Want to Buy Hasselblad 500cm, Pentax 67, or Mamiya 7

Two23 said:

These are such dramatically different systems that it makes me wonder if you've really thought things through here. You first need to really consider what kinds of photos you want to take, how you take them, and what you want to accomplish. First question is will you always be using a tripod? If not, rule out the Pentax 67. It's a beast! The Mamamiya would be the best choice if not using a tripod. The Hassleblad is in between (although bulky.) Next question is are you thinking of using this as a studio camera or a travel camera, or what? For studio the Pentax and Hassleblad work well, for travel the Mommy 7. Are you mostly shooting people or landscapes? For people, the Hassleblad. For landscapes, the Pentax. How many lenses are you thinking of buying, and again what will you be shooting with them? Will you be using flash sync? Sync on Pentax is 1/30s (I think), on Hassy it's 1/500s with leaf lenses. Do you need a built in meter or are you planning on using a handheld meter? You really need to put more thought into this before spending big money.


Kent in SD

Click to expand...

Gosh I use the Hasselblad for all types of photography. According to you I must be doing it wrong!

Sirius Glass said:

Gosh I use the Hasselblad for all types of photography. According to you I must be doing it wrong!

Click to expand...

And I as well, Sirius. I've yet to find my 500c/ms encumbering or deficient in any manner for anything I've ever photographed: Landscapes, nature, people...whatever. Hasselblads...weighty? Surely you jest! Maybe a gym membership is in order? I carry a pair of 500c/ms, 50, 100, 180, and 250mm lenses, as well as four loaded A-12s, a couple of B60 filters, and a Tiltall when I go out exploring in the sticks. Walking around town, I dump a body, and use a shoulder bag.

LeftCoastKid said:

And I as well, Sirius. I've yet to find my 500c/ms encumbering or deficient in any manner for anything I've ever photographed: Landscapes, nature, people...whatever. Hasselblads...weighty? Surely you jest! Maybe a gym membership is in order? I carry a pair of 500c/ms, 50, 100, 180, and 250mm lenses, as well as four loaded A-12s, a couple of B60 filters, and a Tiltall when I go out exploring in the sticks. Walking around town, I dump a body, and use a shoulder bag.

Click to expand...

I have two packs to choose from:

1. 503 CX, 50mm lens, 80mm lens, 150mm lens, 250mm lens, 500mm lens, 2XE and filters.
2. 903 SWC, 50mm lens, 80mm lens, 150mm lens, 250mm lens, 2X extender and filters.

If you want to build a kit, get a Bronica, a Mamiya or a Pentax. If you want to build an army or a kit, get a Hasselblad.

My Hasselblad army is now very large and powerful with a 500 ELX, four 501CM bodies, 12 film and one digital back, 9 lenses, countless finders and screens, etc. It’s the best camera system ever designed and made regardless of format and the resulting photos the best I make.

My only other medium format camera is a single Rolleiflex 2.8D.

mporter012 said:

I'm fixing to move into medium format. Looking at any and all of the systems in the title, with a lens or 2. Let me know what ya got!

Click to expand...

not that I have one for sale but, don't overlook the
Mamiya6;small, light an terrific optics!

Not only is the Hasselblad technically and aesthetically of excellent design but for mf no other camera is so ergonomically comfortable (with the possible exception if a Rollei TLR, but that’s a different kind of camera). Why would anyone chose a mf camera that is so awkward it must be used on a tripod. Seem to me if used only on a tripod might as well go whole hog and use a technical or view camera.

I regularly use my Pentax 67 as a street camera. With 100 ISO film. I feel no need to use a tripod. I carry two bodies, two lenses, and film in a lovely little backpack. I haven't used a tripod in a long while.

Hasselblads are certainly pretty, functional, and a good investment. Nothing to say against them. I'm not a fan of rangefinders.

What do Hasselblads have to do with rangefinders?
I have no real experience with the Pentax 67 other than handling it in a camera store when it was introduced, and felt, for me, it was unwieldy. When my friend Louie Stettner tried one for a couple of weeks (he soon got ride of it) I fiddled with it. I had the same feeling with the Pentacon, a gift from the factory, and therefore felt a little guilty when I traded it for a 400mm Telyt. For me, a design that works for 35mm doesn’t work for mf. The reverse could also be true...the Rolleiflex and Pentax cameras based on mf designs failed at the market place. All this demonstrates, as I advised the OP, hands on experience is best. He may just fall in love with a Pentax 67, or any of the other fine cameras mentioned in this thread. But there is a reason that the basic design of Hasselblads and Leica Ms didn’t change for decades.
I don’t buy cameras for investment other than that the better cameras are cheaper in the long run. By the way, when new, they weren’t giving Pentax 67s away.

I suggest trying them before buying. Or even buy one each from KEH and send the two you don't want back.
For me the choice would be easy and I'd go for the Mamiya because I like to explore while shooting. I have a Hassy and don't like it for ergonomic reasons and noise and the Pentax sounds too heavy for me. They're all good cameras of course.

To the OP - as has already been said, there's a wide range of styles of camera you listed - 6x6, 6x7, SLR, rangefinder. As has been also said, none of them are bad cameras - all are excellent. TBH, I'd start by deciding which aspect ratio you want- 6x6 or 6x7. Then decide which style of camera you prefer - SLR or rangefinder. Then decide on your preferred subject matter. While the Pentax is the heaviest of the three, that doesn't rule it out for non-tripod shooting.

The Pentax is acknowledged as having the most powerful mirror slap of any of the cameras mentioned so far, so it wants a tripod at faster shutter speeds than the other two - It probably doesn't bear hand-holding slower than 1/60th of a second. I've been able to pull off 1/2 or 1/4 second exposures hand-held with a Hasselblad, and 1/8th with my RZ67, which has an exceptionally well-damped mirror (another camera you should consider - interchangeable backs, 6x7 aspect ratio, rotating backs to switch from vertical to horizontal, and nearly as wide-ranging a set of optics as the Hasselblad, plus an electronically controlled in-lens leaf shutter so you get very accurate exposures and flash sync at all speeds).

Another camera worth considering that you didn't mention is a Rolleiflex 2.8 or 3.5 TLR. Yes, you're limited to just one lens with just one focal length, but they're brilliant lenses and take amazing photos. Some of the giants of photography have used them throughout their careers - Richard Avedon, Gordon Parks, Bruce Weber, Helmut Newton, Vivian Maier, to name a few. The cameras are ergonomic wonders as well- very intuitive to operate. And because the mirror never moves, they're even quieter and more vibration-free than SLRs - I've hand-held my Rollei at 1 second and gotten acceptably sharp images (yes, I do have very steady hands, but part of that is also just good technique).

nsurit said:

If you are "fixing" to move into medium format you are obviously not from Chicago but rather someplace in the south, not that that has anything to do with the price of tea in China. Shucks, when I was fixing to do the same I tried an inexpensive TLR to get a little feel for square format medium format and then went ahead a bought a Hasselblad. No regrets.

Click to expand...

Nsurit, you beat me to it. I was wondering where someone from Pennsylvania came up with "fixing to". I too wound up with a Hasselblad but I do have a regret. That is that I don't have two............Regards!

Ai Print said:

If you want to build a kit, get a Bronica, a Mamiya or a Pentax. If you want to build an army or a kit, get a Hasselblad.

My Hasselblad army is now very large and powerful with a 500 ELX, four 501CM bodies, 12 film and one digital back, 9 lenses, countless finders and screens, etc. It’s the best camera system ever designed and made regardless of format and the resulting photos the best I make.

My only other medium format camera is a single Rolleiflex 2.8D.

Click to expand...

guangong said:

Not only is the Hasselblad technically and aesthetically of excellent design but for mf no other camera is so ergonomically comfortable (with the possible exception if a Rollei TLR, but that’s a different kind of camera). Why would anyone chose a mf camera that is so awkward it must be used on a tripod. Seem to me if used only on a tripod might as well go whole hog and use a technical or view camera.

Click to expand...

+1

Kevin Harding said:

I regularly use my Pentax 67 as a street camera. With 100 ISO film. I feel no need to use a tripod. I carry two bodies, two lenses, and film in a lovely little backpack. I haven't used a tripod in a long while.

Hasselblads are certainly pretty, functional, and a good investment. Nothing to say against them. I'm not a fan of rangefinders.

Click to expand...

There are no range finders on Hasselblads, even the SWC.

Sirius Glass said:

There are no range finders on Hasselblads, even the SWC.

Click to expand...

X-Pan?

LeftCoastKid said:

And I as well, Sirius. I've yet to find my 500c/ms encumbering or deficient in any manner for anything I've ever photographed: Landscapes, nature, people...whatever. Hasselblads...weighty? Surely you jest! Maybe a gym membership is in order? I carry a pair of 500c/ms, 50, 100, 180, and 250mm lenses, as well as four loaded A-12s, a couple of B60 filters, and a Tiltall when I go out exploring in the sticks. Walking around town, I dump a body, and use a shoulder bag.

Click to expand...

Instead of lugging a backpack full of expensive camera gear around, last week I used a simple Rolleiflex to do some street shooting in Seattle. It didn't attract any attention, which was a definite plus considering the hordes of bums staggering around downtown. I also appreciated its light weight and compactness compared to messing with all the stuff you listed. If I was shooting mostly landscapes, I would have been using a 6x9 camera.


Kent in SD

Sirius Glass said:

There are no range finders on Hasselblads, even the SWC.

Click to expand...

MattKing said:

X-Pan?

Click to expand...

I was talking about REAL Hasselblads.