Torn between a Hasselblad 500 CM and a Pentax 67

[AgX]

I don't see this as comparing to an industry standard but for a great part comparing two cameras of basically different design (Hasselblad-style versus Exakta-style).

 

[DREW WILEY]

P67's were popular even with fashion photographers because of their ergonomic handling. There are only three leaf-shutter lenses for flash use, "normal" (90 & 105), and a 165, but these did the trick. Pros used all kinds of SLR MF systems, including various Mamiyas, Bronicas, Rolleis, and Pentaxes. Hassies hardly had a monopoly in that respect, and it's an utter myth that they were ever the quality "standard". That's more marketing hype than anything else. Pick gear you can afford and that does the kind of work you need. Nearly all these pro MF cameras and lenses were very well made, and none of them is going to give you a dramatic quality edge over another analogous system. To do that you need a significantly bigger neg. It's that simple.

 

[Sirius Glass]

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.

Especially when they are going to trade in what they bought and buy a Hasselblad anyway.

 

[frank]

Hasselblad is a great camera/camera system, but it is not the answer for everyone. I have 2 bodies and 4 lenses, but also use other MF cameras. (Though not a Pentax 67.)

 

[Roger Cole]

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.

Sure. Then start adding the non-80mm lenses.

It's like Motorola in radio, or Apple in computers, and many others where you pay for the brand more than the product, "You CAN buy better, but you CANNOT pay more!"

 

[DREW WILEY]

Some of the Rolleis are even more expensive than Hassies, and also use top-dollar Zeiss lenses. I've been around em enough to know that
the more bells n' whistles a camera has, the more things that can go wrong. But that old SL66 did have a tilt feature. I'd rather have the
simplicity and reliability of the P67 system. I've had my share of opportunities to buy upper-end Hassies at big discounts from collector/snob types who never even shot them and were trying to get a bit of that "investment" back. I've never cared much for the square format or boxy shape of 6x6 systems. But to each his own. Taking good pictures has more to do with the person behind the lens than the brand of camera itself.

 

[fastw]

Never went back to Blad after trying P67. Much bigger neg, better handling, cheaper, much easier to focus for close up portraits and remember, AE with P67II. I must admit though, the Blad may more reliable.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

The only really good way to decide between them is to put them in your hands. If you can take a trip to mainland Asia or even over to the Big Island of Australia, where you can put your hands on one of each in the same shop (or at least on the same day in two different shops), then you'll have a much easier time deciding between them. You won't go WRONG with either - they're both fully capable cameras that have been used by countless professionals to make first-rate images that have been published on the covers of innumerable magazines over the last 50 years. I seriously doubt any magazine editor or ad director ever met with a photographer and said, "If you're going to shoot with a Pentax 67, you're fired" or "If you want the job, you better use a Hasselblad". The only thing they cared about was, did the images delivered by the photographer meet the spec.

The Hassy is more naturally shot waist-level. The Pentax wants to be used eye-level. The Pentax feels more like a 35mm SLR on HGH. The Hassy feels different. You really need to hold each of them in your hands and play with them, ideally shoot a roll or two and see the results you get before you commit to buying. That's the only way you'll know which one is right for you. Dozens of opinionated internet gasbags bloviating about their preference is only worth the paper it's printed on. At best, online opinions can point you in a general direction ("the Pentax/Hasselblad has a feature I require/can't stand, etc"). But it's still your decision and your money. Listen here long enough and you'll get every medium format camera made recommended to you, and probably even a sales pitch for 4x5.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The Hassy is more naturally shot waist-level. The Pentax wants to be used eye-level.

I use a PME 41 metering prism on my Hasselblad and it handles like a slightly larger 35mm camera.

 

[Slixtiesix]

If you should chose the Pentax, make sure it already has the mirror lock up!

 

[DREW WILEY]

With a prism finder at eye level I find the P67 much more ergonomic than any of the box-shaped cameras like Hassy, but there is also an
excellent chimney finder as well as a pop up hood with central magnifier available too. Son in this respect, you can make most of these systems behave analogously. No big deal. But that big P67 prism is a lot heavier than most, and is much of what contributes to the overall reputation of "clunkiness" to the system. With respect to mirror-lockup, I consider it a "must" feature, and it is present on all but very old
P67 cameras. Anytime the mirror can hit the roof before the shutter curtain closes, you need it. I don't know exactly at what point this occurs, but I'd guess any exposure longer than 1/60th sec. But you won't be able to handhold this big a camera at slow speeds anyway; so for all practical purposes, you use a tripod and mirror-lock for almost everything else.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Yes, the mirror lock-up is the deal maker or breaker. Underline it in red. Don't fall for the old Asahi-Pentax / Honeywell 6x7 bodies without it. Even the old 6x7 bodies invoke a lot of vibration from mirror and shutter whack. Photographers saying they hand-hold the 67 at 1/15 second are having you on. OK, let's see their pics enlarged to a metre to prove the "my photos are always sharp handheld" joke! Get used to the 67 virtually living on a tripod for the best results. I swear by the quality of the imaging, never mind about this fabled, mythical "industry standard" being Hasselblad <*woot!?*>...

 

[Hatchetman]

MLU:I never use it. Tripod? nah. If you want to be encumbered by all this stuff go 4x5. If you want great sharp amazing photos, get a Pentax 6x7.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

MLU: use it every time with 500CM. Tripod too. Many tests show huge difference. Otherwise handheld I use my 35mm gear. Hassy lenses too good to compromise anything.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

MLU:I never use it. Tripod? nah. If you want to be encumbered by all this stuff go 4x5. If you want great sharp amazing photos, get a Pentax 6x7.

Yes, get a Pentax 6x7. With a tripod.

 

[Sirius Glass]

MLU: use it every time with 500CM. Tripod too. Many tests show huge difference. Otherwise handheld I use my 35mm gear. Hassy lenses too good to compromise anything.

I have never used the mirror lock up on Hasselblad or any camera except the Minolta. The early Rokkor f/4 21mm lens extended past the mirror because it did not have a retrofocus. None of my night exposures ever needed the mirror lock up.

The column shadows are from street lights on the traffic circle.

 

[Slixtiesix]

Night exposures are different because they are long enough to allow the vibration to settle down. If the camera shakes during the first second of an exposure that is 1-5 minutes long, it does not effect the image at all. Mirror lock up is more essential with shorter exposures. I use it whenever possible.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

For landscapes, I use mirror lockup 100% of the time (actually, it's pre-release: it closes shutter, stops down aperture, raises mirror, opens baffles).

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I use a PME 41 metering prism on my Hasselblad and it handles like a slightly larger 35mm camera.

Even with the prism on the Hassy (which is not something the OP indicated an interest in - he even mentioned the availability of a WLF for the Pentax!), the square-ness changes the dynamic so it's not so 35mm-ish. And to correct my earlier assertion about the Pentax 67, it handles like a MUCH larger 35mm SLR, not a slightly larger 35mm SLR.

 

[wiltw]

Night exposures are different because they are long enough to allow the vibration to settle down. If the camera shakes during the first second of an exposure that is 1-5 minutes long, it does not effect the image at all. Mirror lock up is more essential with shorter exposures. I use it whenever possible.

^
Proven fact via a published test conducted by a major photo monthly decades ago (I forget if it was Popular Photography or Modern Photography) . SLR mirror vibrations most affecting the exposure were in the range of (about) 1/8 - 2 sec. and the Olympus OM-1 was the least prone to mirror vibrations at the time, due to the built in dampening.

 

[Alan Gales]

And to correct my earlier assertion about the Pentax 67, it handles like a MUCH larger 35mm SLR, not a slightly larger 35mm SLR.

Yeah, any 6x7 camera is going to be big. The wooden handle grip helps with ergonomics though.

My friend with the Pentax kept saying my RZ was too big (due to it being a 7x7 with revolving back) but I felt my RZ handled better with the L grip than his Pentax. My friend sure didn't think so. I have also read where a few people could not warm up to hand holding a Hasselblad. Like you recommended earlier, it would be nice if the OP could get his hands on some of these cameras. What feels ergonomic to some doesn't to others.