pentax 67II vs Mamiya RB67 pro SD vs Hasselblad 503CW

This has probably been discussed before, however I need facts based on user experiences and not feelings about cameras.

1. How much of a problem is mirror vibration in the pentax 67II?

2. Are shutter speeds slower than the focal length possible with the pentax
67II, by a magnitude of one stop, e.g. 300mm 1/250th?

3. Is a tripod really needed for < 200mm lenses on the P67?

4. how scarce are APO KL telephoto lenses for the RB67 Pro SD in the UK,
and Europe?

5. Should I buy a new RB body in Hong Kong, if I know the Mamiya dealer,
have vistited their showroom, and can get it?

6. A Hasselblad is a good investment, however their new glass will smash an
average wallet to pieces. I need a 300mm or 350mm telephoto lens, and a
40mm CF or CFE lens for the Hasselblad 503.

7. Is secondhand Hasselblad glass viable, or is it too damaged and worn by
pro use

atm, I am leaning towards buying a P67II, especially for the flat film plane,
and the sharp and cheap lenses. Need some advice re. the shutter. I will possibly get an RB67 too, if I can track down one or two of the APO tele lenses. An RZ67 Pro II is a non starter due to durability problems I have heard.

Hold on! What kind of shooting is this for? What sort of work do you do, or want to do? Landscape, portrait, macro...? What focal lengths do you need?

In answer to 7:
There is a lot to choose from. And there is a lot of bad stuff among the also abundant good stuff.
Asking price is not necessarily a meassure for the condition lenses are in.
So it is a matter of looking around and picking the right deal when it comes along.

But generally, yes: secondhand Hasselblad lenses can be/are very worthwhile. It's not too hard to find many used lenses that will still deliver 'as new' quality for many decades to come.

handheld. all of those i will handhold. i will use a tripod for long tele > 300mm. i have handheld all of these with the default lenses with no anxiety. the rb feels solid, however am concerned with availability of APO lenses. i don't wish to have a P67II live on a tripod 24/7. this is why i research the shutter issue.

But do keep in mind that handholding and making the availability of the best lenses an issue are not compatible.
If you really need the last bit of performance out of your equipment, put it on a tripod. Always.
If not, why would you need the apo lenses?

Handheld what? Handheld scenic? Or handheld street? For handheld scenic / documentary / travel, I think you might consider the Mamiya 7ii or one of the earlier incarnations. Far more pleasurable as a handheld tool than any of the cameras you've mentioned. Not to dog those cameras, they are all fine pieces, but for handheld documentary-style shooting the RFs rule. The shortcoming of the Mamiya RFs is for low-light work and for posed portraiture and similar limited DOF work.

The P67, RB, and RZ are most effective on a tripod. And by the way, whoever told you the RZ isn't durable is wrong. I mean, I could just as easily make some dumb comment about hassies jamming, and then the thread spirals off into nonsense....

P.S. I find the apo lenses useful for IR and for colour work; they are indeed very fine, but... they are many excellent non-apo lenses in these lineups as well.

i need service years from now. specifically, service of the electronic timed shutter and power winder. this is why an RZ is not viable. the only automation in an RB is the power winder. i cannot consider the mamiya 7II due to insufficient focal length. my shooting will include distance, and ship photography.

I know I will feel excited providing i discover the mirror vibration in the P67 is over hyped, otherwise I might get an RB67 and take advice on hunting for lenses in the lineup. Again I will consider buying from Hong Kong due to visting the dealer in person and talking in english and cantonese in person.

I own a Pentax 67II and recently bought an RB67 SD. I haven't used the Mamiya enough to give experienced advice, but here are my thoughts.

1. Having interchangeable backs is a big advantage to allow for different films, different development, and quick change of film. Really big advantage (for me)--I do mostly B&W and being able to have different holders for different development is my main reason for going for the RB67.

2. I thought the Pentax might be OK with the WLF (waist level finder) for hand held shots, but just trying it out, I immediately bought the pentaprism. A vertical composition with the Pentax would be very awkward with the WLF (especially hand held) and show upside down. Whereas, the RB67 works pretty nice with the WLF and the rotating back on the RB67 is very nice.

4. The RB67 is a totally mechanical camera--no electronics to fail. The Pentax has lots of electronics--I don't think it can even shoot without a battery. I like mechanical cameras.

5. Pentax has instant return mirror; RB67 does not. (With mirrors as big as these, I think instant return is not a good idea in theory.)

6. I recommend the E focusing screen (45 degree split image and microprism collar) for the RB67. I'm getting older, and it's just easier to focus on a split image for me. Many of the screens for Pentax are becoming very difficult to find in the USA.

Most medium format cameras and long lenses on ANY camera do best on tripods. If you are more interested in hand-held cameras the Fuji Rangefinders (if you are OK with a single lens, normal focal length or wide) are excellent; the Bronica Sq series (6x6) is very hand-holdable, and much more reasonably priced than Hasselblad equipment, however, they are not producing cameras now, so it's all used equipment, and I have no idea of what their current service level is.

In the USA, K/L lenses of all types seem readily available. Don't know about UK/Europe. I've bought some RB67 on Ebay new from Hong Kong with no problems at MUCH lower prices than in the USA.

Good luck with your choice.

Charlie Strack

The question is: "is a sportscar better than a pick-up ?"

I shot a lot of portraits with the Pentax and the 200mm handheld. It is a great camera.
The RB is a diferent breed as mentioned and a great camera too.

When at a meeting of photographers try to handheld both of them and see whitch one you like best.

Peter

Since you're considering a Hasselblad and handheld, why have you eliminated 645 slrs from consideration? By doing so you've eliminated most of the field of eminently handoldable MF cameras, and the numerous APO lenses available for them. The image quality from Pentax, Mamiya, Bronica 645 lenses can be quite as astounding. Via the Pentax adapter the 67 lenses operate at full-aperture metering and automatically stop down.

All-mechanical cameras have their issues, too. For example, shutter timing. Leaf shutter lenses require regular service. OTOH, oscillator-controlled focal-plane shutters are arguably more precise. Some are self diagnosing and self-adjusting, frequently going decades without requiring any service whatsoever.

The RZ gets heavy after a while. After an hour my arm starts to shake slightly, so that doesn't help sharpness at all. I'm getting ready to sell mine as I just don't use it as much as I should. I plan on checking out the Hasselblad, or some 645 cameras. So I would not recommend the RB if you want to handhold a lot.

I have both an RB and a 67II kits which I have used for years. The Pentax is much better for the handholding you describe. The RB and lenses are much heavier. The RB conveniences are the rotating back (great with the WLF), and interchangable backs, but I always choose the P67 for handheld shooting - it is faster handling and lighter, and I prefer the look the SMC lenses give.

I also do have a Hasselblad V kit, and it is wonderful for handheld with the WLF - if you want 6x6. If buying used does not scare you, the Hassie prices are quite good these days.

I have had my P67ii for 4 years. In 4 years I grew from one 105mm lens to 9 lenses mostly purchased through eBay. So far not a single piece of any thing of my system ever needed to be CLA'ed or repaired. My oldest glass is a 90 mm LS bought at $75.00. The LS shutter is working perfectly no doubt. There is no haze, fungus or anything that would make me unhappy. There is no question that P67 gears are all very well built and high quality. On the other hand most RB stuff I have seen were pretty beat up. There might have been pretty new stuff too but most used gears I have seen were not.

I almost shoot my P67ii all handheld only. Never got a blurred image. Well, I do not enlarge to poster sized print. If I anticipate large prints I would uses a tripod. If you do get a P67ii you will want to get the new AE prism too. It is the most significant improvement of the p67 system. It is extremely bright and easy to focus because of its adjustable diopter. I don't need interchangeable back. I don't need to change films in the middle of a shoot. Remember WLF is only for square format cameras. 6x6 is really beefed up 6x4.5. It is not to be compared to 6x7 if you need large negatives.

So, generally speaking, I go down to smaller formats for tele work and larger formats for wider. The reason for doing so is obvious.

If you really want to try to straddle the focal lengths from wide to tele and do it all handheld, comfortably, then I think a 645 may be the best option. With my 645 cameras I use lenses with focal lengths from 35 to 500 (and that even with a 2x extender!) and they are peachy for macro too. The Mamiya 645 pro is like a mini-rb... too bad it doesn't have a rotating back, but it's a real joy in the field and offers the high shutter speeds that you need for long tele.

Incidentally, I think the p645N cameras are the real standouts in the Pentax lineup.

mtjade, I don't know what you mean about WLF only for square format, the rb and rz have WLFs and they are not square. I also question the idea of 6x6 as beefed up 645. Some of us shoot squares because we like squares. If you crop 645 to square then it is quite small.

mtjade2007 said "Remember WLF is only for square format cameras."

I take exception to this, as with the RB/RZ67 rotating back, they work just fine. They would be more awkward to use (especially hand held) on, say, a Bronica GS-1 for vertical orientation--though on a tripod, still easy to use if you're used to view cameras with the upside down image!

Charlie Strack

Agreed about the WLF - this is the main advantage of the RB/RZ IMO. The rotating back makes it very nice to use the WLF.

I think this P67 shutter/mirror vibration issue is overplayed, at least in the 67II.

Also, the 67 body is cheap enough you can buy two and treat it like a "back" with a different film.

i will get the p67ii. the flat film for astrophotography appeals. i will get a sturdy gitzo for when i need it

Enjoy!

The question asked: "Is a tripod really needed for < 200mm lenses on the P67?"

I have a P67 II, handheld, and the results (landscapes) were just fine... until I got a 20X loupe.

Now I use a tripod for all shots. No exceptions. Results much better.

Kris

Indeed.

It is all about what you hope to achieve.
Keep your expectations low, and handholding will do (and you don't need the best lenses then).
If not, use a tripod.

pollux said:

6. A Hasselblad is a good investment, however their new glass will smash an
average wallet to pieces. I need a 300mm or 350mm telephoto lens, and a
40mm CF or CFE lens for the Hasselblad 503.

Click to expand...

I have a 503 CX that I am very happy with.

To point #6, please see my signature.

Steve

I ve had both, now I have several RB 67. I feel they are more useful in more situations, especially studio, I do like the bellows.

I don't know if the Hasselblad really belongs in here. It is a different frame spacing than the other two, and is much smaller.

So, I think the first thing you need to do is pick a frame spacing.

IMO, use a Hassy if you like square format. Use a 645 or a Hassy with a 645 back if you want a camera with the size, convenience, and ergonomics of a Hassy, but don't want to print square format. Use the RB or Pentax if you want to make prints at off-the-shelf paper sizes, and do not need a small camera like a Hassy. Hassy's only big disadvantages to RB/RZs and Pentaxes are:

1. Frame size. This is a very big deal IMO, unless you want square prints.
2. Slower to use for close up work
3. ...and of course, price. Price of EVERYTHING. Parts, accessories, lenses, backs, repairs, etc.

Other than those, I would use a Hassy instead of an RZ and M45.

For the 6x7 choices, the things you need to look at involve the main "operating differences" between the systems, as you will obtain quality results and have quality lenses with either.

The things that are BIG differences:

1. The Mamiya is a full-on component system camera, with exchangeable magazines. The Pentax does not use magazines. There are pluses and minuses to each of these. If you don't need magazines for what you do, the Pentax will require less service and the film plane will always be in exactly the same place. However, the advantages of magazines are so numerous for so many situations, that if you can make use of them, they outweigh this, IMO.
2. The Mamiya uses a leaf shutter. The Pentax uses a focal plane shutter. The Mamiya synchs at all shutter speeds, while the Pentax does it at '30 maximum. This is important especially when mixing ambient light and flash. Otherwise, I see little difference, as long as you can shoot in a dark studio.
3. The Mamiya has close focusing ability without using extension tubes (though extension tubes are also an option). The Pentax requires extension tubes to focus close. If you shoot close (but not necessarily "macro") a lot, big deal. If not, then no big deal.
4. The Pentax is nice and simple ("brainless") to use. The Mamiya is more versatile, but requires more attention to use.

The final opinion: If you don't mix flash and ambient light, would not make good use of magazines, don't focus close often, and have trouble with technical matters (and there is nothing wrong with that - technical matters are just something one must deal with to get what one wants artistically)...in other words, if you just want a nice and simple "big 35", I would say that the Pentax is the better choice. If you want an almost infinitely versatile tool to cover a huge array of situations, specifically mixing flash and ambient light and using magazines, the Mamiya is the better choice. Even if you are technically inept (as are many of my friends with both RB/RZs and Pentaxes), practice does make perfect, and repeated use of the camera will get you up to speed.

As for lenses, forget about it. They are all good.

As for hand holdability for "technically sound" shots, don't expect it with either of these if you are using long lenses and/or shooting in low light. The WLF will help a bit. There is a WLF for both of these cameras. However, I would say that if hand holding will be your primary use, there are better options than either of these (such as Hassy if you want an SLR).