Torn between a Hasselblad 500 CM and a Pentax 67

Sirius Glass · Dec 22, 2014

rayonline_nz said:
Most likely with the Hasselblad I would be wanting a normal 80mm and a 50mm or 40mm (not sure) and a 150/200mm - at most.

I have and recommend the 80mm and 50mm Hasselblad lenses. The 40mm is costly, heavy and will require a separate and hard to get filters. I found the 150mm lens which I still have the least used lens. The 250mm weighs about the same and is a nice step up from the 80mm lens.

DREW WILEY · Dec 22, 2014

I don't see any advantage going Hassie. Even if certain Hassie lenses are a tad better, for all practical purposes it's a 645 neg, so the Pentax still wins with its bigger neg, and the lenses are quite good and affordable. If you want significantly better image quality you have to move up to large format film anyway. Most of the bulk and weight of the Pentax is in that big prism. There is a superb chimney finder available that
gets the wt down. My older brother was a Rollei and Linhof salesman. He owned that wonderful SL66 system; but whenever we traveled together, he'd borrow my P67. So much of this is just a matter of personal ergonomics or whatever.

Sirius Glass · Dec 22, 2014

Hasselblad is 6x6. And for all practical purposes is 6x6, not 645. 645 is an option for Hasselblad and very few people bother with 645. The Hasselblad is lighter. Parts and service are easy to obtain. Lenses and accessories are also easy to obtain. There is not much difference between 6x6 and 6x7.

miha · Dec 22, 2014

Don't forget the wooden grip of the P67 - something that Hasselblad came up with fairly recently!

Roger Cole · Dec 22, 2014

There is if you crop to rectangular.

I probably crop 1/3 to 1/2 of my 6x6 negs to 645 or so. Or 6x3, or 6x5. I try to compose to the frame and I like square, but I'm not a slave to it nor does the world live by it.

Poisson Du Jour · Dec 22, 2014

It's a difficult choice because they are both excellent systems and neither have the definitive edge over the other, but you do at least have more cropping versatility with the 6x7 format. Quite a few 67 lenses (newer SMC Pentax generation) are well above the $200 to $200 range; a couple are more than $1400 on the used market (e.g. 75mm f2.8AL). What you eventually decide on may be influenced by how well you 'fit' a scene to either or both formats and a preference for one over the other because of that 'fit'. I have never thought a Hasselblad would be suitable for a landscape interest, but I have been proved wrong e.g. one of my correspondents is Oleg Novikov who has photographed the wild Siberian and Chinese landscapes on Hasselblad and made it work. Seeing what others have achieved may see you settle on the best format sooner rather than later. Pentax viewfinders and prisms (both TTL and non-TTL) are now getting quite old and most will require the foam seal to be replaced (an infuriatingly fiddly and fraught process). The electronics in the prisms can be especially vague after many, many years of continual use (and neglect!) with shutter speeds also a point in question of reliability (very especially the ancient 6x7 bodies). Get your hands on both cameras to see how they feel and go from there.

Sirius Glass · Dec 22, 2014

One of the most important factors is the very personal factor of fit: How does the camera fit and feel in your hands? Not someone on Internet idea of what fits.

cliveh · Dec 22, 2014

Torn between a Hasselblad 500 CM and a Pentax 67

No contest, Hasselblad every time. It is a classic system precision camera, need I say more?

Sirius Glass · Dec 22, 2014

cliveh said:
Torn between a Hasselblad 500 CM and a Pentax 67

No contest, Hasselblad every time. It is a classic system precision camera, need I say more?

Well said!

Theo Sulphate · Dec 22, 2014

JW PHOTO said:
... I truly love having interchangeable backs and have three backs labeled N-1, N and N+1, which allows for simple Zone system work for B&W ...

Exactly. For landscape and other work, you can have different backs loaded either for different contrast situations (where the film from each back can have custom development, rather than having mixed contrast exposures all on one roll), or you can just have different film types.

RalphLambrecht · Dec 22, 2014

APUGuser19 said:
This is a dilemna only you can answer. You're on a an island isolated by the South Pacific. Many people cannot relate as to suggest a choice, by reason of availability to you. Either choice is a good one. The Hasselblad is compact, but also invariably needs service to see that the shutter is still accurate, and the mirror pads are replaced. The 67 is a FP shutter, which seems to hold accuracy better than BTL shutters (IMO). Further, a bigger negative from a lesser lens-quality camera is still sharper that the very best lens on a smaller negative. But with the tripod, you answered your own question. If you are one of those married to a tripod, then why not use the biggest camera you can carry? Otherwise, the Hasselblad can give superb performance without all the heavy iron to lug around.
As for me I carry a 553 ELX. But for one reason--mirror slap. The weight of the motorized Hasselblads makes an excellent vibration damper. Plus, they are cheap (here in the US). Mine was a choice that makes itself.

Inmy view ,the Hasselblad is simply the best MF System camera there is;for landscape or otherwise;you can potentially even convrt it to digital and we are likely pushing daisies before it is obsolete

DREW WILEY · Dec 22, 2014

The P67 is basically handles like a big noisy 35mm body. There are a few fast lenses in the system, which makes this an excellent aerial system or suitable for limited handheld use, and some of the EDIF telephotos are absolutely first rate. I wouldn't worry much about lens quality in later lenses. You'll pay a lot more for Hassie lenses, and a few of em might be a bit better, but the larger neg of the P67 basically
overcomes that anyway in most cases. And as far as not having interchangeable backs, no big deal. You can probably buy extra P67 bodies
cheaper than Hassie backs, and the forward film advance vs reverse curl of the film is a better flatness method. But an awful lot of this is
personal preference. You gotta handle them a bit to decide. You won't get a significantly improved neg until you move up to 4x5 anyway.
Medium format is inherently a compromise system. Faster to shoot than large format, but clumsier than 35mm. Roll film is relatively cheap.

rayonline_nz · Dec 22, 2014

Poisson Du Jour said:
It's a difficult choice because they are both excellent systems and neither have the definitive edge over the other, but you do at least have more cropping versatility with the 6x7 format. Quite a few 67 lenses (newer SMC Pentax generation) are well above the $200 to $200 range; a couple are more than $1400 on the used market (e.g. 75mm f2.8AL). What you eventually decide on may be influenced by how well you 'fit' a scene to either or both formats and a preference for one over the other because of that 'fit'. I have never thought a Hasselblad would be suitable for a landscape interest, but I have been proved wrong e.g. one of my correspondents is Oleg Novikov who has photographed the wild Siberian and Chinese landscapes on Hasselblad and made it work. Seeing what others have achieved may see you settle on the best format sooner rather than later. Pentax viewfinders and prisms (both TTL and non-TTL) are now getting quite old and most will require the foam seal to be replaced (an infuriatingly fiddly and fraught process). The electronics in the prisms can be especially vague after many, many years of continual use (and neglect!) with shutter speeds also a point in question of reliability (very especially the ancient 6x7 bodies). Get your hands on both cameras to see how they feel and go from there.

Thanks. Keh doesn't have that $1,400 lens Except the EX condition 600mm F4. The other lenses apart from a EX 105mm F2.4 $400, most/all are at least F4. I shoot on a tripod so I don't need fast glass. The 45mm F4 SMC is like $250-350 ... ish.

Are the SMC the latest Pentax glass?

I think I might go with the P67 for scapes with 2 or 3 cheap lenses. I might pick up a Hassie after that and just try out with a 80mm. A basic kit from Keh is still less than $1,000US which is what Apple NZ charges us here for an iPhone in the southtern hemisphere. If I end up doing travel hobby on the P67 the Hassie might still be a fun camera at home doing walkabouts.

AgX · Dec 22, 2014

cliveh said:
No contest, Hasselblad every time. It is a classic system precision camera, need I say more?

A precision camera does not necessarily comes handy, in the most literal sense.

Both cameras follow different ergonomic approaches. Even in case both should be handy alike, the Pentax will be easily accepted by someone with experience with typical 35mm SLRs.

Alan Gales · Dec 22, 2014

To tell you the truth, for travel photography, this is what I would want.

http://www.fujifilmusa.com/products/professional_photography/film/gf670/

DREW WILEY · Dec 22, 2014

Yeah... nice and light, but only one lens choice, and relatively fragile, esp the bellows. Hassies and P67's have a track record for being rugged.

Alan Gales · Dec 22, 2014

DREW WILEY said:
Yeah... nice and light, but only one lens choice, and relatively fragile, esp the bellows. Hassies and P67's have a track record for being rugged.

Only one lens but two formats and built in meter. You're not supposed to drop the thing, Drew!

DanielStone · Dec 22, 2014

Alan,
Before you buy/recommend one of the Fuji cameras, you might want to read through this thread here:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

-Dan

Alan Gales · Dec 22, 2014

DanielStone said:
Alan,
Before you buy/recommend one of the Fuji cameras, you might want to read through this thread here:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

-Dan

Well that really sucks! What a bunch of b.s.!

Thanks for the tip, Dan.

Sirius Glass · Dec 22, 2014

Alan Gales said:
To tell you the truth, for travel photography, this is what I would want.

http://www.fujifilmusa.com/products/professional_photography/film/gf670/

DanielStone said:
Alan,
Before you buy/recommend one of the Fuji cameras, you might want to read through this thread here:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

-Dan

Advisory: When this man recommends a stock, do not buy it.

Really, a folder when all the thread has been about medium format camera with interchangeable lenses.

Poisson Du Jour · Dec 22, 2014

DREW WILEY said:
Yeah... nice and light, but only one lens choice, and relatively fragile, esp the bellows. Hassies and P67's have a track record for being rugged.

Of the Hassies and P67s ... yes, very true! But the 67 cameras have idiosyncracies that have really gotten to a number of photographers and even brought them undone at the worst possible time (example: broken metering coupling chain). This means that they do need some TLC in use, and a front-of-mind awareness of the potential for serious problems. Not beyond anybody to work like this, just that it has distressed so many people caught unawares.

ambaker · Dec 22, 2014

I own the 67 and a 500C. Thank you digital "revolution", for making my dreams come true.

I usually fill the viewfinder with my image, so cropping is no something I keep in mind when composing.

I would really advise handling both and buying the one that seems most natural to you. Cameras are tools. Would you buy a hammer that felt awkward to use, just because others say it is a very nice hammer?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Alan Gales · Dec 23, 2014

Sirius Glass said:
Advisory: When this man recommends a stock, do not buy it.

Really, a folder when all the thread has been about medium format camera with interchangeable lenses.

You are right. I was just thinking that the Fuji would have given the OP both 6x6 and 6x7 formats and would have been easy to travel with. It had slipped my mind about the interchangeable lens requirement so of course the folder wouldn't have worked. My bad.

Slixtiesix · Dec 23, 2014

I want to jump in here! Seriously, after reading the whole thread, I also thought that a Fuji GF670W might be an ideal choice. You can switch between 6x6 and 6x7 and around 55mm of focal length is what you wanted. Lenses are not interchangeable, but one could ad a GF670. Of course things start to become costly then since these cameras are rather new. However, this is also an advantage, since you won´t have to worry about having them serviced in the near future. Another advantage is that there is no need to buy a new/heavier tripod. Another option: Mamiya 6 or 7. I must admit that I do not like rangefinder focusing, I just wanted to show some options.

If you should chose Hasselblad I can recommend a 50/4 FLE CF and 100/3,5 CF. The 180/4 is great too, but you may not want to lug it around on your trips. Mine starts to feel like a brick in the bag after walking a few miles.

ckirby · Dec 23, 2014

Note that the common theme through these posts is people trying to come up with reasons not to buy a Hasselblad. If you're going into MF you may as well get the industry standard first and experiment with other cameras later for the sake of variety. Every other camera is judged by how it compares to a Hassie. You can get a fully functional older 500 with lens, finder and back for under 500USD, including warranty, so it's fairly painless.

Torn between a Hasselblad 500 CM and a Pentax 67

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency