andy_king1

<p>Stanislav,<br>

As the previous posters wrote, since the flange register distance is about 10mm shorter for the Hasselblad V than the Pentax 67, no adapters exist to mount hassy lenses on pentax 67 cameras. However, there are 2 ways to get Hasselblad lenses to work on the Pentax 67. <br>

1. You can adapt Hasselblad (or Pentacon) lenses to the Pentax 67 mount (lens mount surgery). <br>

2. You can buy a Pentax 67 (II) that has been modified with a Hasselblad mount (camera mount surgery)<br>

The second way allows you to use any Hassy lens on the Pentax 67. For the first mount surgery option, I've seen the following lenses modified: (anything over 110mm or so):<br>

Hasselblad Zeiss 110/2 F/FE (more surgery than normal)<br>

Zeiss Jena 120/2.8 (have seen these on ebay)<br>

Hasselblad Zeiss 150/2.8 F/FE<br>

Zeiss Jena 180/2.8 (wonderful bokeh but heavy)<br>

Schneider 250/5.6 (and the 150/4) for Pentacon 6<br>

Zeiss Jena 300/4<br>

etc.<br>

The second route (camera mount surgery) is much simpler and in the long run cheaper if you use many hassy lenses (no need to have lens mount surgery done on multiple lenses). You buy a Pentax 67 (II) that has been modified with a hasselblad lens mount. You see these cameras on ebay, and I've noticed that the price has gone up over the years. ($3000+). Any hasselblad V lens will mount on these modified cameras, but the thing to watch out for is lens coverage. Look at the MTF charts for each lens to see how far the coverage goes past 6x6. A few lenses cover 6x7 with no problem, namely:<br>

Hasselblad 40mm f/4 CFI IF Zeiss Distagon (supposed to be very sharp, must remove "hood" to avoid vignetting on 67)<br>

Zeiss Sonnar 100mm f/3.5 (easily covers 6x7)<br>

Zeiss 110/2<br>

Zeiss 150/2.8 and f4<br>

etc. The longer lenses typically cover 6x7. This second option allows the use of the NASA-inspired 100mm 3.5 lens, which to my knowledge cannot be altered to work on the Pentax 67.<br>

Hope this helps.</p>

<p>Hi, FYI there is annother source for buying the Burzynski ball head that avoids the high shipping costs from Isarfoto Germany. See the post by Jean Forest at the end of our <a href="http://www.websiteoptimization.com/speed/tweak/ballhead/">Pro Ball Head Review</a> article:</p>

<a href="http://www.websiteoptimization.com/speed/tweak/ballhead/">http://www.websiteoptimization.com/speed/tweak/ballhead/</a>

<p>As has been mentioned above, carbon fiber is stiffer and has a higher strength to weight ratio than aluminum or wood. I went from a Bogen 3021 to a Gitzo 1325 for my Pentax 67 II and the difference was significant. Before I "went carbon" I could feel the movement and see the blur in some slides, now with a solid ball head the vibration is much less and the pix show it. I'd say the 1325 is the minimum tripod I'd recommend for a Pentax 67.</p>

<p>If you add spikes to firmly anchor the pod in the ground, as well as use a weight hook where I hang my backpack, that increases the mass which dampens the oscillation. If you'd like to see actual measurements check out this vibration characteristics test report from Dr. Charlie Kim at:</p>

<p><a href="http://markins.com/charlie/report.html">http://markins.com/charlie/report.html</a></p>

<p>the section that shows the benefits of using your MLU is an eye-opener. It also compares different ball heads.</p>

<p>Your choice of tripod will have a greater effect than your choice of ball heads, according to Lloyd Chambers "The Sharpest Image," see my <a href="http://www.websiteoptimization.com/speed/tweak/ballhead/">Ball Head Review</a> which talks about this.</p>

<p>Kirk has recently reduced the weight of their ball heads. The BH-1 has been reduced from 2 to 1.875 lbs, I compare the different pro-level ball heads here:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.websiteoptimization.com/speed/tweak/ballhead/">Update: Pro Ball Head Review</a></p>

<p>Hi fellow photogs,</p>

<p>I've just posted an updated <a

href="http://www.websiteoptimization.com/speed/tweak/ballhead/">ball head

review</a> at:</p>

<p><a

href="http://www.websiteoptimization.com/speed/tweak/ballhead/">http://www.websi

teoptimization.com/speed/tweak/ballhead/</a></p>

<p>that compares pro-level ball heads. Many of the manufacturers have come out

with lighter versions of old or new models (like the Z1 or V2) so the article

needed a refresh. The article compares the various models on weight, max load,

height, and load to weight ratio. The hope is that people will save some time

when deciding on which ball head to buy.</p>

<p>I recommend the Sharpest Image article (pay) from Lloyd Chambers, it tests

different setups and shooting modes, and includes some surprising results for

tripod stability (compares Gitzo carbon fiber models for vibration). It appears

that the tripod causes the most vibration, while the ball head is secondary,

but still important for larger glass and cameras. Also recommend reading

the "Vibration Characteristics" pdf from Dr. Kim (free) that shows the effects

of MLU, different ball heads, and tripod bases on vibration.</p>

<p>Let me know if you have any comments on the article or suggested

additions.</p>

Yes, I missed a P67 with hasselblad mount on ebay, would love

to buy one of these. So I've seen one.

About modifying hasselbad lenses for the Pentax 67, yes this

is possible. I bought a couple from a photographer in New York.

The registration distance is such that you have to use lenses

longer than 110mm. The 110/2 just has enough room (it is a dream

lens btw). The 110/2.0 and 150/2.8 both cover 6x7 no problem.

I have some Zeiss Jena lenses as well modified for the Pentax 67.

You can have the 180/2.8 zeiss jena, the 300/4 zeiss jena modified.

I've seen both of these, i believe the 120mm zeiss jena lens can

be modified as well. Happy lens hacking!

- Andy

Ah, another Pentax 67III rumor. I've owned Pentax 67/II systems for

about 20 years and would love to upgrade to a digital version,

or one with 1/2000 of a second or higher flash sync speed. Even better one that can use film or digital backs, although I'm not sure

the sensors are there yet for a reasonable price.

If Pentax comes out with a 67III I'm sure I'd buy one, as would

many of my fellow Pentax 67 owners. I think a more realistic

goal would be to have the p645 digital that would take p67 lenses.

If Pentax says they are not in the film camera business, does that

mean a Digital Pentax 67 III? Now you are talking!

- Andy King

I too noticed a difference between Velvia 50 and 100. On a recent trip out west to Canadian Rockies I noticed that identical shots with same lens, but different film (switched from V50 to V100 no F) were definitely different. Velvia 50 held the highlights better, white clouds/snow not blown out, like they appear in V100.

Also, as other posters noticed above the greens are not quite as vivid. Most disturbingly I noticed a magenta cast to Velvia 100 (220). This was amplified when I used graduated split ND filters in the clouds with V100 (which I use a lot for landscapes). My hope is that Fuji continues to make Velvia 50, while they tweak Velvia 100 to get rid of the magenta cast, and overexposed highlights.

The good news is that Velvia 100 looks sharper and more contrasty, if such as thing were possible over Velvia 50. There is an edge to objects that I haven't seen before, and it looks cleaner to me. I suspect it will scan better too, perhaps other posted can address that. Fix the cast/highlights and I'd be happy with that extra stop.

I bracketed all shots with 1/3 stops, so exposure differences didn't matter, taking the best from each speed showed me that for my work, Velvia 50 was a better landscape film. My freezer is filling up with plenty of Velvia 50 220 now.

I like the Tiffen 2mm glass Cal-Lee graduated ND filters. They are color neutral, don't scratch like the resins, and give great results. Yes, they aren't lead-free glass but I don't see any difference in the slides/prints/viewfinder. I have the 2 stop and 3 stop medium edge graduated ND for my Lee system. Even fits over my 55-100 Pentax 67 zoom at 95mm (push-on holder). They are 4" by 5.56" I believe. I would like a 1 stop graduated ND, and 3 stop solid ND in this size and thickness, but they don't make them anymore. The 4mm is too thick (is intended for motion picture use) and expensive.

I do have a Singh-Ray 3 stop solid ND filter as well (not glass), haven't tried this one out yet, just got it.

Also, I've found that with a thicker polarizer filter (Heliopan 82mm Warm Tone Linear Kaesemann Polarizer) and my wide angle 45mm P67 lens, even the wide angle Lee adaptor ring will vignette. I had SKGrimes grind off the inner edge of the ring, now no vignetting.

- Andy

I've stocked up as well, with a bunch of pro packs of 220 Velvia 50 now in the freezer. I tried the new Velvia 100 on a recent trip. While it is sharper and seems more contrasty, it has a distinct magenta cast. I took identical scenes with both Velvia 50 and Velvia 100, and the difference is significant to my eyes.

I heard that Velvia 50 had a magenta cast in the beginning, and Fuji tweaked the emulsion. I hope Fuji does the same with Velvia 100. I've emailed the company re this, with no response so far.

- Andy King

<p>Hi all,

<p>

I wanted to let you know about a comparative review I wrote of

some pro-level ball heads at:

<p>

<a

href="http://www.websiteoptimization.com/speed/tweak/ballhead

/">http://www.websiteoptimization.com/speed/tweak/ballhead/</a

>

<p>This article compares some ball heads (Arca Swiss B1,

Markins, Kirk, RRS, Burzynski) for weight, ball head size, height,

load capacity and design. My idea was to get the latest data in

one place to make it easier for photographers to compare the

various offerings. I've talked to the manufacturers, and they were

helpful in their suggestions and making sure the data was

accurate. The new RRS ball heads and Markins heads (some

titanium) in particular are interesting.

<p>

I happen to shoot a Pentax 67 II, so I need a robust support

system, or I start to notice it on bigger enlargements. If you have

any suggestions for other heads in the same weight class let

me know.

<p>

Cheers,

<p>

- Andy King

Brad,

There are no adapter rings that I know of for zeiss 6x6 lenses, as

they have shorter flange to film plane distances.

However, some Carl Zeiss Jena lenses made for Pentacon

cameras etc. have been successfully adapted to Pentax 67

cameras. I've got a 180/2.8 CZJ I'm planning on having adapted

by zoerk, and the 120/2.8, 300/4 have also been adapted.

Anything shorter than 100-120 mm doesn't cover 6x7 adequately.

The 180/2.8 is pretty big, but is fast and has a good rep for wide

open performance. There is even a 500mm that can be adapted

but I haven't seen one.

You need a machinist experienced in adapting lenses, like

zoerk, but it usally costs more than the lens itself.

- Andy