 500CM I love using a waist level viewfinder and it suits my method of composing my photo's.

My budget will allow me to get the scanner first which will allow me to scan in my older 6X6's, then I will get the camera next the 9800 printer and then either a digital back or more lenses.

Any suggestions or comments would be appreciated.

[godtfred]

A digital MF camera is really out of the questions right now but I am considering getting either a Hasseldblad 503 or a Mamiya RZ67 Professional Pro II and scan the negatives with an Epson Perfection V750-M PRO until I can afford getting a digital back.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=87866\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

A part from all the other specifications you put up (wais level finder, etc.) I would suggest the full frame 35mm route (canon's). I would expect they can deliver quality equal to that of scanned 6x6 film on the epson 750. And the price of a 503 Hasselblad + 750 Epson seems not to far away from a lightly used 1Ds MK II. Also aquiring lenses would be a lot cheaper on the canon than on the Hasselblad and you save a bundle on film...

I havent tested this myself, and 35mm versus MF has a lot of differences in image "look" so it might not be the best for you.

I have although printed well exposed and photoshop'ed images for some of my friends on the 9800 I have. Particularly one slightly cropped image from a Canon 20D was printed in 44x60 inches. And with the viewing distance taken into account, it held up "fine"  

Good luck on the investment, you cant go wrong with any of the options you have listed...

[SeanBK]

I believe close to $10k you can get Hasselblad bundle - 503 series with square sensor 16MP digitalback. This way you bypass all the scannings... You still use waistlevel with the digitalback and Zeiss optics.

[pixelseeker]

I havent tested this myself, and 35mm versus MF has a lot of differences in image "look" so it might not be the best for you.

I have although printed well exposed and photoshop'ed images for some of my friends on the 9800 I have. Particularly one slightly cropped image from a Canon 20D was printed in 44x60 inches. And with the viewing distance taken into account, it held up "fine"  

Good luck on the investment, you cant go wrong with any of the options you have listed...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=87878\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
[/quote]

Thanks for the suggestion;

I am heavily invested in the 4/3 system with several lenses which I still plan on using along with a MF camera. Olympus is suppose to be coming out with a newer pro body early next year with a much higher MP count so the Canon option is out for that type of format.

[nik]

Quote - "The V750M scanner is less than half the price of a Nikon dedicated film scanner that can handle the 120 film and the specs seem to be good.

From my past experience with the 500CM I love using a waist level viewfinder and it suits my method of composing my photo's. "

--------------------------------

I've gone back to shooting with my 503 and film for various reasons, including your's above. But, I would not suggest you go down the route you're going regarding the scanner you want to purchase. The old rules still apply, you get what you pay for. I looked at just about EVERY scanner from the low-end crappy epsons to high end creo, dainippon and fuji A3 flatbeds and drum scanners from dainippon and ICG. I also looked at the virtual drum of the Imacon 646 & 848. It took months, I travelled to the showrooms and took the same trannies and saw what they could do. At the end of the day I liked the results from the ICG scanner/software combination the best but it was just too big to fit in my small studio and a pain to use mounting fluid, so, I settled on renting the Imacon 848. I found it to be fast, accurate and easy to use. The more you use the software, the better you become at getting a great scan. I don't know where you are, but I was in San francisco and used Rayko's 848 (cheap!) and am now in london and use Calumet's. Day rates are available.

You really will be losing a lot in the transition from film to digital via an epson scan. The epson scanners, bless them, are ok for certain tasks, but if you want a great scan, go for the Imacon 848 or 949. The software is absolutely HEAD-AND-SHOULDERS above the epson, you see what you get BEFORE the scan gets done. Go to www.hasselblad.se or search the web for the flextight v 4 scanning software tutorials, you'll see that I am right.


-Nik.

--------------------------
http://www.stoqq.com

[marcwilson]

Yes, it really is pointless to use to use a flatbed scanner such as that for scanning medium format film to produce very large prints..you will simply lose all the benefits of the large size film shot with the zeiss lenses.
The flextights are great but again at prints around 100cm or larger a real drum scanner will again show more detail in your prints that the imacons..that is with lightjet / lambda prints so I can not say from experience about inkjet prints.

But the flextights are a great in comparison to anything from a flatbed and given one of my own I would quite happily use it leaving drum scans for only my largest prints.

But really..I do not think all the money, time invested is wortwhile for large prints if scanned on an epson (or other) flatbed scanner.