Pentax 6x7 vs. 67

[Hassasin]

It started with non-MLU 6x7, then it moved to MLU 6x7, eventually becoming 67 (67 II is another story).

The 67 is said to be different enough to affect reliability, at least that is what I'm reading.

Of the MLU 6x7 and 67, is one of these less prone to any problems? I get the age difference, but I'm not after a heavily used body anyways. Some places suggest that 67 is somewhat more fragile in some areas, due to internal changes.

 

[Alan9940]

Can't speak to either of the early 6x7 models, but I owned a 67 body for about 20 years and it performed flawlessly all those years. I eventually sold it and got a 67 II, mainly because this version has a much brighter viewfinder enabling me to obtain proper focus. My old eyes ain't what they used to be!

 

[Hassasin]

@Alan9940 Thanks.

 

[mtjade2007]

Get a P67 and invest in a few lenses. Build up the confidence on the lenses then you will consider to get into P67-2. It is one of the best MF cameras. You will not look back.

 

[markbau]

I've had a 67 for about 25 years, it's been dropped, travelled heaps with rough handling and it has never missed a beat. You'd have to pry it from my cold, dead hands.

 

[Randy Stewart]

I've owned/used the P67 system since 1985. I first acquired a 6x7. In consideration of no removable film backs, I later bought a 2nd 6x7, and still later, a 67ii. I've never had an issue or failure with any of them. Around 2000, I had both 6x7 bodies CLA'd and prism meters calibrated by a local Pentax factory authorized shop. I admit that I am not a heavy user, but three bodies with 100% perfect performance over more than 35 years says something.

 

[DREW WILEY]

My first MLU 67 body finally needs triple bypass surgery after 47 years of hard outdoor use in all kinds of weather, including several drops. It's cheaper just to buy another one; but I already had a spare on hand.

Be aware that the finders (prism or otherwise) are not interchangeable between the earlier versions and Type II. The lenses are.

The MLU feature is important. Whether or not you need the bells and whistles of the Type II model is a
different story. Many of the older cameras might need new light seal gaskets by now. But that's fairly easy to do yourself if necessary.

 

[Hassasin]

My first MLU 67 body finally needs triple bypass surgery after 47 years of hard outdoor use in all kinds of weather, including several drops. It's cheaper just to buy another one; but I already had a spare on hand.

Be aware that the finders (prism or otherwise) are not interchangeable between the earlier versions and Type II. The lenses are.

The MLU feature is important. Whether or not you need the bells and whistles of the Type II model is a
different story. Many of the older cameras might need new light seal gaskets by now. But that's fairly easy to do yourself if necessary.

According to Pentax finders are compatible, the only difference is the AEII finder, which has electronic contacts on 67II (I believe still can be put on older body as plain prism). Of course getting AEII without accommodating body makes no sense.

 

[DREW WILEY]

There's one blatant error on that diagram. They have the labeling of the folding hood and the rigid magnifying one reversed.

 

[Hassasin]

There's one blatant error on that diagram. They have the labeling of the folding hood and the rigid magnifying one reversed.

That is correct, still finders are interchangeable. I posted this only to clarify this one bit, and this has been confirmed by several sources - finder mounting is the same throughout the series.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Since I use a handheld meter anyway, I now use the non-metering prism. It's a little bit lighter. I've worked with four different finders : two kinds of prism, the folding finder, and the tall chimney style.
The last type, the chimney, is the brightest viewing and most precise to focus, and shows the full screen, but is really clumsy for vertical or handheld compositions.