The big Hasselblad vs. Pentax 67 showdown

[alex_b.]

Just yesterday my Blad died. Literally. There were times when the lens

got stuck on the body, when the batteries were empty, but this one is

pretty serious (I think). Anyway, I've had it up to there whit this

swedish gadget. Thank god I had the ancient Pentax 6x7 I bought

recently to finish my work (I do fashion for a living). This "tank"

just keeps surprising me all the time (positively, of course). I am

thinking of selling the Hasselblad and buying me another Pentax

body - the 67II. For all that have had similar problems, questions or

wishes, I compiled a list of advantages that the P67II has over

Hasselblad (the 553ELX model). However, this list is based on my

subjective needs and should be read as such.

 

Blad lenses have normal, average apertures whereas P67II has a great

wide 105/2.4 and 165/2.8 lenses. You can put a polaroid back directly

on the Blad and use it with all the lenses, but if you buy a Polaroid

camera you can even use it for other cameras (e.g. EOS). My Blad was

TTL only, P67II also has 3 autoexposure modes (great for outdoor

street shots).ALL accessories for Hasselblad are extremely expensive,

whereas P67II accessories (lenses, ext.tubes, prism finders etc etc.)

are really affordable. Blad is 120 only, P67II does 120 and 220, the

latter with 21 frames. Blad is 6x6 (yuck), Pentax has the royal 6x7

format which requires minimal cropping later. With Blad I could only

afford one body, but when buying the P67II I will also have a spare

body I bought earlier. Hasselblad is quirky to hold whereas P67II is

really elegant with the built-in grip. Blads have bayonett filter

mounts, P67II has screw mounts. Hassy does it up to 1/500, P67II up to

1/1000. Also, Hasselblad goes down to 1 sec, the P67II to 4 sec, even

to 30 sec w/AE prism. Hasselblad has no display, P67II on the other

hand informs you of the battery status and ISO setting. With Blad

lenses focusing is slooow. Pentax has one of the fastest focusing

systems I've seen. Hassy doesn't have a self-timer, P67II does (to use

with MLU). Hassy attracts more attention (and more potential thieves)

than the "uglier" P67II. Hassy uses 5 AA batteries, Pentax 67II only 2

CR123 (environmentally friendlier). If the battery dies in the Blad, I

can do NOTHING! If the battery dies in the P67II I can use the spare

body which I COULD afford earlier. Zeiss lenses have f/settings AND

shutter speeds dangerously close on the lens barrel, P67II keeps them

apart - aperture on the lens, shutter speeds on the body. Multiple

exposures with Hasselblad are complicated, P67II deals with it easily

(e.g. for multiple flash pops).

 

Phew, only one thing that Hasselblad has will be missed on the P67II -

a motor. Yes, and the leaf-shutter lenses. But Pentax focal lenghts

with leaf-shutters are tailored to please: 90mm for those

person + environment shots, 165mm for portraits and more "isolated"

shots.

 

Things which are irelevant for me are interchangeable backs, speed of

loading (I do not believe in "action" fashion shots), waist level or

prism finders (- both have both) and weight.

 

Ah yes, as you can see I probably will buy a Pentax 67II.

 

What about Mamiya, you ask? That's just another story.

[dougfromtumwater]

Hi Alex

As a Hasselblad user (501CM), and as a photo hobbyist for close to 30

years, I wish you good luck on your switch to Pentax. I have seven

observations concerning your opinions to switch which may or may not

prompt second thoughts: 1) Hasselblad can use 220 film because they

have A220 film backs. 2) The square 6X6 format has many advantages,

weither cropped later or kept as a square print or slide. I think the

6X6 or 6X7 format is a subjective aesthetic for many of us. 3) I have

never had a jam or a lens get stuck on my 501 and the Hasselblad

equipment feels very robust to me (I grew up on Nikon F's and F3's

which are good little hammers in their own right). 4) The P67II is a

real big boy and I don't think the term "elegant" fits that camera in

a hold holding situation (I could see that term applying well to a

Leica M6). I've heard that P67I's & II's are happier on a tripod with

the MLU always in use. 5) I like having the aperature and shutter

speeds on the lens barrel. I don't have to shift my eyes to see the

contols and the spacing is fine for my fingers. 6) I don't have a

motor on my 501CM either, and I don't have to worry about batteries at

all! 7) Hasselblad is expensive but when you do sell your system, to

buy the P67II, I am sure you will enjoy the superior resale value

which used Hasselblad equipment carri

[davidgarth]

If most of your pictures are cropped to a rectangle, you might be very happy with the new Pentax 645n. Very reliable, great lenses, selectable exposure modes, auto focus if neeeded, and a quick motor drive.

[chris___10]

Hey, I think you are on the right track. I bought a Hasselblad, and quickly decided it wasn't for me. I couldn't afford anything other then a normal lens (I am a student), I don't like the 6x6 format (it is a waste of film.....why not crop in the camera!) and it just didn't feel right. Now I have a Pentax 67, 135macro, and the 55f/4. I am really starting to like this simple two lens setup. I agree with every point you made. And yeah, a Blad can use 220, but for the price of a 220 back new, you can get a second P67 body used. Hasselblad is a nice, though overpriced, system if it fits your style. For fashion, I think the Pentax would be prefect, which is why a lot of fashion photographers use it. Sure, it has a slow synch speed, but that can be dealt with in any situation except fill flash, and for that, there are the LS lenses. I say go for it, get the Pentax.

[alex_b.]

Just one thing here to clear the confusion - when I said Hasselblad was 120 only and Pentax 67II was 120 and 220 I ment that with ONE SINGLE back.

[djphoto]

This just one more case of different strokes for different folks -- or better, different answers for different questions. Just as Pentax 6x7 is the right answer to Jeff's questions, the Hasselblad was the right answer for mine. I owned the Pentax for about 12 years and respect it greatly as the premier field camera. However, for commercial studio work, it is a pain to use because Polaroids must be taken of just about every setup. With the H-blad, I just switch backs. With the Pentax, I must have a dedicated body for Polaroids which must be placed on the tripod, the proper lens attached, and test exposure(s) made. Then the dedicated body must be removed from the tripod, replaced with a body loaded with the appropriate film, the lens switched over, and focus and framing fine-tuned. At the point, the art director says, "Y'know, I think I really need to see another Polaroid..."

[dave_wilson1]

Hi Alex, in some ways I can appreciate your dilema but this really isn't all that unusual of a situation. The FIRST thing that should be leading your decision is your creative energy. If 6x7 is for you and you prefer to express yourself in that format, and are happy with the Pentax, as you own one, THEN go for it. Aside from a small amount of 35mm, I shoot all square, I see square and I think square, then I crop or print what I want out of my square. My bodies are all mechanical hand-wind 500 series. I would NOT own a battery body, CAN"T stand them. My Bronicas that I owned previously for 12 years were also square except for one 645 ETRS which I quickly sold after I found the square was for me. As far as flash sync of 30th, this is only a MINOR inconvinience which can be overcome with good technique, problem is many folks are TOO LAZY to worl the 30th properly. By the way, many of my Blad shots are taken at a 30th or lower, so I could care less about this for the most part. Like I said, this is a question of how you see ALL cameras break. Good Luck!

[peter_hughes]

I have both a Hassy 500C/M and a Pentax 6x7 and I find that they compliment each other beautifully. I have a 150mm f/4 Sonnar "permanently glued" to the Hassy; I consider it my portrait camera. Right now I'm only shooting with the 45mm f/4 SMC Takumar, though I plan on acquiring another lens as soon as my budget allows. I don't care for the new series of these cameras; like D. Wilson above, I don't like cameras with batteries, let alone auto-everything. I compromise with the Pentax because, well, that's the only way it comes. Don't shoot Polaroid so that's not an issue for me. Don't shoot fill flash so that isn't an issue either. I'm not crazy about the 6x6 square, but I recently put together a sample book of my work and found, much to my surprise, that there were an awful lot of squares in it. I'm a purist at heart so I don't really crop, though sometimes I'll tighten the composition a bit. But I rarely, if ever, change from square to rectangular or vice versa.

 

This is a rambling post. Must have my espresso and get into the darkroom. I have some beautiful squares to print.

 

http://www.ravenvision.com/rvapeter.htm

[andreas_carl]

"Hasselblad is quirky to hold whereas P67II is really elegant with the built-in grip." Huh - are you serious??? For me it's the opposite, Hassies are great to hold and there is nothing as satisfying as seeing the final image on an acute matte screen. The Pentax, even with the grip just is too klunky for me. Another real cool thing about Hassie is that all lenses I own (from 38 mm Biogon to 250 CF) take the same diameter filter! If I want to take rectangular shots, I go "the full way" and take either my Fuji GW690 or Fuji GSW690. These two rangefinders complement my Hasselblad system perfectly and I am ready to do almost any job that may come up!

[andrew booth]

Alex,

<p>

You're actually contradicting what you were saying only last week about the Hassy: <i>"Hasselblad 553ELX - it is like exact opposite - it almost anatomically :-) fits in your palm and is a joy to use"</i> (in <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=000VDC">Calling All Pro's...handheld work with RZ67</a>).

<p>

I'm not trying to pick holes in your posting, but as you correctly stated 'this list is based on my subjective needs'. I'm sure MFD readers will read it in that way. Hasselblad produces a fabulous range of equipment which fulfils a great range of photographic requirements, and represents the ideal camera to many (but obviously not to you!).

<p>

I'm also not keen to have a Hasselblad v Pentax flame war start. Perhaps this thread will disappear soon...

[tim_brown]

The Hassey 500 series and the P67 are like apples and oranges. Seems silly to me to try to rate one over the other. What percentage of owners even have the talent to approach the potential of either of these fine cameras?

[colm boran]

While it may be true you can buy another P67 body for the price of a Hasselblad back, that also means you have to carry those monster bodies around with you. For hiking and shooting landscapes (and fitting everything into a carry on bag including clothes for a week) I'll take a Hasselblad with two or three film backs over two or three P67s any day!

[chris___10]

Colm Boran,

While the P67 is deffinetly heavier in the 3 body config. vs. a blad with a body and three backs, the poster specifically said weight is not an issue. He is shooting fashion, not landscapes. I have used both systems for landscape photography, and while the Hasselblad is a fair amount lighter, I still prefer my Pentax 67. I only cary one body, and when I had the Blad, I carried an extra back for a while untill I found I had no real need for it. I very rarely find myself in a situation where I need to change film mid-roll when shooting landscapes. That is just my experience though, I know many of yours will vary.

 

Anyway, the weight isnt a issue in this case.

[alex_b.]

Dear Andrew Booth!

Thank you for your mentioning, but if you read carefully you would see I am NOT contradicting myself.

Last week's posting about Hassy fitting almost anatomically was ment ONLY COMPARED TO MAMIYA RZ!

The new P67II is even easier to hold because of the built-in grip. With Hasselblad, you hold the

camera from underneath, with P67II from the side. Hassy DOES fit almost perfectly in one's palm,

but P67II represents the "traditional" 35-mm holding principle, which is BY MY OPINION better for

eye level work than "cube" cameras.

 

Hassy also IS a joy to use from the operational point of view, I never said it isn't, but it just

kept disappointing me at various occasions where my P6x7 did great.

 

It was not at all my intention to start a war between P67 and Hassleblad users, just to spawn a

creative and thoughtful debate which will show "future generations of browsers" what to make of this

artificial problem.

 

Many greetings!

[alan_dale]

Why limit ourselves to just Hasselblad or Pentax 67? Why not consider the Kiev 60 --- a camera that seems to have the disadvantages of BOTH systems? It has no interchaneable magazines like the Pentax 67 (as Hasse purists always point out about the Pentax) and is limited to the square aspect ratio (as Pentax-o-philes always want to say about the Hasse). Of course, it costs a fraction of EITHER Pentax or Hasselblad.<p>

Seriously, this is an apples and oranges comparison that might seem really important when you are standing in the camera shop with the checkbook in your hands, but otherwise doesn't seem to matter that much. I say, buy what your friends buy --- that way you can borrow and loan lenses, etc., among people whom you trust. I myself bought one of the two cameras listed in this comparison, but could have just as easily bought the other --- no regrets. There is always going to be something better coming along --- if I buy the Hasse, I will be told I need the 6x7 aspect ratio of the Pentax. If I buy the Pentax, I will be told I need the interchaneable backs of the Mamiya. If I buy the Mamiya, I will be told I need the movements/perspective control of the Linhof. If I buy the Linhof, I will be told it is too expensive and I could have bought a dozen Kievs for a fraction of the price. If I buy the Kiev, I will be told that the camera does not have the build quality or reliability and I should have bought Hasselblad...<p>

[paulrumohr]

I've been using the P67II for a year now and have noticed a few small things

that have me interested in possibly switching to Hassy.

 

I like handholding cameras. I shoot fashion too. I don't ever think I've ever

gotten a shot that didn't look even just a little posed when I've been on tripod.

So I bought the 67.

 

The P67 camera is fine hand held for a short while, but on long sessions my

shoulder begins to hurt. P67s are really really heavy. And while it has a grip, I

think it might be likened to holding a shot-put up to your face all day.

 

IMHO, the problem is that if you're really into the decisive moment, you're

going to try keep the P67 close to your eye for as long as possible to catch it

and this doesn't help reducing fatigue. An ELX style body with W/L is seems a

lot easier to hold for long periods.

 

Also, when you wind the lever on P67, the camera will jerk forward a little and

you will lose a fraction of a moment as the camera tips forward slightly and

then resettles to a shooting position. Not so bad, but a motordriven Hassy

stays on the subject pretty well while the camera advances the film for you.

 

The flash sync is really limiting. No fill. Reflectors, Scrim Umbrellas,

Butterflies, and 12X12 overhead silks? I'm glad you have the production

budgets, assistants and grip trucks to accompany that Pentax body! Fill flash

ain't so bad with some warming and pulled back so it's not too obvious.

 

And polaroid. Now we all know WE don't need it, but try explaining that to the

CLIENT who is asking for one. (OK, Mr. Client stand here and look at this.

Great- now just imagine that on film, sir!)

 

Alex B. how about trading cameras?

 

Paul Rumohr

[michael_heal]

<p>Paul,</p>

<p>Experiment with a 45 degree prism finder on an ELX (or similar). It makes the camera surprisingly easy to hold, almost as easy as does the waist-level finder, because the camera can be held in a very comfortable position. In addition, it is faster to use because there is no magnifier to flip up and down for critical focusing.</p>

<p>In his original post, Alex raised some valid points, principally relating to the fact that Hasselblad is not a great system if you can afford only the basic camera. However, I think most people would find the Hasselblad much easier to hold. Not only is it much smaller and lighter, but there is no need to turn it on its side. Reliance of the ELX-style models on the ubiquitous AA battery is a non-issue for most people.</p>

[brad_farwell]

For the sake of the archive, though this thread is long gone, I thought I'd mention the Hassy CW and CXi, which both take the new grip/winder CW, a beautiful piece of work which solves your hand position problem while giving you a winder w/ remote. A CW/winder, 45 or 90 metered prism, and your hassy is a lot like the pentax. If you really like the 67, perhaps a 645 back on the hassy would be an option.

 

though yes, that whole price thing is a pain in the tuckus. ;)

 

(I'm saving up to replace my yashica mats myself)

[philip_tilton]

I have no interest in convincing anyone that he/she should not be happy with his/her present equipment. I suspect that these postings are useful to people contemplating a purchase and wondering what equipment will best suit their needs.

 

I owned a P67 (not a P67II) for a number of years. I bought it primarily because it was an easy transition for me to move from a 35mm SLR to a "Nikon F on steriods" (the P67). I did not consider a Hasselblad at that time because it seemed so foreign to my limited experience in operating cameras.

 

Eventually, however, I decided not to retain my P67 for the following reasons. Most of my work was (and remains) in black and white landscape photography, necessitating the use of a tripod. The P67 is difficult to operate in vertical/portrait orientation on a tripod. The absence of interchangable film magazines prevented me from applying the zone system to film development. Notwithstanding the P67 mirror lock-up device, I worried about blurring caused by camera movement resulting from the heavy P67 shutter. (I'm not sure that ever happened, however.) I never regarded the P67 as a camera conducive to handheld photography either. The extremely loud mirror slap and attendant vibration were annoying, to say the least.

 

I bought a Hasselblad and learned to make square prints from the square negatives. I agree with the other commentators that it makes no sense to carefully compose a photograph only to be compelled to crop out information in the print. I've come to appreciate the square print and have no problem composing in squares.

 

I don't view my Hasselblad (its a 503cx) as a suitable camera for handheld photography. It is perfect, however, for any photography on a tripod. Yes, it is very expensive, and the lenses are outrageously so, but the lens quality is unparalled. I would also like to note that the Pentax 67 lenses are very good and are much more reasonably priced.

 

I eventually traded in my P67 for a Mamiya 7II. I did so because the Mamiya 7 is perfect for handheld photography: big, razor sharp negatives from a surprisingly light and easy to focus and hold camera. There is no mirror to slap up and down and all the lenses have leaf shutters.

 

I hope this is helpful.

[gene crumpler]

I own both and like both. The pentax (2 bodies) for working where I don't have to carry the camera very far and the hassie for extensive travel on foot. 16x20 prints side-by-side favor the 67 format. The hassie is faster camera to operate.

[dennis_ng]

<p>Flash forward to 2010 May. I read this posting of interest as I am struggling with what to do with my cheap 2nd hand Hassey systems with 4 lens (50/100/150/250). I just built a system of Pentax 67 with 3 lens initially (55/90/200). I am going to have 4 more coming (90LS/100macro/165LS/300nonEDIF). </p>

<p>The issue with Pentax in my case is that wide open it is not that good. Hassey seemed has no issue at all. (Someone has posted some figure somewhere and Pentax is ok when in f8-f11 even compared with Carl Zeiss lens but not wide open. Not even F4.) <br>

Handholding is not an issue for both. I can do 1/15 occasionally and some works and some does not.<br>

I guess one may want to have a Pentax 645N2 and then save enough for Pentax 645D to use both 67 and Carl Zeiss lens. For 645N2 and if you use Velvia 50, who know that you are not using 67 or 500C/M. The lens rules. <br>

Would test this hypothesis. <br>

P.S. Using D300 seems that P67 lens especially the 55F4 is quite good, btw.</p>