I shoot a lot of people (studio and on location) and when I need to shoot handheld I use my Hasselblad and when I have the freedom and space I use my 4x5. Square format works often but other times I wouldn't mind a rectangular format and while I do sometimes crop my Hasselblad images, I'd rather just shoot a bigger format.
I used to shoot with an RZ67 which is a wonderful system but requires a tripod. Rangefinders won't work - I want interchangeable lenses. While I know a lot of people like the Bronica GS1, I feel like maybe a Pentax 67 is sort of the best compromise. While the big downsides are committing to one roll at a time and kind of awkward to tripod-mount in portrait orientation, the system has a lot of lens options and I believe there are 90mm and 165mm lenses with leaf shutters that will help overcome the dreadful 1/30 flash sync speed. At least last I checked, these aren't viewed as halo products with massive price markups (Mamiya 7, anyone?.
I'm sure I'll get encouragement to dive in but I'm curious if there are any systems I may be overlooking. Or... just live with my Hasselblad.
Not a lot of options for rectangular and larger than 6x6 with interchangeable lenses. If you were willing to consider 645 you'd have more options (Pentax 645 can even take P67 lenses with an adapter).
I like my Pentax 67, it really does handle like any other SLR, just bigger/heavier. I primarily shoot it handheld these days, mostly with a 35mm XPan adapter kit.
The wooden grip is a godsend for carrying it in the hand. I also have one of the cheap 3D printed right side grips, which helps a lot when shooting.
corposant wrote:
... Rangefinders won't work - I want interchangeable lenses ...
Mamiya 7! Unless it is the markup you mention further down in your post that is a dealkiller. Personally, I find 6x7 challenging, and the lack of RF coupling for some of their lenses convinced me to stick to the Mamiya 6 as an ultralight travel camera, while the Hasselblad is mostly for tripod work.
theHUN wrote:
Mamiya 7! Unless it is the markup you mention further down in your post that is a dealkiller. Personally, I find 6x7 challenging, and the lack of RF coupling for some of their lenses convinced me to stick to the Mamiya 6 as an ultralight travel camera, while the Hasselblad is mostly for tripod work.
Funny I should have phrased that better. I would like to look TTL.
A Pentax 6x7 was a camera that I avoided in the film days and continue to this day. I just don’t want to carry such a large and heavy camera. I have a Mamiya 7 and 7ii, Bronica and Fuji 645 rangefinders and the Bronica ETRSi. Of course, the downside is the rangefinder cameras is close focus and no TTL..which is irrelevant for me. That said, I do use TTL with digital medium format. I think that my favorite medium format camera is the Bronica RF645. All three lenses are quite good. You would want to make sure that you get the body calibrated for the 100mm and not the 135mm lens. Even the 100mm lens, with the widest aperture should not be used closer than 1.8m. That said, it does focus to one meter, but the rangefinder base is too small for accurate focusing at near with f/4.5, so distance is best measure for that last 0.8m. With many B&W films and modern color offerings like Portra, Ektar and E100, the 645 really holds up quite nicely. The ETRSi is the best bang for the money here and the most recent Bronica medium format SLR. It is comfortable to use, especially with the hand grip/winder and a mirrored prism. Focusing screens are also readily available and film backs are interchangeable. I think that the ergonomics here outshine the Pentax and the big Mamiya. The 6x7 with great lenses and a film like Ektar can actually exceed the resolution of the 100Mpix digital, but you need great copy/scanning equipment to get anywhere near maximum. On the other hand, the 645 copied by using my X2D and a Hasselblad 1:1 macro, might not be quite up to the X2D resolution, but it is close. Of course, the downside is the very expensive copy setup. I think that if you get top quality lab scans, or use a full frame camera to do the copy work, the 645 with the above films will push the digital copies. If you still use a wet darkroom, a top 6x7 with great lenses, like the Mamiya 7 will definitely outperform my 100Mpix digital camera.
bwcolor wrote:
A Pentax 6x7 was a camera that I avoided in the film days and continue to this day. I just don’t want to carry such a large and heavy camera. I have a Mamiya 7 and 7ii, Bronica and Fuji 645 rangefinders and the Bronica ETRSi. Of course, the downside is the rangefinder cameras is close focus and no TTL..which is irrelevant for me. That said, I do use TTL with digital medium format. I think that my favorite medium format camera is the Bronica RF645. All three lenses are quite good. You would want to make sure that you get the body calibrated for the 100mm and not the 135mm lens. Even the 100mm lens, with the widest aperture should not be used closer than 1.8m. That said, it does focus to one meter, but the rangefinder base is too small for accurate focusing at near with f/4.5, so distance is best measure for that last 0.8m. With many B&W films and modern color offerings like Portra, Ektar and E100, the 645 really holds up quite nicely. The ETRSi is the best bang for the money here and the most recent Bronica medium format SLR. It is comfortable to use, especially with the hand grip/winder and a mirrored prism. Focusing screens are also readily available and film backs are interchangeable. I think that the ergonomics here outshine the Pentax and the big Mamiya. The 6x7 with great lenses and a film like Ektar can actually exceed the resolution of the 100Mpix digital, but you need great copy/scanning equipment to get anywhere near maximum. On the other hand, the 645 copied by using my X2D and a Hasselblad 1:1 macro, might not be quite up to the X2D resolution, but it is close. Of course, the downside is the very expensive copy setup. I think that if you get top quality lab scans, or use a full frame camera to do the copy work, the 645 with the above films will push the digital copies. If you still use a wet darkroom, a top 6x7 with great lenses, like the Mamiya 7 will definitely outperform my 100Mpix digital camera.
Lastly, with the right film, great lenses and a steady hand, 35mm film can be quite good. I have a 30x40 print from an M3 and 90mm Macro-Elmar on Ektar that is tack sharp at arms length. ...Show more →
645 isn't really enough for me - I'd want to be bigger than 6x6.
theHUN wrote:
Mamiya 7! Unless it is the markup you mention further down in your post that is a dealkiller. Personally, I find 6x7 challenging, and the lack of RF coupling for some of their lenses convinced me to stick to the Mamiya 6 as an ultralight travel camera, while the Hasselblad is mostly for tripod work.
If you're allowing the Maimiya 7, you have to bring in the Plaubel Makina 67/670/67W. I really love my 670, and as much as I'd like to have an inter-changeable lens setup (especially access to the 50/4.5 on demand), I can live with my Nikkor 80/2.8 and a no-mirror-plus-meter setup.
corposant wrote:
645 isn't really enough for me - I'd want to be bigger than 6x6.
OK, understood.. Clearly, you’ve been at this for a long time, so have a good sense of what you want. That said, likely not a camera that you aren’t aware of. Given that you use 4x5, going for 6x7 makes sense.
Just don't forget that one of the reasons the 67 (or GS-1) are not as unwieldy as an RZ or 4x5 is the lack of a rotating back. If you're shooting people a lot I'd expect you're going to be holding this thing at 90 degrees a good bit to get portrait orientation...which arguably sorta creeps it back up the scale in terms of unwieldyness.
Lee Saxon wrote:
Just don't forget that one of the reasons the 67 (or GS-1) are not as unwieldy as an RZ or 4x5 is the lack of a rotating back. If you're shooting people a lot I'd expect you're going to be holding this thing at 90 degrees a good bit to get portrait orientation...which arguably sorta creeps it back up the scale in terms of unwieldyness.
You're right - it's definitely some heavy-lifting shooting vertically.
15 years ago I’d agree with you. I went back and found a receipt for a pack of Portra 160VC I bought new in 2011. It was $21.45 for 5 rolls. That same pack (“new” Portra 160) is $59.95. I would like to shoot the whole frame rather than crop and toss film unless I have to.
fjablo wrote:
The Pentax 67 is a great camera and based on what you’ve outlined, seems to be the only option that fits.
That said I question the benefit of moving to 6x7 over cropping the 6x6 negative to the same aspect ratio.
The image sizes are 56x67mm vs 48x56mm. So you can print about 17% larger at each axis, that’s nothing.
I‘d just get the frame lines on the Hasselblad tbh.
corposant wrote:
15 years ago I’d agree with you. I went back and found a receipt for a pack of Portra 160VC I bought new in 2011. It was $21.45 for 5 rolls. That same pack (“new” Portra 160) is $59.95. I would like to shoot the whole frame rather than crop and toss film unless I have to.
But how many rolls does it take to make up for the total cost of ownership of this new system? As challenging as the square format can be at times, I do love the breadth, depth, and simplicity of the Hasselblad system.
OregonSun wrote:
For me at least, the wooden grip helps a lot with vertical shooting. The grip rests on the heel of my hand, using thumb and forefinger to focus.
If you do get one, there is an old dedicated RRS plate out there that cradles the bottom, but they're hard to find.
Here's a pic of mine (on XP2), with both grips and the RRS plate, maybe it'll help you decide
What would be really helpful is a "reverse" L-bracket where it could be tripod-mounted to the right side of the camera while keeping the grip attached. There's also a focus-ring extender/attachment that looks really helpful.
corposant wrote:
What would be really helpful is a "reverse" L-bracket where it could be tripod-mounted to the right side of the camera while keeping the grip attached. There's also a focus-ring extender/attachment that looks really helpful.
The right side has the same mounting studs on the front as the left, a right side tripod plate could probably be fabricated to use those. You might be able to mod a grip to do it, you'd have to remove, reverse and reattach the keyhole plates to make it secure on the right. You'd also have to add some kind of shim for the locking screw to push against, since there is no dedicated stud for that on the right
Another option (that I may try myself), would be to fabricate a tripod mount plate that could just replace the removable wooden part of the grip. You'd have to swap back and forth for hand carry/tripod use, but the fabrication would be a lot simpler.
corposant wrote:
15 years ago I’d agree with you. I went back and found a receipt for a pack of Portra 160VC I bought new in 2011. It was $21.45 for 5 rolls. That same pack (“new” Portra 160) is $59.95. I would like to shoot the whole frame rather than crop and toss film unless I have to.
The Hasselblad is giving you two more frames per roll, so if anything it’s the more cost effective option here.
It just comes back to you giving up some image area and as I wrote above, it is *practically* irrelevant.
But hey if you want a new camera, just go for it. No need to artificially try and rationalize it. I have plenty of cameras that that I don’t need 😅
Agree with @lifeandmylens@, the 67 is such an easy medium format camera to live with. Just a big SLR with a great lens selection. It being a big SLR allows for a lot of spontaneity/flexibility, so as long as the size is manageable, you won't be disappointed with it as an all-'rounder.
