Torn between a Hasselblad 500 CM and a Pentax 67

[rayonline_nz]

Should the year go well, I am looking at upgrading to medium format part way thru 2015. I have thought about this for some yrs, since 2006 when I opted for a flatbed scanner instead of a dedicated 35mm which I now regret as the the dedicated ones are not made anymore and are so much better.

But anyway. I do scapes mostly on a tripod. A lot of it travel in my own country and overseas when I get the time that is.

I want larger than 645.
Yes the P67 can get a WLF.

Some points:
I like the H500 due to the nature of a traditional style. I have never handled a medium format, here in NZ we just don't have them, a lot of shops don't even have many modern lenses - not even a shop demo haha (at times). I prefer the Nikon FM2N than my F100.

The H500 is a bit more compact and lighter.
Film backs is nice to have but not that essential.
Maybe I can get away with a lighter tripod and use my current one (Gitzo 1228 mountaineer and 1550 traveler).
However if I am doing many scapes, at times a recangle frame may be preferred then I have to crop it after. Other times a square format might be nice to have and no need to decide whether portrait or landscape.


At the other end:
6x7 is rectangle already.
Lenses are cheaper. If I am not mistaken, Hasselblad lenses like the C T* tend to be around $500-600 each while Pentax are $200-300 (?).
It is larger and heavier and might need a larger tripod (3 series Gitzo).
I would probably shoot slides with it and should I want some street location photography I might need to carry my Nikon FM2N as well (for b/w film).

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.


Can someone confirm the weight of the Pentax? Photoethnography say it is 1760g with a 105mm f2.4 (with a prism). However on the same page it says a P67 with a AE prism weights 1.66Kg (the latest version) or 1.76Kg (the older one). So surely the 105mm lens cannot be just 100g.

By look at Keh.com there doesn't seem to be a lot of P67 equipment but much more Haseelblad gear. If I do a search on Flickr like Japan or Hong Kong and then put in either Pentax 67 or Hasselblad. There are a lot more images with the Hasselblad ... (?).

 

[Fixcinater]

I got into the P67 series for cheap. I got into a Hassy setup for cheap, and never got on with it's method of working. Much prefer the oversized 35mm SLR feel.

P67 lenses are plenty sharp for landscapes, especially stopped down.

 

[film_man]

Considering that you are in NZ I would first check where I can get a Hasselblad or Pentax serviced, if you can get local service that would greatly sway it in favour of one or the other. Check what the prices are, you may find a Hassy repair is more expensive.

Square is nice but shooting wide with square is tricky for me, I find shooting wide with a 6x7 tricky too as you just have so much vertical space to play with it. So think about that. To compare to your FM2n you need to look at what the coverage is on the horizontal and vertical, so for example a 50mm on a Hasselblad is like having the horizontal view of a 30mm lens on the FM2n and the vertical view of a 20mm lens.

Another point, you can crop a 6x7 to square and you can crop a 6x6 to rectangle but one gives you 6x7 and 6x6 cropped and the other 6x6 and 645 cropped (roughly speaking).

Either system is good, they are both heavy enough to make the weight a non-factor, an extra 300-400g here or there is not going to make much difference and if you are shooting from a tripod who cares.

 

[rayonline_nz]

Yeah I should know one or two local repairers here. Heard some local guys got their old film cameras repaired or CLA'ed. This is one or two second hand film camera stores too that also does repairs. Probably a near / already retired fella.

Yeah I find that square format for walk about about could be more creative when closer to the subject isolated but if I am on Hong Kong Peak Lookout or a observation deck or on a pedestrian bridge hmmmm.... Yes a 6x7 is larger than 6x6 so even if I crop a 6x7 to square I still have a 6x6.

I would most probably import one from Keh.com or get one overseas on travel (from Asia). If I got one going with Keh.com prices, I am gauranteed to make a profit here should I sell it.

Maybe commonsense says I should go with a P67 first. A Hasselblad 500CM goes for less than a iPhone right. Should I don't like it or sell one system here, I won't lose out. No one buys it here but Bronica were listed at a online auction for like $1,000US equiv. SQ-Ai I think it was with one lens it might have been. Not often but occasionally one MF gets listed here.

 

[polyglot]

I think 'blads are wonderful, but not good value for money. Consider also the RB/RZ which has the big-negs-and-awesome-cheap-lenses appeal of the Pentax, with the benefit of interchangeable backs. RZ's are quite large and the lenses are even bigger, but I would never give up the ability to carry 3 kinds of film (B&W, C41, IR) on a daytrip.

 

[gone]

The issue to me is, what we're talking about are old cameras in either variety. Old cameras have problems, and a CLA just means it works good at that point. Having lived in Hawaii, I understand what it's like to have limited local photographic repair or replacement options, and shipping is always a killer. For those reasons, and because they're great value for the money, I would go w/ a Rolleicord or a Rolleiflex. In my experience, the lenses are sharper, and they're small and light, especially if you get a Rolleicord. Unless you drop one, they're usually very reliable too, especially the Rolleicord, which has a very simple knob wind mechanism. The shutters are simple leaf shutters that tend to be reliable and ultra quiet, unlike a blad. Don't overlook the Voigtlandr Brillants either. I had one w/ a Heliar lens that just blew away any medium format camera I ever owned.

A TLR isn't everyone's cup of tea, and it took me quite a while to get on w/ them, but now I take my $20 Argoflex w/ me everywhere, and the photos from that little camera are quite remarkable. Remember, if you're shooting landscapes, you don't necessarily need the more modern lenses, since you're going to be shooting stopped down. No, maybe the corners won't be super sharp. Does anyone really care about that anyway? If it matters, get a cord or flex w/ a Tessar/Planar/Xenotar.

 

[andreios]

On a side note - if you don't absolutely need tele-lenses, you may also consider a combo of a TLR (whatever - Yashica Mat / Rollei / ...) and a Fuji GSW 690 - you get both the square and a proper rectangle for landscapes. I owned a 6x6 slr system (bronica) but have settled on this combo - the weight is the same (or even less than a 6x6 system with trhee lenses a prism and a couple of backs) and for hiking this combination works much better for me.

 

[rayonline_nz]

I just had this thought. If I was in Singapore waterfront and taking the shot of that financial district with the Merlion and Fullurton Hotel. Sunset, just minutes passed, I have tripod set up, my Velvia, cable release - sweet. Let's say I have a 6x6. How the heck do I compose that.

 

[film_man]

I just had this thought. If I was in Singapore waterfront and taking the shot of that financial district with the Merlion and Fullurton Hotel. Sunset, just minutes passed, I have tripod set up, my Velvia, cable release - sweet. Let's say I have a 6x6. How the heck do I compose that.

With a lot of sky? I know what you mean. I owned the following lenses for my Hasselblad, 50, 60, 80, 150, 160, 250 and I can tell you that whoever can compose with anything less than 60mm on square gets my respect, I just couldn't make it happen. I have seen some of the most amazing shots with the SWC hasselblads, that's 38mm superwide and I just admire how they can compose with that.

 

[JW PHOTO]

I have both and each has it's good and "not so good" points. 'Blads are easier to carry around and a little quiter, but not much. 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. With the Pentax I have two bodies, one for B&W and one for color. The Pentax is certainly not as handy this way, but you can make do. I much prefer 6x7 to 6x6 and it is the downside to the 'Blad. That said, 16x20 prints are still no problem with either. For me, if the 'Blad were 6x7 it would be the perfect camera. Now, if I were in your position with a choice as to which camera? I'd pick niether! Yes, I'd also look at the Mamiya RZ67. I owned a very nice RB67 outfit at one time and it was a really nice setup. A little on the heavy side, but did the job fine. I would have been able to get by with the RB67 forever, but I shot mostly weddings and the 'Blad was King or Queen when it came to weddings. Now, if I didn't have any medium format came right now and had to pick a new system? For me it would be the Bronica GS1 6x7 with speed grip and AE prism. Great glass, interchangeable backs and prism.............all for a great price right now. You can easily have two Bronica GS1 bodies for the price of one 'Blad body with the same features and lenses are cheaper too. Of course there is always the Fuji GX680................... You do see where this is going don't you???? If I were you I'd decide if format size, weight and interchangeable backs are important and let the rest fall where it may. You will get superb results from any of these systems lenses so don't let that sway you to much. This is just my opinion of course, but something to think about anyway...........John W

 

[AgX]

Can someone confirm the weight of the Pentax?

Pentax 6x7 + TTL finder + battery = 1820 grams

 

[canindya]

I am not sure whether this info will will be helpful or not but I had owned Hasselblad 500 C/M. One aspect you might want to consider is every time you press the shutter the mirror vibration is significant. If you are looking for some street experience you might want to look at TLR or Mamiya 7 - leaf shutter. Much more silent and less shake. Hasselblad is an amazing camera - no doubt about it. But I traded it for a TLR since I was looking for to capture street environment.

 

[Roberto]

I own both. I find them almost completely different tools. The Hassy for BW square work is outstanding, though not easy to compose with. But if you manage, oh man!
I can't shoot good square colors, and I am not very sure what is the reason, maybe the more graphical contents of BW matches better the balance of the square frame.
But that's me ... Charlie Waite's work in square color is truly amazing!

The Pentax 67 has a huge negative, can deliver amazing results and is much, much easier to use than the 'blad. You can not do the Zone System very well with it though.

I think the decision is much easier to make if you focus on the final result you want to get: if you prefer square prints (maybe in black and white) go for the 'blad otherwise get the Pentax (of course this is a coarse semplification but you get the idea)..

 

[baachitraka]

I still do not get why it should be difficult to compose with a square....

I may take the suggestion from Polyglot on RZ.

 

[Roger Cole]

I have both and each has it's good and "not so good" points. 'Blads are easier to carry around and a little quiter, but not much. 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. With the Pentax I have two bodies, one for B&W and one for color. The Pentax is certainly not as handy this way, but you can make do. I much prefer 6x7 to 6x6 and it is the downside to the 'Blad. That said, 16x20 prints are still no problem with either. For me, if the 'Blad were 6x7 it would be the perfect camera. Now, if I were in your position with a choice as to which camera? I'd pick niether! Yes, I'd also look at the Mamiya RZ67. I owned a very nice RB67 outfit at one time and it was a really nice setup. A little on the heavy side, but did the job fine. I would have been able to get by with the RB67 forever, but I shot mostly weddings and the 'Blad was King or Queen when it came to weddings. Now, if I didn't have any medium format came right now and had to pick a new system? For me it would be the Bronica GS1 6x7 with speed grip and AE prism. Great glass, interchangeable backs and prism.............all for a great price right now. You can easily have two Bronica GS1 bodies for the price of one 'Blad body with the same features and lenses are cheaper too. Of course there is always the Fuji GX680................... You do see where this is going don't you???? If I were you I'd decide if format size, weight and interchangeable backs are important and let the rest fall where it may. You will get superb results from any of these systems lenses so don't let that sway you to much. This is just my opinion of course, but something to think about anyway...........John W

Exactly what I was thinking - landscapes mostly on a tripod = RZ67. I'd stop there over the GS1 for the rotating back.. GX680 is a great system but lenses and other parts are far more rare and the thing is an absolute BEAST.

 

[JW PHOTO]

Roger,
The RZ67 would be my first choice if I were going to do landscapes and still-life shots mainly, but for walking around on the street the GS1 with prism and speed grip for me. Plus, I can still do landscapes and still-life shots with it. Yes, the GX680 is a beast, but a very nice beast that I was very tempted to own. I'm going to be 65 and find myself using a Rollei/Yashicamat more and more all the time. Why? Weight, weight, weight! John W

 

[flavio81]

I own some (light) folder cameras, a (light) Rolleicord, several Mamiya TLRs + lenses, and a (heavy) RB67. If i could keep only one, i would choose to keep the RB67. The versatility and image quality more than makes up for the added weight, for me.

 

[Roberto]

The GX680 is almost the same size/weight of a 4x5.. why bother with a smaller negative then...

 

[AgX]

Almost the same as a 4x5 SLR ?

 

[cjbecker]

I have had both systems, and enjoyed both systems, but still have the Hasselblad. The Hasselblad was my first medium format system, I have used the system since 07 and can adapt it to literally any situation. I got the Pentax on a trade, just wanted to try it out, and see what it was all about. I used it for a while but never really meshed with it. I just hated the bulk of it. The Hasselblad can slip in to a pretty small area, the Pentax not so much. It also helps that I like shooting and printing square. Both are good systems. I just like the Hasselblad more.

 

[Roger Cole]

The GX680 is almost the same size/weight of a 4x5.. why bother with a smaller negative then...

It's way, way bigger and heavier than many 4x5s. One reason I don't give in to the temptation to avoid the hassles of sheet film by moving to an RZ system is that it would be far larger and heavier than my Tech III with three lens kit, even when I include things like darkcloth, film holders etc.

 

[Oren Grad]

Almost the same as a 4x5 SLR ?

Yes, same ballpark as a 4x5 Graflex.

 

[Roberto]

Almost the same as a 4x5 SLR ?

The gx680 needs a sturdy tripod anyway so being a slr is not a big advantage for me. For landscape a 4x5 is IMHO a better choice. I can even shoot 6x12 and all the other MF formats. But that's my choice... for what is worth

 

[Alan Gales]

My opinion is that if you want to shoot square then shoot 6x6. If you want to shoot a rectangle then shoot 6x7 or 645. I don't like cropping later.

I have owned both a Hasselblad 500/cm and a Mamiya RZ67. A good friend of mine owns a Pentax 6x7 so I have handled one. I prefer the Mamiya over the Pentax and my friend prefers the Pentax. Both are fine cameras but quite different.

I preferred my RZ for portraiture and my Blad for carrying around. My RZ mostly lived on a tripod.

 

[rayonline_nz]

I tend to do my photography more on travel half of that overseas using subways and buses etc. Out for breakfast and not back to my room till after dinner when the sky is black. Visiting museums etc.

The RZ is just far too large and heavy. Only a few MF are made now. At the end of the day even the blad might be $2,200-2,500US vs the Pentax of $1,000US - for a 3 lens kit. I find that for land/cityscapes a rectangle works better but when I isolate it the square can be great - portraiture, streets, walkabout. The rectangle for me might work better to capture the entire "Kuala Lumpur Twin Towers" but if I isolate only part of it with some tree leaves the 6x6 works. The Hassie might be a more fun camera and the P67 gets the job done better (rationally speaking). Rather not deal with a 6x7 RF with a Hassie.

P67 is cheaper maybe try that out with just the 105mm before getting the other 2 lenses. It is not a must to do b/w, but nice to have. I could if I wanted, with a Nikon FM with a single prime.