Bernd, I did use my Pentax 67 ll on a Gitzo so heavy I can hardly carry it anymore! I did have brand new lenses and though I tried everything I could think of not to have to admit to myself and my bank account that I´d made a boo boo, there was no alternative but to cut my losses. (I had the 55 and 200 lenses, if I forgot to mention that earlier.)
Hasselblad 500 cameras also have issues with mirror bounce - all such heavy objects do, it´s an unavoidable fact of both physics and life - and Hasselblad were honest enough to admit as much in their own Newsletter once and showed the difference between two shots, one with MU and the other without. But their lenses (okay, Zeiss´s lenses) never showed shutter problems converted into blur. About all that ever went wrong with them was the delayed action thinggy on the C series, which I think was discontinued on the later lenses.
But the Pentax has another, additional problem, and that´s caused by the mass of the shutter blinds. I always used the darn camera on that Gitzo, MU employed. Can you tell me what else I could have done, as you suggest one can do better when one has ´learned how to use it´? There might be a case for hand-holding, insofar as the human body might absorb some shock, but that´s only after the camera has suffered it first! Also, not on for slow shutter speeds.
With respect, bokeh counts for zilch if the edges of an intentionally crisp image are not up to an acceptable standard. In most commercial work I can think of, bokeh would be an intrusion - clients want product or subject as clear and as sharp as possible and have little interest in out-of-focus areas which would take up precious space.
Maybe I missed something in my search to convince myself that it was a great buy. Or maybe it suffered from the same flexible QC that today´s digital products all seem to do.
Ciao - Rob C
