Pentax 67 Question

[DannyC71]

I recently acquired a Pentax 67, the first version, and it doesn’t have the battery holder. I’m putting a battery in the compartment, and the contacts are clean, but nothing is happening. My question is whether or not the battery holder is necessary, or is there something else wrong and I have a literal brick? I do have a battery holder on the way.

Also I have the 75mm f/4.5 Takumar lens and the aperture ring is extremely difficult to move. The blades still stop down when I move the lever or switch from Auto to Manual. Is there a relatively easy way to loosen up the ring?

TIA

 

[OAPOli]

The P67 will operate without the holder. However the P67 won't cock the shutter without film; there is a way to do so that is outlined in the manual (open the door, turn the counter passed "0", close the door).

Try that, then make sure the battery is good and in the right polarity.

Sometimes dried grease will stiffen the aperture ring. It shouldn't be too hard to access but I've never done this specific lens.

 

[skylight1b]

I recently acquired a Pentax 67, the first version, and it doesn’t have the battery holder. I’m putting a battery in the compartment, and the contacts are clean, but nothing is happening. My question is whether or not the battery holder is necessary, or is there something else wrong and I have a literal brick? I do have a battery holder on the way.

Also I have the 75mm f/4.5 Takumar lens and the aperture ring is extremely difficult to move. The blades still stop down when I move the lever or switch from Auto to Manual. Is there a relatively easy way to loosen up the ring?

TIA

To add to what OAPOli said, the first time I used this camera I thought I had a brick as well. It not only needs film but needs to be at frame 1 to fire. I had winded my roll to frame 1 (or so I thought) and it would not fire. It turns out it only looked like it was at frame 1 but wasn't actually there yet. You will feel a noticeable difference in winding between frame 0 and frame 1 with film in it.

 

[Taylor Nankervis]

All Pentax 6x7 / 67 cameras (meaning, from the first generation in 1969 to the last in 1992) have a safety interlock feature that prevents firing of the camera if there is no film loaded. This is easily bypassed for testing purposes with a bypass key inserted under the film counter dial. It is not recommended as standard practice but is useful when resetting the counter window to 0.

I can confirm that neither of my two Pentax 67 (final generation) cameras will work if the battery is not in its holder (and film is loaded). I cannot see anything to suggest that the battery holder physically interplays with something else, other than latching to the body. I don't see how it is reasonable to offer a camera for sale if it is missing an OEM part essential to its operation like the battery holder!

The age of the camera you have would strongly suggest that there are other, bigger problems lurking nearby; if it is from c. 1969 to c. 1975, I would return it and instead angle for the last generation Pentax 67 cameras — all of which had progressively small engineering improvements with each iteration. Without a full cut down and inspection, the older cameras will trip up with unrecoverable faults, chief among them being the winding mechanism (usually the first thing to fail); then the shutter speed dial with corroded and/or worn contact pads, the mirror solenoid and the shutter (capping and incomplete, lazy travel). The film counter roller, to the right of the shutter gate, is a very frail component which should never be reverse-turned; it is a routine replacement on the older cameras, usually scavenged from a like-camera and transplanted.

I would suggest you read through pentaxforums.com to bring yourself up to speed with several operational idiosyncrasies of the Pentax 6x7, among them being the meter coupling chain and its attendant risk of breakage. Another being how to effectively reset the camera in the event of a jam.

 

[DannyC71]

Thanks everyone for the replies. I tried turning the frame counter with the door open and it seemed to do something, but now the mirror is stuck almost all the way up. Also the check battery light does not come on.

Unfortunately returning it is not an option as I got it through Zen Market, a proxy for Japanese auction sites, and for very cheap. So either I tinker or sell it for parts and cut my losses. Although I may try a sacrificial roll once the new battery holder shows up.

 

[OAPOli]

What you are describing occurs when the shutter is released with no power. You can reset the mirror via the little button under the shutter release trigger on the front plate. Please look at the manual.

It appears that your battery is either dead or in the wrong position. There is a good chance your camera is okay.

 

[Taylor Nankervis]

For the benefit of the OP, resetting the camera:

(Assumes film is loaded)

Ensure the prism is locked down in place first and a lens is mounted.

1. Use a toothpick to press the deeply recessed button, left of mirror box, once only
2. Fire the shutter; and
3. Wind-on.

This sacrifices one frame of the film and resets the mirror, solenoid and shutter release.

 

[mshchem]

I have definitely learned something about these cameras here today. I had always thought these were purely mechanical. I read on Wikipedia that these are related in design to the 35mm Pentax ES! I had an ES when I was a kid, in the 70's. I loved that camera.
Best of luck to the OP, hopefully once you get all the ducks in a row the machine behaves!
Amazing glass!

 

[reddesert]

I don't have any Pentax 6x7-specific advice, but I always keep a spool of 120 backing paper around for use in testing 120 cameras, roll film holders, etc without wasting film. Unlike 35mm cameras, many 120 cameras (if they have automatic frame counting) really want film loaded for testing, and backing paper alone will work for many purposes.

 

[abruzzi]

I always keep a spool of 120 backing paper around for use in testing 120 cameras, roll film holders, etc without wasting film.

This 100%. If its your first medium format camera, just sacrifice one roll of the cheapest film you have (right now that seems to be Foma or Kentmere in the US) and accept that its $8 used in service of getting your camera working. Then pull the film off the backing paper and keep the paper on a spool for future testing.

 

[itsdoable]

This 100%. If its your first medium format camera, just sacrifice one roll of the cheapest film you have (right now that seems to be Foma or Kentmere in the US) and accept that its $8 used in service of getting your camera working. Then pull the film off the backing paper and keep the paper on a spool for future testing.

why pull the film off the backing? Rolleiflex's need the film thickness for proper testing...

 

[DannyC71]

Update. So I tried a sacrificial roll, a roll of Kodacolor X that expired in 1973. I would be shooting it at like ISO 2, and likely still getting no good results. Anyways, the shutter never properly fired, and I had to reset the mirror every time, and the exposure counter never even moved. And I know the film was loaded properly because it did wind up onto the take up spool. So unless the actual battery holder is somehow critical to operation then I have to assume it’s getting no power. The battery is brand new so it can’t be a dead battery.

Thank you everyone for the replies and advice.

 

[abruzzi]

why pull the film off the backing? Rolleiflex's need the film thickness for proper testing...

becasue its a pain in the a.. to reroll it properly with the film still in place and I'd never buy a camera that only worked by sensing a change in the thickness of the film.

 

[abruzzi]

Update. So I tried a sacrificial roll, a roll of Kodacolor X that expired in 1973. I would be shooting it at like ISO 2, and likely still getting no good results. Anyways, the shutter never properly fired, and I had to reset the mirror every time, and the exposure counter never even moved. And I know the film was loaded properly because it did wind up onto the take up spool. So unless the actual battery holder is somehow critical to operation then I have to assume it’s getting no power. The battery is brand new so it can’t be a dead battery.

Thank you everyone for the replies and advice.

Home-Pentaxs

pentaxs.com

 

[Pieter12]

becasue its a pain in the a.. to reroll it properly with the film still in place and I'd never buy a camera that only worked by sensing a change in the thickness of the film.

That rules out a lot of Rolleiflex TLRs.

 

[reddesert]

This has gotten afield, but I just save the backing paper from a roll of film I developed and use that to test wind and fire functionality on 120 cameras, roll film holders, etc. If you need to test frame spacing precisely, on many cameras with turns-counting, you would need to have film+paper. But more often I just want to make sure the wind cocks the shutter properly and that it fires, the frame counter works, etc.

The Rolleiflex TLR is the only camera I have used that auto-senses the film start, and if I really needed to test that, I could tape a little scrap of film to the backing paper to trigger the start.

 

[DannyC71]

Home-Pentaxs

pentaxs.com

Thanks. I’ll have to save up. $400 for a non MLU 6x7.

 

[Taylor Nankervis]

Thanks. I’ll have to save up. $400 for a non MLU 6x7.

Don't
buy
a
non-MLU 6x7

Mirror lock-up is essential to separate shutter and mirror inertia that causes blur with these cameras; you may think handholding a 6x7 / 67 is easy and fun, but it will definitely introduce blur (visible under loupé on the lightbox, not necessarily immediately present on 6x4 prints!) unless you get into the habit of using the camera on a tripod, l earn and employ careful, refined firing technique, which will in turn provide you with the excellent optical performance that so many of the (latest-gen) SMC Pentax 67 lenses offer.

Secondly, the 6x7s dating back many decades — not the later 67-designated cameras, are a very poor choice today because of their advanced age (55+ years), too many without a single service and those that are offered not having been professionally checked, much less overhauled. The winding mechanism, shutter, mirror solenoid, battery compartment, counter roller, shutter speed control circuit and copper pads...the list is a very long one and the oldest cameras have multiples of these problems that stand ready to let you down at the worst possible moment.

I very strongly suggest you park your money and save up for the late-generation Pentax 67 cameras from 1990 to 1992 — progressivelyi, these cameras had a host of small but very beneficial engineering improvements that make them a better investment going forward, but it must be borne in mind that all of the cameras will be getting on a fair bit now after brutal professional use and generally careless amateur employment, and it is essential to have your wits about you when shopping.

 

[OAPOli]

@Taylor Nankervis I think the OP was referring to the cost of a full service for a non-MLU 6x7.

I don't know what are the intended uses for the OP but personally, I use my non-MLU 6x7 handheld most of the time and it's a fine camera for that. I'll note that the MLU switch is easily actuated inadvertently, which loses a frame.

 

[DannyC71]

Don't
buy
a
non-MLU 6x7

Mirror lock-up is essential to separate shutter and mirror inertia that causes blur with these cameras; you may think handholding a 6x7 / 67 is easy and fun, but it will definitely introduce blur (visible under loupé on the lightbox, not necessarily immediately present on 6x4 prints!) unless you get into the habit of using the camera on a tripod, l earn and employ careful, refined firing technique, which will in turn provide you with the excellent optical performance that so many of the (latest-gen) SMC Pentax 67 lenses offer.

Secondly, the 6x7s dating back many decades — not the later 67-designated cameras, are a very poor choice today because of their advanced age (55+ years), too many without a single service and those that are offered not having been professionally checked, much less overhauled. The winding mechanism, shutter, mirror solenoid, battery compartment, counter roller, shutter speed control circuit and copper pads...the list is a very long one and the oldest cameras have multiples of these problems that stand ready to let you down at the worst possible moment.

I very strongly suggest you park your money and save up for the late-generation Pentax 67 cameras from 1990 to 1992 — progressivelyi, these cameras had a host of small but very beneficial engineering improvements that make them a better investment going forward, but it must be borne in mind that all of the cameras will be getting on a fair bit now after brutal professional use and generally careless amateur employment, and it is essential to have your wits about you when shopping.

I was referring to the cost of service, but with that being said I’m totally changing tack and am looking for a Mamiya RB67. I was looking on eBay and I can sell the Pentax for parts for more than I paid for it.

 

[DannyC71]

@Taylor Nankervis I think the OP was referring to the cost of a full service for a non-MLU 6x7.

I don't know what are the intended uses for the OP but personally, I use my non-MLU 6x7 handheld most of the time and it's a fine camera for that. I'll note that the MLU switch is easily actuated inadvertently, which loses a frame.

Mostly landscapes on a tripod. I do already have a Yashicamat 124G but am wanting to go 6x7 instead of 6x6.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Mostly landscapes on a tripod. I do already have a Yashicamat 124G but am wanting to go 6x7 instead of 6x6.

I have owned both a RB67 and still own two Pentax 67's so have some idea what you are going through right now. While I really like the RB67 I decided to part with it and keep the Pentax since it fit "MY" style of shooting better. In your first sentence above I'd say buy the RB67 Pro S. Landscapes on a tripod? The RB67 is made for that and many other things too. The main thing I missed by going with the Pentax 67 was interchangeable backs. With the RB67 system you can shoot color negative, transparency and B&W with just one camera. Lens quality between the two is not a problem since both have top notch glass. Also, both have an extensive line of accessories to go with each. One thing the RB67 has going for it right now is the body itself is dirt cheap. I'm with you when it comes to negative size, bigger is better!

 

[skahde]

Mostly landscapes on a tripod. I do already have a Yashicamat 124G but am wanting to go 6x7 instead of 6x6.

Also consider the Bronica GS-1. Within a year I build a complete outfit with two bodies, three backs and (except the build to order 500 mm) now have all focals I could wish for 50-250mm. First prints from the setup are already framed and on display and I really like the camera. I wont go into detail on a Pentax-thread but as you are considering alternatives I thought the big Bronica was worth mentioning.

 

[Lachlan Young]

chief among them being the winding mechanism (usually the first thing to fail)

Often caused by the feed side getting sticky - however, fixing the wind side is much less involved than getting to the (simple but gummed up) bits in the feed control side. The latter involves a near complete dismantling.

 

[Lachlan Young]

I don't know what are the intended uses for the OP but personally, I use my non-MLU 6x7 handheld most of the time and it's a fine camera for that.

Frankly, if someone is intent on always sticking a P67 on a tripod (I'll make exceptions for the big telephotos), they'd be better off jumping to 4x5 rather than worrying themselves sick about MLU, especially for 99% of the overly considered and effortfully overwrought landscapery that results.

I've got three MLU 6x7's/67's and
the position of the MLU button is routinely maddening.