Pentax 67 or 645

[wjlorimer]

Hello to all APUG Medium format members. This is my first posting from a new member - so be gentle

I would like to start using medium format for my landscape work, both for enjoyment and profit. I work as a designer for a calendar printing company, and we use 67, 645 and (gasp) even 35mm (though I've tried to talk the boss out of accepting 35mm).

I've been all digital myself for the past few years, but used a Mamiya RZB67 in the studio and on location in a previous job. I still love the look of a big slide on the light table, so I'm looking to submit medium format slides myself next year.

I've found quite a lot of info on the internet on the 67, and have even got to try one out recently - which I enjoyed. But I can't find much on the 645 - especially the first incarnation - not the 645N (II). I can find even less about lenses etc.

Is there somewhere I can get brochure type information on the Pentax 645 and its range of lenses?

And for landscape work, is there a generally held view with one over the other? Obviously the 67 slides are that much bigger - generating the 'wow' factor and bigger enlargements, but is the 645 a contender in other regards?

My tendency towards the 645 has a lot to do with its availability on the secondhand market at the moment - there just seems to be more of them around.

Thanks in advance for all your collective wisdom. I look forward to hearing what you have to say.

Wayne

 

[rkmiec]

www.keh.com. they are a used camera dealer here in the states with an excellent reputation.they have a large selection and if you want to know what the range of lenses are they have alot.some specs are given for some lenses.such as filter size,min focus etc.also check the accessories page.i use them alot for reference purposes when i am checking a price range for a lens and i have purchased several things from them...while you are there check out the mamiya 645 lots of goodies for that camera also.

 

[toadhall]

Hi Wayne, and welcome to APUG.
I've owned both a Pentax 645 (original model) and a Pentax 67 (not the II).

I found the 645 awkward because of its automatic metering (I know it can be set to manual, but you need to meter under one of the 'auto' settings). Additionally, it doesn't have a mirror lock up, can't change backs in mid roll, and has a fixed prism. Those aren't necessarily bad things, but for my way of shooting, and subject (landscapes/nature) it didn't work for me. The optics, however, were excellent.

I have used the 67 extensively, and produced a quantity of good images. It does have a mirror lock up (and needs one!) and interchangeable prisms, but again can't change backs or film mid-roll. I have noticed, compared to some other medium format cameras, that the frame spacing was erratic (never ruined an image, however). This may have been the one I owned, or it may be systemic. Again, the optics were excellent.

If you want a back up body, I believe that you will pay more for a Pentax 645 or 67, than you would for a used 'bare' Mamiya or Bronica body.
The 645 is certainly lighter and more 'portable' than the 67, which is heavy and occasionally, awkward, but built like a tank.

You might be interested to know that there is an adaptor, albeit hard to find, that lets you use 67 lenses on the 645.

Bear in mind that these are simply my opinions, and may not be relevant to you, your subject material, and your methodology, so take with a grain of salt ....

Good luck on your search ...

John

 

[MikeK]

I have used both 645 Bronica ETR-S and the Pentax 6x7. I really enjoy the extra film area on the 6x7 so much so I am in the process of selling my 645 outfit. It is heavier than the 645, in fact with the 75mm lens mounted it is heavier than my 4x5 Shen with a 135mm lens mounted. But I am more than willing to put up with the extra weight for the increased negative area.

Just my 2 cents

Cheers

Mike

 

[winger]

I have the 645N and sometimes wish I'd gotten the 67 for the slightly bigger negative. Metering in manual is fine with the N version - it behaves just like a 35mm in a lot of ways. Just a 35mm on steroids. I love the feel and the optics, too.

 

[coigach]

I use a 67II for all my landscape work (see apug portfolio link below) and can give you my thoughts on this camera.

Heavy, bombproof, pretty reliable.

Mirror lock up (never use without for lanscapes!), body generally a workhorse.

Lenses great. 45mm, 55mm 75mm very sharp. 105 and 135 macro good sharp lenses, although in my experience the 135 macro struggles beyond f11 if not using it in macro situations, 300mm v sharp, but difficult to avoid shake beyond f11 even using tripod and mirror lock.

All things considered, I think the 67 system is great and the larger transparencies look amazing.

Hope this helps,
Gavin

 

[Lee Shively]

I've tried the Pentax 6x7. Nice camera, big negative. Heavy. I bought two original Pentax 645 bodies and four lenses. Nice cameras, big enough negative and not too heavy. The lenses are superb.

I'm not sure what toadhall meant about having to meter under one of the auto settings of the original 645. It meters in the manual setting just fine but I generally use a handheld meter if I'm on a tripod. Because the cameras aren't much heavier than a big 35mm SLR, handholding is easy. So is carrying around a bag of lenses. The mirror is heavily dampened and doesn't really need a lock-up--at least I've never missed that feature with long exposures. If you want interchangeable viewfinders and backs, it ain't got them. Some people dislike the push button controls of the original 645 and like the dials on the later models. Viewfinders, backs and buttons aren't factors to me.

If you enlarge prints to huge sizes, the 6x7 will probably show its edge due to physics. And personal preferences count for a lot--you seem to lean toward the 6x7 size.

 

[georgecp]

Hi Wayne,

I owned both the 645 and the 67 systems and ended up with a Bronica GS-1 6x7 that I am very happy with. First of all, I found that the difference between 6x7 and 645 was substantial enough for my work (especially when compared to 35mm) to warrant a system with the bigger neg. While I liked the Pentax 67, the Bronica was a better choice for me. The GS-1 is more compact and has multiple backs. Additionally, it has a leaf shutter which I found easier to work with in the field. The drawback of the GS-1 is that it does not have a wide a selection of lenses, especially in the telephoto end. The selection was good for me and the system does have an excellent teleconverter....

The best advice I could offer is to try (rent/borrow) each of these systems if you can prior to purchase. The intangibles end up being very important and you can only get a handle on them by trying each system out. NZ should have enough equipment around for you to arrange something.

By the way, I have been to your country and LOVE it. It is a wonderful place to spend time.

Best Regards,
George

 

[Phillip P. Dimor]

I have extensively used the original Pentax 645. I've only handled the 6x7.
I've only missed having interchangeable backs a few times and it's something I can definitely live without. It uses 6 AA batteries, I get about 100+ rolls easily. Once your batteries start going, the shutter lags. The meter is great, i've never had a problem. The interface, buttons and display are perfect for me. I like it more than the 645N or NII. It's faster for me to just keep my two forefingers on the buttons and just press away. It's very intuitive.

The price on these things is outstanding. The motor drive is sufficiently quick. The optics are excellent. If you can live with a fixed finder, grip and limited accessories (tough to find viewfinder magnifiers, bellows, etc) it's an awesome camera. I've handed the 6x7, I could feel the mirror slapping and flapping. 6x7 is definitely a plus but you get 15 exposures per 120 roll w/ the 645 and they enlarge quite nicely IMHO.

I've also handled the mamiya 645 offering, the older one. It was ok. Never tried bronica but have heard good things.

I've handled the 645NII. The autofocus is pretty okay. I think that wedding photographers like these. I don't care for autofocus. The lenses seem nice but I like the build quality of the original p645 lenses. Metal and rubber.
The knobs are awkward for me.

 

[wjlorimer]

Thanks to all who have responded to my query thus far. As I expected, some very good responses from experienced users.

I think I am still heading towards the 645 - for a couple of reasons already outlined in some responses above. First, the film size, although not as impressive as 67 is still a pretty impressive jump from 35mm - and enough for my needs in terms of enlargements.

Second, the size and weight of the system will suit me better than the 67 - I would like to capture candids with it hand-held as well as my more tripod based landscape work.

And third, availability on auction sites here in NZ is good now. In fact there's a Pentax 645 auction finishing tonight that has my name on it!

I still have the use of the 67 as well, and will take it out this weekend for another trial run. Then the 'proof' will be in the pudding (as they say) when I get the films back from the lab.

Thanks again for all your honest, thoughtful and reasoned answers - I appreciate every one.

God bless

Wayne
nzdigital.blogspot.com

 

[craigclu]

I have both a P67 system and a 645. The finder is much brighter on the 645 and I actually seem to get better results with it over the 67 for general duty. The 645 will give you a great leap from 35mm in terms of tonality and depth. I have an adapter for using my 67 lenses on the 645 and this adds to the versatility, too. I use the 67's when I absolutely know I'll be likely to make large prints but the 645 is really good to 11X14 if handled correctly.

I'm not really telling you anything that you couldn't deduce from a little research and others' responses but the main reason that I'm piping in is to mention that both of these systems are finding little duty for me as I find that medium format range-finders cover most of my needs on a typical outing and require less serious supports and can be easily controlled with small tripods. If I know I'll be doing macro or doing an appropriate duty requiring a long lens, the slr's go along but it's usually a Bronica RF645 or Mamiya 7 tagging along. They're superb image takers, handle fast and once you're accustomed to them, are easy to apply to careful cropping needs, too (especially compared to the P67 as it shows a radically different amount through the prism vs its true coverage). Coming from a typical transition from 35mm slr's, I didn't initially consider thinking in any other way than with an slr mindset. You also may enjoy experiencing medium format with a Fuji range-finder or even a tlr of some sort. I guess what I'm saying in a long rambling manner is that you may not use your medium format gear for exactly the same things that you currently shoot 35mm for (as happened to me).

 

[ellisson]

I enjoy using both. I like the feel of the 645, and the bright viewfinder and the motor drive. This camera is just very easy to use. I also prefer the meter on the 645, which is easier to activate compared with the 67: you need to pivot a very small flat lever on the 67. Not a problem if you have time, i.e. landscapes, but it slows me down for street and travel shooting. I find it much easier to travel with the 645 - the lenses are significantly smaller, so you can pack more gear. Also, you can preload several holders, which saves time changing film (even if the holders can't be interchanged mid-role) in the field. The 645 bodies are inexpensive on the used market - I don't need the 645N or N2 - so you can carry two bodies for different film or lighting.
On the other hand, I like the larger negative size of the 67, and this camera is my preference when I'm going to make large prints. Something else about the 67 - I always feel safe carrying this camera. Its built to protect you!

 

[ernie51]

I stepped up from 35mm to the 645n and I really love it for shooting on the fly. I use the 80-160 zoom and finr it to be reasonably sharp. The camera is very intuitive to use. Viewfinder bright,. Drawback is the film magazine, not being able to change mid-roll, but I just plan on shooting the same film on each subject. I then purchased a P67 MLU system. I use this for tripod work. My main complaint is the dim viewfinder but if I shelled out a couple hundred bucks I could have a Beattie installed which I might do. It's a good dependable camera. I'm really happy with both camera's and lenses and would recomend them. If your just making the switch the 645n would be a great way to go and will give you versatility and some pretty decent images.. Good Luck

 

[jovo]

Kind of oblique perhaps, but if you ever develop a crush on square format (which I confess to still be in thrall of), cropping the 6x7 to 6x6 is a better idea than cropping the 645 to a square. My opinion born of experience is that larger is better. It's more likely than not that you'll want bigger enlargements than smaller and better resolution than poorer, which will make the larger negative more than welcome.

 

[Paul.A]

I have a 645 IIn which I absolutely love. My kit comprises of the 45-85 mm zoom, the 150 mm, 2 x 120 inserts and 2 x 220 inserts, and a medium sized dedicated flash. This all fits into a medium sized photo back pack which I can carry all day.
The camera is very fast to use, a lot like using a 35mm SLR. The evaluative metering is on the whole very accurate and for those iffy moments there's always spot metering. The viewfinder is a delight to use, the best on any camera I've used and the auto-focus snappy and can easily be turned off on the lens. I've used it for shooting fashion in a studio, portraiture, street photography and rural and urban landscapes and its handled them with aplomb. I think its main virtue is that it is invisible, ie it does n't get in the way of the picture making process. My only regret is that the marque has been discontinued, I was even looking forward to the digital version coming before it became a casualty in the Pentax Hoya merger.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

The Pentax 67 is a fine camera, with a huge negative size for 120 roll film. Size does matter. If you lay a page of 645 and 6x7 transparencies down side-by-side. The 6x7 images will "jump" out much more. You don't really need a loupe to view them. Bear in mind that-even though taking images in the same 6x7 format-the Pentax 6x7 is an entirely different camera in concept and design than the Mamiya RB or RZ 67. The Mamiya is designed as a waist-level camera that can be adapted to eye-level. The Pentax is an eye-level camera that handles just like a big-oversized SLR. If you have a 35mm SLR, All the controls on the Pentax 6x7 will seem very familiar to you.

 

[nick mulder]

I've used the Pentax 6x7 but still prefer my Mamiya RZ67 which can take 6x7, 6x6 and 645 backs - the RB can even take a 6x8 back, might be something to consider ?

 

[Sparky]

I've always been really unhappy with the way that Pentax took the 35mm paradigm and just scaled it up to 6x7 - 35mm SLRs were designed that way for a reason - and (for me) I don't think it works all that well as a 6x7. The mirror shake issue precludes it from being truly useable handheld. A jack of all trades to be sure - it just depends on what you want. If you want something you can shoot handheld - I'd recommend a fuji GW series 6x7 or 6x9 over the pentax. If you want something for studio use - I'd suggest an RZ or something. For landscape use - there are much better lighter-weight options (again, fuji comes to mind, as well as the makina - which is a bit prone to falling apart these days...)

 

[pentaxuser]

Also, you can preload several holders, which saves time changing film (even if the holders can't be interchanged mid-role) in the field.

As a pentaxuser I have considered the 645 but was a little unsure about its lack of flexibility as highlighted above in that separate backs with darkslides are not a feature. Can I ask for confirmation of my understanding of the P645 situation as follows: If you have a holder with say colour neg film and are mid-roll and find a shot that cries out for B&W, you can only rewind the colour neg, then remove the holder and replace with the pre-loaded second holder containing B&W.

To swop back you then rewind the B&W holder fully, remove it and refit the colour neg film holder, winding forward to the frame number that you had rewound from. Likewise any further changes to B&W again.

So the saving in having a second holder is the time needed to remove one roll and reload from scratch and then repeat this process once you've taken the the number of say B&W shots and wish to revert to colour.

I have assumed in the above, the ability to rewind and accurately get back to the exact spot on the roll avoiding any likelihood of overlap. Is this possible?

Once the film is rewound and the back removed, can I take it that leaving the film in the camera back at just before frame 1 so to speak doesn't risk any light penetrating the roll. It struck me that there may be some risk of light penetration in that loading initially from a factory rolled spool is one thing when pre-loading a spare holder but that a rewind and leaving it in the holder in case it is needed again might be something else and risks the phenomenon of light leaks caused by a loose roll.

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Jon Shiu]

Hi, there is no ability to rewind with medium format 120 film (other than in a changing bag). As you take pictures the film is transferred from the original spool to the take-up spool.

Jon

 

[pentaxuser]

Hi, there is no ability to rewind with medium format 120 film (other than in a changing bag). As you take pictures the film is transferred from the original spool to the take-up spool.

Jon

Thanks. I knew it wasn't possible on my Agfa Isolette I which is my only experience of MF but had just assumed that in much later cameras a rewind would be possible. My camera engineering knowldege is woeful but I can't think why a rewind back onto the original spool shouldn't be possible. So for the price of an insert/holder, all you get is a slightly faster switchover. Presumably the holder can be detached but it leaves the holder open with no darkslide so that the film has to be fully wound on to make this possible. Seems like a lot of money just to save a few seconds.

No problem if you stick to one film but a colour and B&W expedition for a pentax 645 means two cameras whereas for others it is simply a matter of carrying cheaper and less cumbersome backs.

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

So for the price of an insert/holder, all you get is a slightly faster switchover ... Seems like a lot of money just to save a few seconds.

pentaxuser

Generally it is a fair bit of money for the time savings realized, although one's outlook changes a bit when considering shooting weddings or anything else fast paced.

The other advantage is it allows for a film path that is "folded", and therefore more compact, and therefore a camera that is more compact.

Matt

 

[pentaxuser]

The other advantage is it allows for a film path that is "folded", and therefore more compact, and therefore a camera that is more compact.

Matt

Sorry you've lost me here. What's a film path that is folded? Once I have understood what's meant here then I am sure that understanding the compactness will follow.

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

Sorry you've lost me here. What's a film path that is folded? Once I have understood what's meant here then I am sure that understanding the compactness will follow.

Thanks

pentaxuser

This is easier to show than to explain.

When I posted this I was thinking of the inserts for my Mamiya 645 equipment, so it may not apply in exactly the same way for Pentax.

The inserts allow the film to wrap around - the feed and take-up reels are closer to each other than they would be if you were not able to load them outside the camera. If you weren't able to at least flip out the mechanism, you wouldn't be able to easily get the film into where it needs to be.

It can be more like this:


\--------/
.O.......O

and less like this:


/--------\
O...........O

(apologies for the high level graphics )

Matt

 

[joshstromberg]

I recommend the 645 and that is a camera that I own. it is lighter than the 67 and gets more shots per roll. it also has a nice viewfinder and they all come with autoexposure! also when they say that the mirror is well damped that is true and i have no trouble using it hand held, in fact thats how i do it 90% of the time. if u are worrried about quality in this test i've read that there is very little difference between the two

http://nealcurrie.com/t-comp0.html