Medium format system with the best lenses?

[Theo Sulphate]

...We all have our preferences and predilections....

Ok, fair enough. Thanks for the reply.

 

[film_man]

What can I say you are entitled to be wrong. You just have bad tastes.

I bet you are a closet Rollei lover!

This is getting silly I know but I can't resist

 

[mweintraub]

Once you have used a Hasselblad at 6x6 there is no need for those other MF formats.

And it only took 79 comments to get here. Geez, I was expecting you to mention Hassleblad a lot sooner.

 

[mweintraub]

Still nothing beats a good piece of glass.

Absolutely!

 

[DREW WILEY]

First of all, let me apologize for misspelling Hassel-bland. I realize that they are the highly reputable option for those who can't afford actual Rollei-Royce products. I can afford neither. My brother had couple of SL66 outfits for personal use back when he sold Rollei and Linhof. But for some reason, whenever we went out shooting together, he asked to borrow my Pentax 6X7, probably for the ergonomics and simpler use. I was shooting 4x5 exclusively at that time, so ending up loaning him the Pentax for about a decade. It's a fun camera, and I've recently acquired a 300 EDIF lens for it, which has gotta be the holy grail of MF telephotos, period. Doubt anyone makes a sharper or better corrected equivalent. So it all depends on the specifics. My only regret is that I didn't start off with 8x10 to begin with!

 

[ColColt]

I'll bet that 6x7 with that lens must have weighed close to ten pounds but, wonderful camera and format.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Yeah. It needs even better support than my 8x10. But it's so damn crisp that I also use it with my Nikon, with appropriate adapter, even wide open. Was playing with it for wildlife shots last weekend, which is a subject difficult with view camera. But when the mirror hits with a P67, the shockwave generally shatters windows at least three miles away. You either trigger them at higher shutter speeds or use the mirror lock.
The lens itself is only about three pounds. It's the balance of big telephotos that is the issue, at least the the 6x7 itself attached. Still a mini
cam by my definition. A convenience point n' shoot for those instances the timing or wind just doesn't let me use a view camera. And fun.

 

[ColColt]

Too bad there's no tripod ring for that lens. It may help balance a bit better. I didn't know that lens was that good and may look into one myself.

 

[Sirius Glass]

What can I say you are entitled to be wrong. You just have bad tastes.

I bet you are a closet Rollei lover!

This is getting silly I know but I can't resist

While I like the bling of walking around with a wide angle Rollei, a normal Rollei and a tele Rollei around my neck, I found that the weight was really too much.

 

[flavio81]

I own the following:

Pentax 67
Mamiya RB
Mamiya C330
Rolleicord with 75/3.5 Xenar

The sharpest lenses are on the RB. They give tridimensional results and sometimes fool you into believing that the image comes from a 4x5 negative.

The 90/2.8 for my Pentax is probably a great lens but focusing difficulties on the P67 + shutter/mirror vibration have prevented me from enjoying it. Will have to experiment more.

The lens on the Rolleicord is tack sharp.

The C330 lenses are usually not as sharp as in the above systems, but still good. My 105/3.5 (for the TLR) is probably my "worst" medium format lens but I love the images it renders. It is indeed less sharp, but still good enough for many uses.

 

[flavio81]

First of all, let me apologize for misspelling Hassel-bland.

I never understood the love for the classic 500-series Hasslebads. For me they are too unrefined. I never understood their glorification. I say, Hasselblads are for people who don't know that the RolleI SL66 exists (the REAL luxury medium format SLR), or find the Mamiya RB67 (a better designed camera) too big and heavy.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

While I like the bling of walking around with a wide angle Rollei, a normal Rollei and a tele Rollei around my neck, I found that the weight was really too much.

It's really annoying when they bang into each other - just ruins the mint condition I like to keep them in. Somebody should invent a TLR where the lenses could be interchanged by some clever mechanism...

 

[Theo Sulphate]

I never understood the love for the classic 500-series Hasslebads. For me they are too unrefined. I never understood their glorification. I say, Hasselblads are for people who don't know that the RolleI SL66 exists (the REAL luxury medium format SLR), or find the Mamiya RB67 (a better designed camera) too big and heavy.

I find the 500-series Hasselblads very refined (the 200-series more so, except the 202FA). They seem solid, precise, and reflect a well designed modular system. True, I've never examined them internally, but my understanding is that they are good enough for demanding professional use.

The RB67's seem less solid (use of plastic materials) - but I don't consider them inferior, just different.

I enjoy how Hasselblad and Mamiya solve the same problems (the medium-format usage model scenarios) in considerably different ways.

 

[Kyle M.]

I find the 500-series Hasselblads very refined (the 200-series more so, except the 202FA). They seem solid, precise, and reflect a well designed modular system. True, I've never examined them internally, but my understanding is that they are good enough for demanding professional use.

The RB67's seem less solid (use of plastic materials) - but I don't consider them inferior, just different.

I enjoy how Hasselblad and Mamiya solve the same problems (the medium-format usage model scenarios) in considerably different ways.

I agree, I own an RB67 and have owned an RZ67 and a 1968 Hasselblad 500C, I've also handled several Sl66's. To me personally the 500C is the most refined of the aforementioned cameras and feels the most well built, the SL66 a very close second. The RB67 and RZ67 seem slightly less robust but not severely so. I happen to prefer the look I get from RB/RZ lenses and the fact that I can do macro work with the 90mm lens and I really don't need a wide angle or extension rings, If I need to get closer than the 8 ish inches from the front element that the 90mm gives me the 50mm will get me to slightly under 2 inches. I also seem to be one of the few who enjoys the ergonomics or lack thereof of the RB/RZ for handheld shooting. I tried to leave the system once after having used it for 2 years, I came back to it after a year and can't see myself leaving it again. I may give Hasselblad a try again someday, I haven't really made up my mind on it yet.

 

[mweintraub]

I never understood the love for the classic 500-series Hasslebads. For me they are too unrefined. I never understood their glorification. I say, Hasselblads are for people who don't know that the RolleI SL66 exists (the REAL luxury medium format SLR), or find the Mamiya RB67 (a better designed camera) too big and heavy.

After using a Bronica SQ-A and Mamiya RB/RZ I find the system of having to make sure everything matches between the body and back annoying and make the system finiky.

 

[DREW WILEY]

ColtColt - there is an integral tripod ring for that P67 300EDIF. I use it with a Nikon body attached, but not for the actual 67 body unless the shutter speed is fast enough to beat the mirror slap (1/125th or faster). Of course that lens could be shot handheld at higher shutter speeds too, preferably resting on a soft coat or something due to the overall weight. What I did for serious tripod support is machine a maple bracket which accepted both the screw for the camera body and the collar, then tinted the marine epoxy with some rust etc - basically a permanent faux finish to match my well-weathered Ries maple tripods (for fun of course, but highly functional). My 6x7 system is for quickie road shots, for vacation with my wife, who doesn't like waiting around while I fiddle with a view camera and sometimes shoots the 6x7 herself, and for rainy days when I don't want to get my big gear all wet. But all these pro MF systems are pretty desirable.
I've always thought of the SL66 as a benchmark.

 

[ColColt]

The 90/2.8 for my Pentax is probably a great lens but focusing difficulties on the P67 + shutter/mirror vibration have prevented me from enjoying it. Will have to experiment more.

What sort of focusing difficulties do you mean? That's one of the best lens I have and haven't had any focus problems and if I shoot hand held at 125(or greater) no soft negatives.

I think for me, the 165 f2.8 lens is sufficiently long for all I'd be doing with the 6x7. I can see the usefulness of a 300mm, however, but; I'd probably have to shoot at 500 or more to get an acceptably sharp negative as I hate tripods and doubt my Manfrotto monopod would work that well..

 

[Alan Gales]

I never understood the love for the classic 500-series Hasslebads. For me they are too unrefined. I never understood their glorification. I say, Hasselblads are for people who don't know that the RolleI SL66 exists (the REAL luxury medium format SLR), or find the Mamiya RB67 (a better designed camera) too big and heavy.

All three are just tools.

I've owned a Hasselblad 500/cm and an RZ67. A good buddy of mine owns an SL66 and a Hasselblad 500 series. He prefers the SL66. I've handled the SL66 and I preferred how my Hasselblad handled. I also preferred the leaf shutter lenses for fill flash outdoors. My buddy doesn't do flash and likes the tilt ability of the SL66 for landscape shooting. He also hated my RZ67 but loves his Pentax 6x7. I'm not a huge fan of his Pentax.

Different strokes for different folks!

 

[flavio81]

What sort of focusing difficulties do you mean? That's one of the best lens I have and haven't had any focus problems and if I shoot hand held at 125(or greater) no soft negatives.

The P67 is the only SLR I own where I suffer to feel assured that I have correctly selected the focus point. Focusing with my RB67 is instantaneous in comparison and I always nail the focus point. The P67 screen is too dim for me and/or I need a split image screen.

The vibration problems, I did describe them on a dedicated thread. I'm not worried about this latter problem, though; it can be solved by appropriate technique.

 

[benjiboy]

It's really annoying when they bang into each other - just ruins the mint condition I like to keep them in. Somebody should invent a TLR where the lenses could be interchanged by some clever mechanism...

Mamiya C T.L.R's solved this problem more than forty years ago.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Hopscotch back to the P67 300EDIF, since this is technically a lens thread. The alleged focus problems with this can be attributed to three things, none related to the actual optics. 1)Since the depth of field on something this long is very shallow, you obviously need to get it truly in focus, so it helps to double-check with either the accessory eyepiece magnifier or using a more accurate system like the deluxe chimney hood. 2) Unlike its older 300 cousin, the EDIF does not have a hard stop at infinity, so you either need to memorize exactly where this is on the lens scale or verify it visually. I presume this feature was intended for applications past the visual spectrum, since this lens is highly corrected and popular in astrophotography etc. 3) You do need solid support to optimize the performance of any lens this heavy,long, and
precise. It's not a rig for toy tripods and wobbly ballheads. I've been running all kind of tests recently with this lens with both Ektar film
and fine-grained b&w, both P67 body all kinds of modes and tripods, as well as Nikon body. Learning the functional parameters.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Just remembered onE more thing .... 4) Since it's an internal focus lens, the 300EDIF have a relatively short overall focus turn compared to
typical P67 telephotos. So once you're in focus, you gotta be a bit careful not to disturb the setting if attaching a filter or changing the f-stop
ring. Otherwise, the feel of the focus is quite good and not loose at all.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

After using a Bronica SQ-A and Mamiya RB/RZ I find the system of having to make sure everything matches between the body and back annoying and make the system finiky.

To prevent unintended double exposures or blank exposures, the RB67 also has interlocks and a standard sequence of operations - you still have to be mindful, it's just different from Hasselblad. However, the Hasselblad has indicators to tell you about it. (*)

I agree that the lens mount/unmount process is a trap for the uninitiated.




(*) except on the cheapened bodies - boo!

 

[flavio81]

After using a Bronica SQ-A and Mamiya RB/RZ I find the system of having to make sure everything matches between the body and back annoying and make the system finiky.

I don't find it that way.

The Mamiya RB interlocks are pretty easy to understand once you take time to read the instruction manual. And thanks to those interlocks, when you hit the shutter button and the machine goes "ka-chlotshk", you can be damn sure, 100% sure, that the image reached the film emulsion. So no film waste and no blank exposures.

It is very simple, to be honest:

- If the film magazine dark slide is in place, then you cannot shoot.
---> Advice: Remove the dark slide once you put the film magazine in place, and store it in your camera back.

- If the shutter is not cocked... you cannot shoot. But if it's not cocked, you won't see anything in the viewfinder, so this is not a problem.

- If the shutter is not cocked... you cannot take out the lens or insert a new lens.
---> Advice: On a shooting day, cock all your lenses. In this way, they are always ready. After your job is done and you are about to store the camera, you can uncock all the lenses (so the shutters are stored without tension).

- If the rotating back is not fully rotated... you cannot shoot.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

The Mamiya RB interlocks are pretty easy to understand
...

Actually, M. Weintraub was saying that after using the Bronica and the Mamiya RB67, it was the Hasselblad that was finicky by comparison.