Pentax 6x7 versus Bronica GS-1?

I'm trying to decide on a medium-format camera that will do for still life work and also hiking with. I've boiled it down to the Pentax 6x7 MLU and the Bronica GS-1.

Both are just about manageable for hiking, and also good for tripod work for Still Life shots.

Both are claimed to have good lenses.

Which do you think would be the better system?

This video helped me when I had similar question:
Petr

For tripod work, both cameras are probably about equal. Do you plan any handheld photography? I've never owned a GS-1, but I do own a Hasselblad 500C/M which is a similar boxy-style camera. Personally, I find the 500C/M much more difficult to hold steady vs my Pentax 67II, even given the weight difference. Could be that the size of my hands just isn't suited to handholding the Hassey. Just something to think about...

I've used both, and hiked with both- I personally think the GS-1 lenses that I used were better, or I liked the rendition more, but I would not suggest the GS-1. It's difficult to get repair work done on Bronicas, at least as far as I know, and my GS-1 eventually died, and now it sits. There are a lot more Pentax 67 bodies out there, and I would say the repair prospects are better- it's a totally mechanical camera, with a mechanical lens/body connection, there's only leaf shutters in special leaf shutter lenses, and it uses a horizontal-travel cloth focal plane shutter, which is pretty common and reliable. You lose interchangeable backs, but on the plus side, loading is simpler- and changeable backs don't really make sense for hiking anyway, as it's kind of dead weight.

Either way, they are both fine systems, but both kind of heavy- I replaced them both with a Mamiya 7 for that reason, back when prices were much more comparable. I miss the Bronica 100mm f3.5 lens, but I'd buy a Pentax 67 if I had to choose between the systems.

Rob MacKillop said:

I'm trying to decide on a medium-format camera that will do for still life work and also hiking with. I've boiled it down to the Pentax 6x7 MLU and the Bronica GS-1.

Both are just about manageable for hiking, and also good for tripod work for Still Life shots.

Both are claimed to have good lenses.

Which do you think would be the better system?

Click to expand...

I have the Bronica GS-1. It is way under-rated. The body was designed and made toward the end of its production. So all the components are made for the same body, not like the ETR or SQ. Not a lot of them were made, but most of them are in excellent quality. I would not say service is an issue since it is made very solid.

The GS-1 with WLF is very manageable with the weight.

You can add the AE finder and grip. It adds the bulk and weight, but still manageable.

Thank you, good fellows. Lots of good comments, and repair is certainly an issue to consider, although they do seem to have been built from tank parts. My first choice would be a Mamiya 7, but the prices are ridiculous compared to the one I thought of getting some 6 years ago - and am kicking myself for not buying!

Nudging ahead slightly is the Pentax...

They’re all good cameras, but if you’re going to do a lot of hiking that Pentax is really heavy. The Mamiya 7 would be the ideal camera, and the lenses are a cut above the other two. I would take the hit - it’s not like it’s ever going to lose value.

Cheers, fatso. How much is the Mamiya 7 in your neck of the woods? In the UK they are often over £2,000, the Mamiya 7ii often over £3,000 which is over 5,000 CAD. I call that expensive. The Pentax here varies depending on lens, but around £400 to £600. That's a BIG difference.

Agreed on the huge price difference, but you should be able to find one cheaper on eBay. I doubt prices will ever go back down, so you can always recuperate it if you decide to sell it. I know it's a significant amount but in 6 months from now when you're looking at your negatives under a loop you'll forget about how much you paid ;-)

Sorry - I'm an enabler.

Haha, indeed you are. I'd have to sell one or two things first. Maybe I could stretch to a Mamiya 6...I quite like square format.

By the way, Paul, you have some great images on your site. Really great. Lot's of square format too. Mamiya 6?

Thank you

Those were all taken with a Hasselblad - mostly a SWC/M. The 43mm Mamiya is similar - some even consider it better - but I like being able to use a ground glass on the swc. I don't know anything about the Mamiya 6 - does it have a similar wide angle lens ?

The square is a great format - but it depends on what you are shooting. I find nature landscapes and mountains work better as horizontal panoramas, have you considered a 6x9 ? Some of those Fujis are really nice.

I have and use both systems. All of my Bronica lenses are good. I spent years culling and cherry picking for the P67 and feel good about the optics that I ended up with but have a sense of variability with my limited personal experience. I bought into the GS-1 when I had a series of incidences where a switchable film back would have been helpful as that aspect of the P67 was a bit frustrating. At 11X14 types of enlarging, I feel that the two systems' optics are a toss-up with my current lenses. My GS-1 optics are 50, 65, 100, 110, 150, 200 and 250 and they're all super sharp. My P67's are 55, 75 (ƒ4), 105, 135, 150, 165, 200 and 300. I had multiples of most and there were differences between examples in the Pentax system. I never had a 45 that was crisp, though and had some rangefinder options for wide angle that had me not needing one, anyway.

Cheers, Craig.

Does anyone have thoughts about the coupled versus not coupled TTL prism? Can they be added to any of the 6x7 or 67 models?

I have had the Pentax 67 for a couple of years, and just bought into a GS-1 system. I haven't had the GS-1 long so my experience is limited, but a few comments below:

- The Pentax has a much wider selection of lenses, and with the exception of certain 'desirable' or uncommon lenses (75/2.8, 100 macro, 105/2.4, and some of the longer lenses) the rest of the lenses are surprisingly cheap, like $100 cheap.
- the Pentax lenses are very good (in my experience), even the lenses that nobody says anything good about. I haven't had the Bronica long enough to form an opinion.
- The Seiko #0 shutter on the GS-1 limits the lens apertures so most are f4 or slower with the 100mm and ultra rare 80mm are f3.5. no f2.8 or f2.4 for the Bronica.
- If you like the WLF style of shooting*, the GS-1 can be more compact and lighter. But if you outfit it with the grip and prism finder, is looses most of that advantage.
- even with the WLF, the P67 feels bulkier and heavier.
- the metered finders on the GS-1 can give you aperture priority, which you can't get on the Pentax without spending on the very expensive 67II.
- the Bronica has a removable film back system, which, on my ETRSi, I have found is a real benefit when I'm traveling.

In the end, and this is very subjective opinion, the bulk and weight of my P67 was more than I really wanted to deal with. A little after I got it, I also got an ETRSi with a waist level finder*. I loved the compact size and the ergonomics of shooting with a WLF, so it became my primary camera. I found the 35mm SLR ergos of the P67 didn't work as well for me when the camera was 5x the size of a 35mm SLR. So, after briefly considering the Mamiya RZ, I dove into a GS-1.

Make no mistake, the GS-1 is closer in size to a P67 than to a ETRSi. But I love how it handles so far, but again, that because I love the handling of a "hasselbald" style camera (i.e. a cube with the lens on the front, a film back on the back, and WLF on top . But I'll keep the ETRSi around for more portable use. I haven't decided if I'll keep my P67 yet.

* As many will point out there is a severe limitation to shooting a rectangular format with a WLF, because portrait mode is borderline impossible (I've done a few on my ETRSi). This drives a lot of people understandably towards a RB or RZ 67, but I was narrowly focused on portability, and the rotating back of the RB/RZ makes it larger and heavier. The reality is even with a prism on my many other cameras, I still shoot 90-95% landscape, so I just decided to accept the limitation. You may not feel the same way. I do have a prism for both my ETRSi and GS-1, but I rarely use them.

Thanks, Abruzzi. That was very informative. I once had a RB67 Pro SD, and don't want to go there again. The bulk was just too excessive. Cheers.

Another (very) small comment—the GS-1 runs the film in the wrong direction. So when you cut up the film and load it in a sleeve (right side up and emulsion down) the first frame is in the right, not the left. Slightly annoying.

Have you considered the little Bronica ETRSi? It's so tiny and pleniful. The AE III prism is sweet too. If I had to choose between the Pentax 67 and a GS. I would definitely go with the Pentax if you can find a nice one.
The cameras that will probably be the most sustainable are mechanical Hasselblads.

Although I'm primarily a large format user, I've had the P67 system parallel to that for 40 years now. Very durable, bargain pricing nowadays with lots and lots of used inventory out there, especially in Japan, and very competent lenses. I wouldn't bring in RF options into this discussion, like M7's or "Texas Leicas" because it would be an apples versus oranges discussion. Each type has its own advantages. But the P67 is a very realistic system if you want a full selection of focal lengths. It was windy today, so I was out with a P67 with a 300EDIF, which is just about as good as MF telephotos get. But even the lesser, now-bargain regular 300 will deliver fine shots. My brother was a Linhof and Rollei salesman, and owned a couple of his own SL66 systems - a mighty fine expensive camera - but preferred to borrow my P67 for its better ergonomics. I imagine that would have been the case if he had owned Bronica SLR's instead.

LiamG said:

There are a lot more Pentax 67 bodies out there, and I would say the repair prospects are better- it's a totally mechanical camera,

Click to expand...

No it's not. If the battery dies in a P67 the camera is dead. It is a totally battery dependent camera.

... There are a lot more Pentax 67 bodies out there, and I would say the repair prospects are better- it's a totally mechanical camera, with a mechanical lens/body connection, ...

...I replaced them both with a Mamiya 7 ...

Click to expand...

I will point out that the Pentax 67 is completely battery dependent, just like the Bronica GS-1. And the Mamiya-7. But that has never stopped anyone. (edit: beat me to it by minutes! ; )

I have owned and shot with both, but not at the same time. I had a Pentax 67 with the waist level and both prism finders, 45, 55, 90LS, 105, 135, 165ls, 200 & 300. I currently have and shoot with the GS-1, with the waist level, AE prism, grip, 50, 65, 100, 150 and 200. I have backpacked both, and used both with studio lighting.

The main difference between the 2 are: leaf vs focal plan shutter, and interchangeable backs on the GS-1. If these are important to you, then that should make your decision.

Both are packable, especially with their waist level finders. The Pentax is slightly heavier, but not much. Similar size. But if weight is an issue, the Bronica is slightly lighter, and packs smaller.

Lenses from the same era are equivalently good, the Pentax 67 has been around a lot longer, and some of their earlier ones are not quite as good. But P67 lenses are uniformly faster due to the FP shutter, which may be important to you.

The GS-1 does not have an instant return mirror.

I can't tell you which one to get, that has to be your decision (the above plus price /availability). I picked the GS-1, but I'd be happy to use the P67 in it's place.

Optional leaf-shutter lenses for flash use are avail for Pentax too in three focal lengths, 90, 105, and 165. I don't use flash, so don't personally need them. Later Pentax lenses tend to be superb, and certain (not all) older ones too, although those earlier Takumars were quite good for their era.

I've had a Pentax 6X7 since the 80s and the three lenses I've used are the standard 105, 55 wide angle, and the 200 short telephoto. The 55mm (roughly equivalent to a 28 on a 35mm) especially the later ones, is an exceptionally sharp lens. If you decide on the Pentax and want to get a 200, get the newer version. The older version is the smaller 'scallop' lens with an annoying minimum distance of about 8ft (2.4 meters). It's a good lens, I had one for awhile, but Pentax improved it. The newer version is larger but lighter and the minimum focusing distance is cut in half. Pentax Forums has very good lens reviews.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-67-200mm-F4-Lens.html

Optional leaf-shutter lenses for flash use are avail for Pentax too in three focal lengths, 90, 105, and 165....

Click to expand...

I've never seen a P67 105LS, but I've used both the 90LS and 165LS. Maybe you are thinking about the Bronica-S 105LS?

If you are planning to use significant flash/fill, then I'd stick to the GS-1. The 90LS and 165LS work great, but they are clunky, as you have to separately cock the lens shutter between exposures.

I have both systems, as well as an RB67, and have decided to settle on the Pentax 67--mine is a 67II. All thing considered, and there is a lot to consider, my decision is based on the fact that I find the Pentax much easier to focus. That alone is enough to make me choose it, since I don't really want to deal with a camera that I can't bring into focus easily. The Pentax lenses are a little wider open, so that helps, and it has a particularly bright screen. I do need to use the prism for good focus--that's just my particular eyesight issues--but I find it nartural to use a camera at eye level.

The RB67 is about as easy to focus, but is not a camera I would travel with because its weight is more than I can easily handle.

Of course a 6x4.5 or a 6x6 will be lighter and easier to handle, but I find the Pentax pretty easy to handle. Of course, it belongs on a tripod for the sharpest photos, but all cameras do.