Pentax 645D vs Hasselblad CFV39 back

[magicord]

<p>I have almost the whole set of Hassy V lenses + 905 SWC + several 500 series body. I also have many Pentax 67 lenses. If you were me, would you choose Pentax 645D or CFV39, and why?</p>

<p>Thanks.</p>

[magicord]

<p>Sorry, typo error. Should reads 500 seriese bodies.</p>

[leighb]

<p>I have a CFV-39 and am very pleased with it. BTW, it won't work with any SWC due to optical issues.</p>

<p>I'm not familiar with the Pentax equipment, so I can't recommend one brand over the other.</p>

<p>- Leigh</p>

 

[sumo_kun]

<p>I'm not sure about Hasselblad stuff but the 67 lenses you have will work on the 645D but are not really an optimal choice. You really want 645 lenses. Image quality wise, I hear good things about the 645D.</p>

[ondebanks]

<p>This drastically depends on what and how you shoot.</p>

<p>If you need DSLR-like handling (quick response, autofocus, exposure modes, generous LCD screen) and envelope-pushing performance (high ISO, low-noise long exposures, fast lenses)? Then the Pentax 645D.</p>

<p>Otherwise, if you're happy using your Hassy kit pretty much like you've always used it (changeable viewfinders, slowish, manual, and not really being able to tell how good the shots are until you get home): the CFV39.</p>

<p>One other option to consider - a sort of halfway ground - would be a H series Hasselblad with the CF lens adapter for your V lenses. The H4D-40 uses the same sensor as the Pentax 645D.</p>

[stp]

<p>Ray gave a good summary regarding the bodies. I'm wondering how the "old" Pentax 645 lenses are going to fare on the new digital body. Preliminary reports are very favorable. I have a fairly complete set of Pentax 645 primes and zooms, and I've been waiting for the 645D for about 5 years. Pentax has produced a new 55mm normal lens for the digital body, and I want to assume it will be optimized for that body. I understand a new wide angle lens will also be produced, which is necessary because of the multiplication factor of the sensor. I don't doubt that other lenses designed with the 645D in mind will follow. </p>

<p>At the same time, I've been using a Hasselblad 501cm and 4 lenses (55, 80, 120, 180, all cfi I believe) for the last several months, and I absolutely love that system -- it's simply a lot of fun to use and the transparencies are spectacular. Considering costs, ease of metering, and wider range of lenses, I'll probably go for the Pentax 645D, but I'll keep the Hasselblad for shooting film. When that lotto ticket finally shows up, I could consider the CFV39, but that might be digital overkill.</p>

[tim_bosley1]

<p>Your obviously comfortable with the Hasselblad system - so the CFV39 is the best choice to take advantange of the fantastic lens system you have at hand rather than purchasing new lenses and body...<br>

Further the CFV39 back can be had for less than half of the Pentax and opens up upgrade possibilities in the future. <br>

Both systems have pros and cons, but I do not subscribe to the Pentax being the best choice for anyone wanting to go toward medium format digital.</p>

<p>Good luck,</p>

 

[stp]

<p>Perhaps a CFV-39 can be purchased for $5k, but they retail for $14k and finding a used one in any condition has proven difficult.</p>

[steven_kornreich]

<p>I have a Pentax 645D now with a bunch of FA 645 Lenses, <br>

From my experience so far, <br>

Here is what works well<br>

45-85mm FA<br>

75mm FA<br>

120mm FA<br>

150mm FA<br>

200mm FA<br>

300MM FA - watch out for slow shutter speeds though because of shutter vibration <br>

400mm FA same as the 300<br>

Here are the ??? lenses<br>

45mm FA prime, no good soft..<br>

35mm FA prime, depends on sample variation and what you like to shoot, If you are a landscape kind of person who shoots at or near infinity forget about it. I have tried 2 copies and although 2/3rds of the frame is sharp depending on plane of focus, be prepared for some soft areas.<br>

I am now actually looking at a 501CM, CFV-39 back, 50,100, 150, AND 250mm Hasselblad setup.<br>

I got to test shoot on the other day, I had the 40mm CFE non IF, not good, bad ca and soft corners, 120mm CFI macro very good and the 150mm CFI very good also.<br>

I will be retesting the system again but with the 50mm CFI lens to see how that performs.<br>

If you want 40mm you have to go with the very pricey 40mm CFE/IF lens</p>

 

[pbarnes]

<p>Steven wrote</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>(Pentax 645) 35mm FA prime, depends on sample variation and what you like to shoot, If you are a landscape kind of person who shoots at or near infinity forget about it. I have tried 2 copies and although 2/3rds of the frame is sharp depending on plane of focus, be prepared for some soft areas.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I have read rave reviews of this lens. What is the experience of others here?</p>