Any opinions on Pentax 67

[GLS]

The drawback with the later SMC lenses is they don't have nearly as nice focusing helicoids as the earlier lenses; too loose and easy to move IMO. Of course the optical redesigns (where they apply) more than make up for that. The SMC model of the 55mm f4 is a superb lens for example. The lack of a half stop between f16 and f22 is odd though, and occasionally a bit of an annoyance.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

The drawback with the later SMC lenses is they don't have nearly as nice focusing helicoids as the earlier lenses; too loose and easy to move IMO. Of course the optical redesigns (where they apply) more than make up for that. The SMC model of the 55mm f4 is a superb lens for example. The lack of a half stop between f16 and f22 is odd though, and occasionally a bit of an annoyance.

Well...my 55mm f4 was sold off in 2011 for two reasons. One, an annoying, persistent rattle (widely reported) and two, the stiffness of the focusing!
After that early experience, and loaning two other lenses, I was very careful to go over each and every lens I was interested in to ensure nothing rattled or was unduly stiff, and I settled on the 45mm f4.

The 90mm and 45mm lenses have a noticeably stiffer (or "slower") focusing movement than the nimble, stable touch of the 75mm f2.8AL (a design intent, it seems), together with its very light-touch aperture ring. Meanwhile, swinging to the long-ish extremeThe 165mm LS lens has a focusing movement somewhere between the two extremes -- smooth and unfussed, but that is perhaps offset by its weight (the trade-off is what tricks can be had with an LS lens beside high flash sync capability).

The rattle of the 55mm f4 (an old Distagon design) has drawn many theories and assumptions, but nobody seems to have positively identified what it is.

 

[GLS]

Odd, I can't say I've noticed a rattle with mine, and I'm pretty fussy about that sort of thing. Was yours definitely the later (i.e. last) model of the lens; the one with 8 elements?

Re: helicoid feel. I don't know then, maybe there is some variance. I have the last version of the 55mm and the 165mm f2.8, and they both have the same, fairly loose feel. My 105mm is the older model and its focusing feel is much nicer in comparison (perfectly damped). It's not quite up there with Hasselblad CFi/CFE lenses, but close.

 

[Kirth Gersen]

My 67 MLU was a total lemon. Kept firing blank frames, and my supplier and their repairer were both befuddled. I exchanged it for a more primitive 6x7, which has had absolutely no issues. Shooting with it is a totally enjoyable experience, unique in many ways, from the rudimentary, but accurate light meter to the thunderclap of a shutter. It is seriously loud. I have 2 of my target holy trinity: 55 f/4, 105 f/2.4 (both marvellous), and searching for a good value 165 LS for portraits. The images can be sublime.

Only negative is that this camera and a couple of lenses can be very heavy during a day of use. I am no weakling, but I've been quite weary after a day of shooting, and it is the one thing that keeps me from picking it up every time.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Only negative is that this camera and a couple of lenses can be very heavy during a day of use.

Do tell. My 67 kit is all of 14kg and I am no Spring chicken...

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Odd, I can't say I've noticed a rattle with mine, and I'm pretty fussy about that sort of thing. Was yours definitely the later (i.e. last) model of the lens; the one with 8 elements?

Yes, latest SMC Pentax 67 version, which came with the camera for the princely sum of $550 (!) (ex-deceased estate sale, with the liquidator describing the camera: "...a large, black and heavy camera with PENTAX on its front and 67 on the left front. No film in it. Offered with a 55mm Pentax lens..." I had to press the old codger further to get a specific 'vision' of what just was being offered. He provided further photographs and that did the trick!

Meanwhile, for most people though, knowing they were using a P67 lens with top-shelf optical performance, as the 55mm is very well known for (along with the 45mm f4, of which a few 'soft' examples exist), they would probably ignore the rattle. But me...I could not stand it!

 

[bluechromis]

I have used a 67 of kind the middle era and would say that overall is very good camera. I have heard the statements that practically forbid one to use it handheld. But I have found that it can be used handheld satisfactorily. I find that I can flip the mirror up before taking shot handheld and it reduces vibration. Yes, the quality is best on tripod, as is true of all camersa. It depends on what you are doing, if you want immaculate, perfectly detailed landscapes you want to use the tripod. But there are situations that are too dynamic or otherwise unsuited to use a tripod. I find that the "giant SLR" body shape plus prism finding is more ergonomic handheld than some medium format cameras and the meter in my prism finder is pretty accurate. I think if people think of it only as though it were a scaled down view camera that can only be used on a tripod in relatively static situations they are missing some of it's potential. The 105 mm f/2.5 lens is fast for 6 X 7 and can, IMO, create nice bokeh and shallow depth of field--if one is into that. For doing work with strobes there is a limitation of 1/30 max shutter speed unless one uses one of the leaf shutter lens. Some drawbacks: 1. My model is powered by a relatively small battery and when that goes the camera is inoperative because is an electronic shutter. The battery seems sensitive to cold and I have had it die rapidly in cold weather. I understand there is an accessory, external battery that may mitigate that problem. 2. Apart from leaf shutter trick, which I just read about, my camera is not able to make multiple exposures..

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Apart from leaf shutter trick, which I just read about, my camera is not able to make multiple exposures..

The multiple exposure facility was an optional $160 factory modification at Pentax, and a few Pentax 67 (but not earlier Pentax 6x7) cameras were released featuring this, which caused confusion because there was no attendant documention describing what the "little chrome button is for..."!

LS lenses and multiexposures are obscure in the sense of novel use, and the MO for doing so must be followed carefully to avoid jamming the camera's shutter, the leaf shutter or winding mechanism. On the camera B is selected as the "sync" speed (it is usually 1/8s or lower when syncing with an LS lens, otherwise it is 1/30s) while anything is selectable on the LS lens, which is set to LS mode. Because of the mechanical engagement of the LS lens and the camera, multiple exposures can be done without having to wind-on, so long as the LS is correctly primed for each exposure. At the end of the ME cycle, wind on, switch the P67 to any shutter speed and disable the leaf shutter.

Image: Factory-fitted ME on Pentax 67

 

[johnha]

The important thing is to know what you're in for, they are big & heavy cameras, the lenses are big (but some are reasonably light) - this will always be the case with 6x7 format SLRs. You will probably need a new bag (get a good one which will make carrying it easier) and a secure strap (and use it - the camera has few solid hand-holds without the grip). Don't believe anything you've read about not being able to handhold the camera, you can with the right technique and within certain parameters (even without MLU). It's a camera designed to be handheld and shot at eye level and is robust enough to throw over your shoulder.

They are by now old cameras, some have seen very hard pro use (probably best avoided), the earliest 6x7 without MLU are reputed to be harder to repair, the later 67ii is full of electronics for which there are now no spares, the 6x7 MLU & 67 are probably the most repairable. As mentioned the wind mechanism is a weak spot - always guide the lever back rather then letting is snap back. If you remove the metered prism, you must remove the lens before putting the prism back on - you could break the meter chain otherwise. The flash sync is only 1/30th but there are leaf-shutter lenses.

In use, if they're appropriate for your working methods, they're fabulous cameras to use, the 6x7 format is very compelling. Handholding in the usual 35mm way (left hand cradled under the lens) is best - the left hand grip gets in the way with shorter lenses.

 

[abruzzi]

the camera has few solid hand-holds without the grip.

Im'n not sure how the factory grip would work for me. It would take my left hand away from where I'd want it. (cradling the lens, so I can adjust focus and aperture.) Instead I opted for the left hand grip that "snapu" is custom making:

https://www.westendcameraclub.com/blog/2015/9/24/gear-review-pentax-6x7-wooden-grip

Its not ideal since it doesn't relocate the shutter release, so you have to adjust your hand a little when you're ready to take the shot, but it gives a good solid grip.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

I used a 67 MLU for a few years. I ended up getting rid of it for a couple reasons, one being the long lens problem. The other reason was you obviously can't change film mid roll. I generally liked the camera. Loved the 45. The viewfinder was great too. I know other people that dumped it for the same reasons I did. If you only shoot one film and only use wide lenses then it is a great camera.

 

[GLS]

Im'n not sure how the factory grip would work for me. It would take my left hand away from where I'd want it. (cradling the lens, so I can adjust focus and aperture.) Instead I opted for the left hand grip that "snapu" is custom making:

https://www.westendcameraclub.com/blog/2015/9/24/gear-review-pentax-6x7-wooden-grip

Its not ideal since it doesn't relocate the shutter release, so you have to adjust your hand a little when you're ready to take the shot, but it gives a good solid grip.

I bought one of those, but don't use it for two reasons:

1) The position of the finger grooves prevent being able to simultaneously hold the camera properly and trip the shutter release, as you mentioned; it's one or the other at a time.

2) The fit of the grip to the camera studs isn't perfect, which causes some play & rattle. I found this particularly annoying.

 

[Kirth Gersen]

Im'n not sure how the factory grip would work for me. It would take my left hand away from where I'd want it. (cradling the lens, so I can adjust focus and aperture.)

Precisely, but using it without a grip is no real issue. Don't think it is worth the added weight, and prefer using the lugs with a robust neck strap. Only time when I use the grip is on a tripod and as a flash or radio transmitter holder in the cold shoe.

 

[johnha]

Precisely, but using it without a grip is no real issue. Don't think it is worth the added weight, and prefer using the lugs with a robust neck strap. Only time when I use the grip is on a tripod and as a flash or radio transmitter holder in the cold shoe.

Once you're used to the size, weight and profile it's easy to handle, but new users might take a while to get used to it. Holding & shooting the camera is one thing, but changing lenses, loading film & mounting on a tripod could all leave a new user wishing for an extra hand for a while.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Once you're used to the size, weight and profile it's easy to handle, but new users might take a while to get used to it. Holding & shooting the camera is one thing, but changing lenses, loading film & mounting on a tripod could all leave a new user wishing for an extra hand for a while.

I have observed beginners with the P67 having varying degrees of both grief and success in basic handling, but especially film loading, then... BINGO! The beast is mastered! It is a large camera, and as a person with small hands, I know exactly how many first-time, up-close-and-personal users feel: a little intimidated...

If the Pentax 67 is used on a tripod religiously, as in my case, '...changing lenses, loading film' etc is not a problem at all, but a normal part of the MF experience, no different to changing the back of a Hassie, or loading 35mm film. But without this 'hands-free' support, it is awkward. And I have no time for any introduction of difficulty in my work in the field. Film loading can become a loathesome chore, the best method when starting out being to sit down and cradle the camera between your legs and go through the loading slowly. On a tripod, the camera can be loaded horizontally or vertically (the back cover will not flip closed on your fingers in the vertical position).

I see no operational reason for third party supplemental grips and I certainly would not recommend them where they fundamentally change or interfere with the natural placement of fingers to controls e.g. the shutter button or wind-on lever.

 

[guangong]

I looked at the Pentax 67 when first hit market at the old Willough In NYC. Felt it was just too heavy and awkward to use when lifting camera to eye in the same way as shooting with a 35mm SLR. Also looked at the then new 120 Linhof press camera, which had a permanently fixed handle. Not heavy, but too much camera considering size of negative. Bought a Rollei 2.8F instead. A much more comfortable camera to use. Since everyone’s tastes are different, I would try a P67 out first before buying.. Everyone seems to agree that lenses are excellent.

 

[choiliefan]

It's very easy to frame a shot via the prism and hit the MLU button with 2nd finger and press the shutter with the index.
Have shot many frames this way and its a workable technique.
I'm a bit surprised that Pentax never(?) offered a wire frame finder to vacillate this way of shooting.

 

[itsdoable]

Im'n not sure how the factory grip would work for me. It would take my left hand away from where I'd want it. (cradling the lens, so I can adjust focus and aperture.) ...

The factory left hand grip was meant to be used with the Quick Focus lever in a studio-like setting. The quick focus levers are reachable by your left hand fingers when holding the left hand grip, and give you a sufficient range of focus with a stable comfortable long term handhold to work around your subject. You can see pictures of some old Pros doing just that. In practice, it worked pretty well, if this was what/how you shoot.

 

[cbella]

I like this camera quite a bit and use it mostly hand-held. It feels relatively comfortable to me. I find the film easy to load. From a system standpoint, the quality, variety (and price!) of the lenses is difficult to beat. I purchased one that had the right-sided grip. I like it just fine, but could also do without it. My main problem with the grip is a higher likelihood that I will trigger the nearby mirror lock-up button, and potentially lose a frame as a result.

 

[warden]

HERE IS ONE professional producer who doesn't have a couple of bland statements, but an encyclopedic experience of these humble beasts! Why write a few lines when you can write a thesis...

The last sentence of your enquiry, that regarding sharpness and contrast of lenses, depends on a number of factors.
First among these is the valid comparisons between the earliest Takumars (1969-onward) and the latest SMC Pentax 67-designated lenseswhich for the most part all came out around 1989-1991, some with revised optics and modernised handling and materials, together with a couple of much-fancied aspherical/APO and ED lenses (e.g. the 75mm f2.8AL and the 300mm ED IF telephoto, both of which are still available and command steep prices for their excellent optical performance.) Film plane flatness on all of the Pentax 6x7 and 67 variant cameras has been commented on many times. You might want to Google some references about this.

Early Takumar are, at best, average performers, and are now quite old and often again, blighted by fungus, sticking aperture blades, inaccurate focus or worn mounts. The prices being asked of these on the used market are absurd and unjustified. Personally I do not consider them a good buy, nor do I consider the early Asahi-Pentax, Pentax 6x7 cameras to be reliable given their 50-year ago and history in professional Cameras from 1989 are improved in many respects (engineering and materials).

Afer the early Taks, Pentax 6x7 lenses are improvement, but for the best imaging you have to look forward to the revised lens line-up, the SMC Pentax 67-designated one, of which there are numerous enough available on the used market -- sharp, contrasty and easy to focus, just make sure they have been looked after AND have not been dropped! Worn mounts and aperture pins (or missing aperture pins!) are something else to look out for. Contrary to some statements in the foregoing thread, you must focus very, very accurately with all of the lenses and this can be troublesome with the f4 optics in lower light and the inherently somewhat dim viewfinder. All of this made much worse once you put a polariser on and are shooting in low light!

Secondly, technique with the big Pentax 67 cameras must be refined, rather than slapdash, with a sprinkle of haughty self-assuredness, as so many do, and then go on to complain about the camera rather than themselves!
Sure, you can handhold (with fast film and fast shutter speeds, certainly, or shoot with a leaf shutter lens, which will default to poor old P67 FP shutter to 1/8sec just so it can keep up!), and sure, again, there are those saying they can handhold and get razor sharp images at 1/30 second. Right. Pull the other one... You are likely to see nothing untoward at 6x4" or small web-size images, but enlarge that negative or transparency to 60 inches (I routinely print up to 60-70 inches and more, where I can find a printer able to handle the work!), then get back to me with what you see. The blur will be a revelation, and affirming of where your technique (and beliefs) need a second looking at. The P67 is unforgiving of small user errors, and it will show.

If the highest quality imaging is your game (it is to me, where money counts), then use a tripod all of the time, together with mirror lock-up (on those cameras from 1976-onward fitted with this provision) to separate the inertia of mirror movement and shutter travel. I guarantee that with refined and knowledgeable technique you will be rewarded very, very well indeed.

Some points about weaknesses. All of the Pentax 6x7 (1969 onwards) and later Pentax 67 cameras have idiosyncrasies and weaknesses. Chief among these is the specific procedure to avoid breakage of the meter coupling chain [see the Sticky on pentaxforums.com that I wrote about this). Secondly, resetting the shutter/mirror if the MLU (mirror lock-up) button is accidentally tripped e.g. commonly when the camera is stored in a backpack, so do put a piece of tape over it before stowing!). Derangement of P67 TTL-meters (which by the way have a 5-stop range / 2.5 stops up-down from centre) is common given their age, and many are dirty and fungus-infected. The foam seal will probably require replacement, and it is a filthy, tedious and intensely testy procedure. Dirt and heavy wear around the resistors underneath the shutter speed dial is a common cause of inaccurate speeds, or no operational marked speed at all. Hidden in the base and rarely given priority inspection is the 6v battery, and if it has been in there a few years it could well be corroded. Something to look out for, because repatriation often involve stripping out the entire compartment.

The mirror/shutter solenoid can stick or become inoperative through age, long periods of inactivity or prolonged shutter-cocked status. Disassembly and repair is a service bench task, and replacements are taken from like-bodies, thus introducing a cycle of redundancy, and arguably poor reliability long-term.

The wind-on lever can potentially be the first item to break, or inside, the winding pawl/counter which will slip and cause frame overlap. These failures are age-related, with a factor of worsening fatigue from aggressive professional use (and that's OK; the cameras were not put out there to be babied by amateurs!). The frame counter roller to the right of the film gate often fails of its own volition, and will do so if it is fiddled with anticlockwise, which it was not designed to do and should not be touched at all.

The most popular lenses in use are any of the 75mm (including one f4.5 shift), 45, 55, 90 and the 104 f2.4 "standard" kit lens that came with the cameras when new. Longer, and correspondingly heavier tele lenses (which use the outside mounting flange on the Pentax 67 cameras) are available, with the later optically superior lenses or short or tele commanding anything from $2,400 to $4,000+. They are worth the investment if the absolute best imaging quality is a religion to you.

My own choice (landscape/scenic)is the 75mm f2.8AL, 45mm f4, 90mm f2.8 and 165mm f4 LS (leaf shutter). I print very, veruy large, and each of these lenses deliver excellent imaging quality, but the 75mm f2.8AL is the best of the lot. This is a heavy enough kit for most people without having wet dreams of other "exciting" goodies like handles, straps, gadgets and gizmos on the perceived "improvement in handling" such accoutrements provide (they actually add bulk, weight and awkwardness!). The more you add, the greater the back strain, and the weight is a real bugger after a long march.

The lower end of shutter speeds bottom out at 1 second, so you should be proficient in hand-held incident/multispot metering (preferably both) to get over this minor shortcoming and be prepared to take over with a diverse number of handheld metering skills (of which multispot metering is considerably more useful and accurate than incident).

Lots of viewfinders are available. True, the TTL/non-TTL viewfinder may cut off 10%, but it will provide the sharpest focusing ability, especially if you need or want the Pentax 67 right angle viewing attachment (with dioptric correction) or central spot magnifier eyepiece. Focusing screens can be changed DIY-style, but each will require collimation for focusing accuracy at 3 central points of the focusing screen. Diotric correction lenses for the viewfinder eyepiece are hard to find. If you land a camera with a non-standard lens inserted, you will struggle.

The Pentax 67II, released in 1998, is an electronic version of the rudimentary Pentax 6x7 / 67 cameras. Personally, I put my money toward lenses, not camera bodies. Some people have reported problems with the displays in this camera and winding irregularities, so as usual, buyer beware applies.There are a couple of (inactive?) Photrio members here who use the Pentax 67II with the venerated 75mm f2.8AL, which has a light-touch, spring-loaded aperture and very light touch focusing. Other than that, anything could be slapped on it, with the advantage of higher levels assistance e.g. metering over the original Pentax 67.

I too have owned a Hasselblad -- a 503CXi and 80mm Planar, and literally threw it away from it mischievously jamming of its own volition, at the worst possible moment. I hate the bastards with a vengeance, along with boxy Volvos and their elephantine SUVs. I have no time old shiny scandi-boxes that are not up to professional treatment and demands.

Having said all that, my super trooper P67, bought 10 years ago (with a 55mm f4 "starter" lens, which was sold off in 2011), is still humming along. After Beijing and Singapore, I and the camera will be resting a while!

So put your feelers out and look for one in MINT/NIB/NOS or a later-version P67, well looked after. Avoid battered or obviously abused and heavily used specimens. Above all else, invest in lenses and technique.

.::Garyh
_______________________________________________________________________________________________

Twilight at the Taoist Tree,
Lake Bonney, Barmera Riverland, South Australia, 2017
Cropped from 6x7. Pentax 67, 90mm f2.8, UV(0), RVP50, multispot metered.
20x20cm, also 40x40cm KEP-M, MGCF (own, and in several private collections locally,
also Hong Kong, Singapore and Beijing).

( 2018 variant in pink-red/blue in-progress at printer )


View attachment 217360

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

Lynn of Erskine Falls (III of V), 2015
Great Otway National Park, Victoria.
Pentax 67, 75mm f2.8AL, KSM C-POL 0.6, RVP50, multispot metered.
41x30.5cm KEP-M, MGCF. Own, Government and private collections.

View attachment 217361

That was an enjoyable read. Thanks!

 

[halfaman]

I am a satisfied user of a Pentax 67II since 2009 and it has become my camera of choice for general photography specially during my holidays trips. I use it always handheld with a set of three lenses (55, 105 and 200 mm), even I own more during this time. The camera is heavy but a very enjoyable medium format SLR if you get used to. Totally reliable AE programs, great viewfinder, good ergonomics (besides weight)... and all in 6x7 format splendor! The only drawback for me is the 1/30 seconds X-Sync which limit a lot the use of flash.

I found all the lenses to be at least very good, I haven't been dissapointed by any, and prices are fairly resonable for standard ones (not AL or ED) . My two cents about it.

- 45 mm f/4 SMC: Very good. Sharp, low distorsion, and compact. One of the few lenses that were never redesigned optically and it was for a reason.
- 55 mm f/4 SMC: Excellent. A bit heavy but extremely sharp at f/8 with low distorsion.
- 105 mm f/2.4 S-M-C: Special. Wonderful "3D" effect wide open at medium distances, yellowing produced by radioactive elements. Later SMC don't use them but it is much more expensive.
- 165 mm f/2.8: Good bokeh but focal length not useful for me, I used it only once just to try it.
- 200 mm SMC: Excelent. Very Sharp already wide open and with a very attractive minimum focusing distance. While not so stellar, S-M-C version is also a very nice lens despite the reviews in internet.

 

[johnha]

I found all the lenses to be at least very good, I haven't been dissapointed by any, and prices are fairly resonable for standard ones (not AL or ED) . My two cents about it.

- 55 mm f/4 SMC: Excellent. A bit heavy but extremely sharp at f/8 with low distorsion.

- 200 mm SMC: Excelent. Very Sharp already wide open and with a very attractive minimum focusing distance. While not so stellar, S-M-C version is also a very nice lens despite the reviews in internet.

It's worth pointing out there are various 55mm lenses, an early f/3.5 (which requires huge filters) and two f/4s, the later one being generally regarded as better. There were also two 200mm f'/4s, again the later one is generally considered better (and focusses closer). See https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-67-Medium-Format-Lenses-i5.html for more details.

Some lenses retained the older 's-m-c-tak-6x7' names whilst others were updated to 'SMC Pentax 67' (some optical formulas were changed, others weren't).

John.

 

[GLS]

yellowing produced by radioactive elements

FYI this can be reversed by shining UV light through the optics for several days.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

FYI this can be reversed by shining UV light through the optics for several days.

I really don't know why people are still going off about this radioactive thing with lenses. In the Pentax 6x7 / 67 equipment line up, lenses and right-angle viewing attachments together with the early central-spot eyepiece magnifier all had a thorium-tinted element -- and were conveniently overlooked time and time again in animated discourse.
I have the Pentax 6x7 right-angle finder with the terribly feared deadly yellow element...

 

[halfaman]

FYI this can be reversed by shining UV light through the optics for several days.

My experience with the particular sample I have of this lens is that the yellowing can be reverted partially, but never completely. It is very clear when I change between this lens and any other that it has some yellow tint even after several days under an UV light. When printing or scaning color film it is also evident.