Am I on the right track...Pentax 67?

Brad Bireley · Jun 14, 2010

I was thinking about selling my Mamiya m645 1000s with 45, 55, 80, 150, & 210 along with my crown graphic with ektar 127 & rodenstock geronar 210. In their place I'm thinking about buying a Pentax 67 setup. I know I will not miss the m645. I'm not sure about the 4x5. Even though I've only shot maybe 8 sheets during the last year. Any opinions on the Pentax 67?

PhotoJim · Jun 14, 2010

It's big but it's good. The negatives are significantly larger than the 6x4.5 you're used to but significantly smaller than your Crown Graphic can manage.

The movements of 4x5 are what distinguish it, in my opinion. That's something you can't replicate on the Pentax. Then again, the Pentax is a lot easier to use.

herb · Jun 14, 2010

Pentax 67??

I have several lf cameras, and I always use a tripod. That said, my 67II is a lot of fun. We were in the mountains last week near a big paper mill, and I got some great night shots with the 67 using the auto exposure. I think the portablility vs the LF is the thing. I don't do very much handheld shots as i primarily do landscape and architecture.

Brad Bireley · Jun 14, 2010

I use a tripod almost all the time with my m645, so I would do the same with the 6x7. Also, I have not used the movements with my 4x5. I think I might shoot more with the 4x5 to just make sure I can do without it.

Rick A · Jun 14, 2010

I think you should dump the 645(35mm on steroids) for the much larger negative size. However, you should keep the Crown Graphic. I've always wanted a Pentax 67, now I want the 67II.

Jeff Searust · Jun 14, 2010

Pentax is nice-- but why not just move into a Mamiya RB or RZ?

Brad Bireley · Jun 14, 2010

Had a RB & did not like the depth of view scale.

Shawn Rahman · Jun 14, 2010

I have both - a Mamiya Pro TL system with 3 lenses (45, 80, 150); and the Pentax 67 with two lenses (90, 165). The above posters who mentioned the larger negative/chrome size are correct; it is a significant upgrade, particularly if you shoot E-6 like I do. Properly exposed 67 chromes are something to behold when you have a good loupe to match.

IMHO, the Mamiya lenses are sharper. If you shoot your 645 handheld at all, you will miss the portability with the Pentax. I have tried to shoot with the Pentax handheld, and even using the MLU and relatively higher speeds, it is quite challenging to get pinpoint sharpness. So it is basically a tripod only deal.

Both are wonderful systems, but even though I think the Mamiya lenses are finer, I have not used the Mamiya since I got the Pentax. For me, the tradeoff benefits of the 67 framesize makes all the difference in the world.

bblhed · Jun 14, 2010

I have a 6X7 and I really like it, it takes wonderful photos with as much or as little depth of field as you want, and focus so sharp you could almost cut yourself. There is plenty of resolution for cropping, and it might just be me, but I think the colors look better, it may just be that I shoot crappy 35mm film so don't take my word on the color thing.

You may hear complaints about shake, but I have never even put mine within less than 3 feet of a tripod and I have only had a problem once with 160 film indoors at night without a flash. Generally with a 6X7 if your photos are blurred, you moved it is not the mirror. Don't blame the tool.

Also contrary to what you might hear, it does not weigh a ton, it just starts to feel like that after you carry it around in your hands for a while. This is not a camera you want to just get and go hiking with, you will get used to it, but it may take time, I was out in the woods hiking with mine within a few weeks, your actual mileage may vary. If you are carting that Crown around, the Pentax will be slightly more compact, I don't know about weight difference between the Crown and the Pentax.

If you do get the Pentax I highly recommend the hand grip, the strap lugs, and a good strap for it, you might think you don't need them, but trust me you do.

You may want to keep that Crown Graphic a little longer, or until you can replace it with a 4X5 field camera, you may miss that big negative.

JonPorter · Jun 17, 2010

I have a love-hate relationship with my Pentax 67. It is a beautifully made camera with sharp optics that produce wonderful images. And it can be used hand-held without much difficulty. The challenge for me is to compose using every bit of the 7cm width when shooting. This is difficult since only about 90% of the frame is visible in the viewfinder. I find a lot of my shots are more 6x6 than 6x7! Also, changing film is slower and more tedious than on any other 120 camera I've used. I really miss the convenience of the film inserts on my other 120 SLRs. Actually, nowadays I mainly use the 6x7 lenses on my Pentax 645n, which I consider the best 120 camera I've ever owned. But I'll never sell my 67!

MFstooges · Jun 17, 2010

I love pentax 67 but there are some cons. I bought a P67, love everything on this camera except the dim viewfinder. It is dimmer than most 35mm VF and I had a hard time to focus. I sold it and buy a P67II. Absolutely love it! I feel the VF is smaller than older model but way brighter. Plus it has matrix and spot metering capability. I'm a small guy and do not have large hand but never have problem with P67 vibration so far.
I took this picture with P67 and 55mm f4 lens handheld at 1/60. Can still see the seam on the fabric.

Nathan

luvcameras · Jun 21, 2010

Pentax 67 equipment ( like other MF equip ) is dirt cheap and the results can be stunning. I loved my set up and it used it for about 10 years. The lenses, almost across the board, are excellent. The camera is easy to use. Yes, its a bit big and you do need to be careful about mirror shake/slap, but I used to use the camera with 165/2.8 and 400 speed film handheld all the time. I wrote a page on the Pentax 67 lenses years ago...see Dead Link Removed

Good luck

Dan

polka · Jun 21, 2010

90% of total surface is not so dramatic : it means a little more than 1mm on each side ; compared with the huge 56x72 frame dimensions, in my opinion it's negligible (somehow like 53x69). The issue may be that you don't see well the four corners of the image from not near enough to the eyepiece ? Are you wearing glasses ? I could not view full frame with my glasses, so I had the eyepiece stricly corrected for my sight to be able to frame full view with my "naked" eyes.

Paul

michaelbsc · Jun 21, 2010

For 6x7 I've just started assembling a Koni-Omega kit. Rangefinder, not an SLR. I believe that there are fewer options available for the Koni-Omega, but I do like rangefinders better myself. Just a personal preference.

Robert Hall · Jun 21, 2010

I used a set of 67II's for years. With the mirror lockup my 6x7 neg images were confused for images created with a 4x5 negative. Quite nice.

I loved the 45mm wide angle lens the most.

timtheskeetshooter · Jun 21, 2010

Pentax 6x7

I have a few of these giant SLRs and shoot them more than anything.

Pentax SMC lenses are second to few (in my opinion). The 6x7 neg will give you sharper images over the smaller 120 formats.

Yes, you can shoot a 67 by hand! I shoot the 67 mostly by hand on the street and during journalistic type work.

It does take some time to learn how to load film on the fly. Mirror lockup is a must if you shoot slower than 1/60. I heavy tri-pod is needed, for example, a Bogen 3036 with a 3047 head.

Great Fun!

I was asked once on the street how many mega-pixels the camera was. I told the guy 500, but it only holds 10 pictures per memory chip. I proceeded to show the person a roll of film. I got the deer in the head lights look in return. :confused:

Cheers!

TIM

apconan · Jun 21, 2010

I'd love to hear some opinions on the 90% coverage. I am deciding between a Pentax 6x7/67/67ii, and a Mamiya RB67. Both different shooting experiences, I realize, I'd prefer the eye-level shooting of the Pentax, but the 90% coverage is off-putting.
How does the character of the lenses compare as well? I'm sure both are sharp, but is there any difference in how the images look beyond that?

Robert Hall · Jun 21, 2010

timtheskeetshooter said:
I was asked once on the street how many mega-pixels the camera was. I told the guy 500, but it only holds 10 pictures per memory chip. I proceeded to show the person a roll of film. I got the deer in the head lights look in return.

You can actually hold 21 500mp images on the 220 memory roll.

dpurdy · Jun 21, 2010

apconan said:
I'd love to hear some opinions on the 90% coverage. I am deciding between a Pentax 6x7/67/67ii, and a Mamiya RB67. Both different shooting experiences, I realize, I'd prefer the eye-level shooting of the Pentax, but the 90% coverage is off-putting.
How does the character of the lenses compare as well? I'm sure both are sharp, but is there any difference in how the images look beyond that?

I have a P67 and I am a very careful full frame composer type guy and I actually hardly notice the other 10%. I keep in mind when shooting that I can compose tight to the edges and the little extra I get is for security.
dennis

russelri · Jun 21, 2010

I've been using the Pentax 67II for some years now and it is a wonderfully built workhorse. If you don't mind the weight, it's a beauty as a field camera. The myth you can't hand hold this camera is completely untrue, I've handheld this camera without mirror lockup down to 1/60 with fast film and the images are tack sharp. I use the Pentax 67II with the 55 -100mm zoom, lens, and it can get the forearms pumped up handheld in portrait mode. Other than that, it can't beat in its class for versatility and the cost of lenses and accesories. The AE meter that is spot on. I also have Mamiya 7ii for travelling light and at times I have a constant battle over which camera take out to shoot.
A Pentax 67 MLU go for pretty cheap now on the bay and there is tons of accessories to go with it.

Am I on the right track...Pentax 67?

Advertiser

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency