Shel, the two things I love about the 501 are the 6x6 format and interchangeable backs. The idea of interchangeable back 6x6 camera is so appealing to me I'm thinking about taking a gamble shelling out the cash for a Kiev 88 which is basically a Hassleblad 1000 clone. The 67 is a great camera but the versatility of having a camera on a tripod and being able to throw on a Polaroid back is just unbeatable.
Evan From: "Shel Belinkoff > Within the next six months to a year I'd like to begin using a medium > format camera for a long-term project that's been in the back of my mind > for a while. I've somewhat narrowed the choices down to the following > cameras: > > Hasselblad 501 > Mamiya 7 or 7II > Rolleiflex TLR > Pentax 67 and variants > and maybe a Fuji 6x9 > > Here's my thinking, your thoughts and suggestions are welcome and > encouraged. > > I like the 2� format for both its shape and because I don't have to > rotate the camera for horizontal or vertical framing. I like looking > down into the viewfinder as much as using the camera like a 35mm camera. > > The 'blad interests me because it's a very complete system with a lot of > forward and backward compatibility, the lenses are excellent, the camera > seems to be durable and well-built, and it's not too big and > cumbersome. The downside is that it's expensive and can sometimes be a > bit finicky, but the all manual bodies are pretty simple things. > > The Mamiya is of interest because it offers a nice sized negative in a > relatively small and lightweight package. I like the viewfinder, but am > limited, it seems, by one viewing position - eye level. > > The Rolleiflex fascinates me because it's a classic 2� box, unassuming > and simple, well-built, and reasonably easy to carry around. The down > side is that it doesn't offer interchangeable lenses, and the lens > options are limited. The viewfinder is less than stellar, but that can > be modified. > > The Pentax 67 seems interesting, although it seems huge in comparison to > the 'blad, and noisy as well. Admittedly, my experience with it is > limited only to handling a couple in a camera shop. The price/value > relationship seems to be good, and there are certainly enough lens > choices. Does the beast have a viewfinder option that I can look down > into, or does the camera have to be placed to the eye for all shots? > Needing a battery to operate the mirror seems strange, and I don't think > I like the idea on the face of it, but perhaps I can be convinced to > embrace the concept. Since this is the pentax list, and there are a few > 67 users here, what are the weak points of the system, problems I should > look out for? And what are the differences between the early and late > models? > > There's an early (late seventies) Fuji 6x9 that offers a few > interchangeable lenses which intrigues me mostly for its negative size, > and while I like the square format I also like that nice, perfect > rectangle offered by a 6x9. Downside is that it's only an eye-level > camera, lenses are few, and it's old, making parts and repairs somewhat > difficult. > > I think that my choice will probably come down to the 'blad, one of > which I almost bought earlier this year, or the Pentax 67. So, what've > y'all got to say? > -- > Shel Belinkoff - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
