Pentax 6x7

[ColColt]

Those of you that are shooting B&W, are you doing it yourself or sending it out for processing? I don't have my darkroom anymore and was looking for an alternative.

 

[Hatchetman]

you can load a tank in the closet. You can probably find tank, reels, and chemicals for about $50 or so.

The 300mm should have had a tripod collar but it doesn't. might as well shoot handheld.

 

[wildbill]

you can load a tank in the closet. You can probably find tank, reels, and chemicals for about $50 or so.

The 300mm should have had a tripod collar but it doesn't. might as well shoot handheld.

Mine does!
I had a fellow apugger make on for me while I watched. The lens is listed here in the classifieds somewhere.

 

[ColColt]

I've located an excellent 6x7 body but not sure as to the screen. I don't do well focusing with the standard screens and had Pentax install a split image screen for me. You had to send it to them as it wasn't an easy process of swapping out the screens like in a 35mm camera. I think I got that screen from Katzeye, who is no longer in business, sadly.

Anyone know who may make such a screen today? I don't know if Pentax works on the 6x7 cameras anymore.

 

[studiocarter]

They do, but only on MLU and on a case by case basis they told me. I sent an email to the Denver ? Unit and they sent a phone number. I never called because a local camera repair store fixed my 6x7.

 

[ColColt]

Unfortunately, there's no one here anymore than works on cameras anymore. Even back when I had the screen changed out I was told to send it to Pentax ans it wasn't an easy out, easy in replacement. Even after having done that I had to send it back again as it was back focusing. Apparently in the 6x7 at least, I don't know about the later 67, to get it right there were screws of a sort that had to be adjusted up and down as to move the screen in and out.

 

[flavio81]

Unfortunately, there's no one here anymore than works on cameras anymore. Even back when I had the screen changed out I was told to send it to Pentax ans it wasn't an easy out, easy in replacement. Even after having done that I had to send it back again as it was back focusing. Apparently in the 6x7 at least, I don't know about the later 67, to get it right there were screws of a sort that had to be adjusted up and down as to move the screen in and out.

The P6x7 is no different than many other SLR cameras, to be honest.

As for the focus screen height adjustment, this is something that is common also with many other cameras, for example the Mamiya C330, RB67, many others. Of course, this is necessary only in special cases.

 

[flavio81]

Ok, i had a weekend with my new Pentax 67 camera and the SMC 90/2.8 lens.

My point of reference, for comparison, is my Mamiya RB67 camera, which is my other 6x7 camera and a camera that I really like a lot, in fact I would say it's my favorite medium format camera.

So, comparison with the RB and overall impresions:

- The P67 viewfinder (pentaprism) is too small for a 6x7 camera, but it is still comfortable and big. I have grid matte screen with no focusing aids, so I need to use the (optional) 2X loupe to focus precisely. While my RB67 with waistlevel finder has a much, much bigger image and is really easy to focus.

- Build quality of the P67 is a nice surprise, very high build quality, the same with the lens. This is my first PENTAX camera and at first sight, similar cameras (i.e. Pentax ES) and lenses seemed cheapily made from looking at the pictures on the internet, but in actual usage the build quality of the P67 is really high, except for the shutter speed dial. I'd say the camera feels much better than it looks.

- Mirror-up shock is indeed strong... But I like the fact that MLU can be activated with my pinky finger and then I can shoot with the index finger. Which makes shooting with MLU more or less easy. Shutter vibration is lower than I expected, which is good news. All in all, I think that with proper handholding technique, I could minimize the potential problems. I need to do tests, of course.

- But still, compared to the RB67, the Pentax is a pneumatic hammer: the RB67 is supremely smooth in operation, i can handhold it at 1/30 and even 1/15 (or less!) with no problem. This is slightly compensated by the fact that I have a 90/3.8 lens on the RB versus the 90/2.8 lens on the Pentax.

- It is lighter than the Mamiya RB67 and, for my standards, light enough. It feels really easy to handhold and to juggle the camera about. In this sense it has good ergonomics. However, I find i can hold the RB67 steadier and I find the ergonomics of the RB as good or even better. This coupled with the quicker focusing on the Mamiya, gives a plus for the Mamiya. Stop-down-preview is also a bit easier to operate on the Mamiya. And I can glance the shutter speed and the aperture at once on the Mamiya lens.

Nevertheless, film advance is far faster on the P67, which is a good plus.

- Film change is really SLOW, right now my P67 is the slowest pro 120 camera in terms of changing film. While I can reload 120 film very quickly with the RB67 (not to mention the possibility of just swapping the film back), and also with the C330 (really quick!) and the Rolleicord, it is a real pain to do in the P67, no doubt due to the very cumbersome film spool locking pins, which must have designed by Satan himself.

- I still have not developed any film but by looking at the diagram of the 90/2.8 lens, the high build quality of the lens, and Pentax's reputation as a lens maker, I expect the results to be as good as the Mamiya 90/3.8 lens, which is extremely sharp even wide open.

All in all I find it a very well built camera which is fun to use and quick to operate, hampered only by lack of sophistication on the mirror and shutter mechanism. I suspect that there should be a way to inject viscous silicone oil to a strategic part of the mechanism that should slow down the mirror, increasing shutter lag but decreasing mirror slap.

 

[Hatchetman]

You are right. Loading film can be a real PITA with this thing.

 

[ColColt]

You are right. Loading film can be a real PITA with this thing.

I think anyone who has ever owned one would agree totally. It never was a problem for me until I started doing weddings. You had best have an assistant and an extra body. Always shooting 220 film you still only get 20 shots before you run out of ammo. That's where that assistant and 2nd body comes in as he has it loaded and ready to pass to you as he reloads the other one.

Other than that scenario I never got in a big hurry as even in the studio things weren't as hectic as a wedding. Nothing surpasses that!

 

[DREW WILEY]

A chimney finder will give you full frame view, plus a brighter GG image, with built-in diopter correction and magnification. A very nice accessory to own, which will significantly reduce camera wt, though not practical for handheld shooting, and clumsy in vertical orientation.

 

[dscottjorgenson]

I own the Pentax 67II (2 bodies) and regularly use it on a very robust carbon-fiber tripod (Gitzo G1548 with G1372 head) for exposures ranging from 1/125 to many seconds in length. I always use the mirror lock-up, and shutter vibration is never a problem for me.

That said - I have used the same 2 bodies with lighter weight carbon fiber and metal tripods. In such a configuration, even with the mirror locked-up, I regularly experience evenly-distributed, edge-to-edge softness/blur in the image on film, at shutter speeds ranging from 1/30 to a couple seconds in length, when the camera is in the horizontal orientation. At 1/60 or faster, this is not a problem; and conversely, for many-second exposures (say 4 sec or more), it also is not a problem. And it is only a problem when the camera is mounted horizontally; when the tripod head is flipped into the vertical orientation, with everything else the same, the image is sharp on film at all exposure speeds. I have tested both bodies, acquired at completely different times from different production runs, with the Gitzo and 2 lighter-weight tripods, and the results are always as I have just described.

What I think is happening is that the shutter acceleration, when perpendicular to gravity (ie when the camera is horizontal), is inducing a kick (torque) of short-lived duration, which sets in about 1/60 sec after the exposure begins. So for 1/60 and faster, with the shutter already closing or closed by the time the torque from the shutter opening kicks-in, there is no problem. And for many-second exposures it is also not a problem, since the duration of the kick is short enough to be negligible relative to the overall exposure. But for exposures ranging in-between, it's a problem. Meanwhile, when the camera is vertical, the force of the shutter is parallel to gravity and so, no torque.

Don't get me wrong - I love this camera and the images it produces. And if you always handhold it, you'll be shooting at 1/125 or faster anyway, and this will all be moot to you. But if you shoot slower, all I can advise is to use the sturdiest, best dampened tripod you can find - my Gitzo weighs almost 6 pounds and with the head comes in at around 9 pounds.

 

[flavio81]

Drew,

Thanks for the answer. The WLF will be on my shopping list then.

Dr. Scott,

Your theory about the torque or "kick" seems plausible; now, the P67 does have frictional shutter brakes in the mechanism, so the question would be if perhaps after one, two, or three years of usage, they would require re-calibration. And this could explain why there are so many cameras with this effect.

 

[Peter Rockstroh01]

I've used the Pentax 67 for over 15 years, had the whole gear stolen last year, and bought everything again over the past six months. I've tried a few MF outfits over the years and found this model to be the handiest in the field. I use it on a 4 lb. tripod with a Slik grip and it displays the same soft image described by ScottJorgensen, when held vertical. Never figured out why the mirror slap had such a different effect in that position. The camera is only hard to load when there is a unique photo opportunity. Other than that, it is a reallt sturdy design that can take a lot of abuse. I fell out of a tree carrying one and still used it for many years. afterwards.

 

[flavio81]

and it displays the same soft image described by ScottJorgensen, when held vertical.

I thought the problem was when placed horizontal on the tripod.

 

[Peter Rockstroh01]

Nope. When the camera is held vertical, the Slik head sticks out horizontally and is -I guess- more "vibration-prone" ???

 

[DREW WILEY]

I bought my first P67 body almost forty years ago, and it still works exactly the same in terms of handling, mirror kick etc. These cameras warrant real tripods and real tripod heads. With a long lens like a 300, it actually requires a heavier support than my 8x10. With shorter lenses this can be compromised somewhat. But toy tripods will give you nothing but trouble. I'm not fond of ballheads either, though the
better ones might be OK with shorter lenses and mirror lockup.

 

[dscottjorgenson]

Interesting reports of your experiences, everybody. I think the takeaway, with this camera and its huge focal plane shutter, is to shoot fast (1/60 - 1/125 or faster) or use the most robust, well-dampened tripod and head you can acquire, even when using the mirror lock-up. Currently my tripod/head set is about 9 pounds in weight (even with carbon fiber legs) and I'm happy and have no problems anymore, at any camera orientation, or any shutter speed. When I was using tripod/head kits of about half that weight, I would have the problems I described. Good luck, everyone.

 

[ColColt]

I'm considering getting another one of these beauties and found super nice 6x7 which was the one I started with. My concern is my eyes are not what they were in the mid '90's when I was shooting a lot with the 6x7.
I have problems seeing through and focusing my Nikon F2A with the standard eyepiece and have on order a +0.5 diopter to fit as I was told that's what I need due in part to Nikon not numbering their diopters correctly. My tri-focal is +1.25 and was told to subtract one from that which would put it +0.25. They make no such diopter so, +0.5 is the closest.

IF I could find a proper diopter for the 6x7 would the same advice go for that camera as they do for Nikon or just try and find a +1.25 instead?

 

[dpurdy]

I'm considering getting another one of these beauties and found super nice 6x7 which was the one I started with. My concern is my eyes are not what they were in the mid '90's when I was shooting a lot with the 6x7.
I have problems seeing through and focusing my Nikon F2A with the standard eyepiece and have on order a +0.5 diopter to fit as I was told that's what I need due in part to Nikon not numbering their diopters correctly. My tri-focal is +1.25 and was told to subtract one from that which would put it +0.25. They make no such diopter so, +0.5 is the closest.

IF I could find a proper diopter for the 6x7 would the same advice go for that camera as they do for Nikon or just try and find a +1.25 instead?

Don't know where you find such a thing. I have a plus 1 original pentax diopter in mine and otherwise the view is always a bit soft to my eye.

 

[wy2l]

I own a Pentax67 II, a landscape protographer, and have enjoy the discussion on when to use the "beast" with a tripod.

Conduct an experiment: Either 1) Read Thornton's book "Edge of Darkness", or 2) Shoot a few frames hand-held and on a tripod at various shutter speeds, process the negatives, and break out the 20x loupe.

Conclusion: Use a tripod and MLU. Always. Always.

 

[ColColt]

I would have to say that probably 70% of my shooting with the 6x7 has been hand held and if I used 125th sec or greater there were no problems. At weddings I used to do I had it atop a sturdy Manfrotto 3211 tripod with a Bogen 3047 head. I felt that was a good combination for the heavy Pentax.

 

[DREW WILEY]

There are several ways of dealing with diopter issues, if one of the factory eyepieces isn't suitable. First, according to my optometrist friend, any optician could simply make a custom one if they know the diameter and thickness, given the optometrist's prescription. Second, there are adjustable diopter magnifiers which clip onto the pentaprism, then flip out of the way for overall viewing. These come in very handy for precise focusing in general. Then there is the deluxe chimney hood which is very bright and has an adjustable diopter. The latter two options aren't practical for handheld shooting, but work well with a tripod. Since nuances of closeup vision aren't necessarily a constant over the working lifespan of a camera like this, adjustable diopters are an excellent form of insurance for such changes.

 

[ColColt]

i hadn't realized I had a viewing problem until I pulled out my old FTN Photomic recently and found looking through the top part of my glasses I couldn't see as sharp to focus as before. I hadn't noticed that because I've been shooting with a D7000 for some time and it has a variable diopter adjustment and everything from the LED panel to infinity looks sharp. No such adjustment with the film Nikons nor the 6x7.

Having discoved I could look through that center part(tri-focal) of the glasses, everything was in sharp focus but requires tilting your head up to find the tri-focal section. I do know the 67II has, like the D7000, an adjustable diopter and in my case that may be the better option, thought a more expensive one.

 

[flavio81]

I think I mentioned that the Pentax 6x7 catalog mentions that the mirror has a dampening system.

Well, I took a look at the P6x7 service manual and the damper dampens the "down" movement of the mirror. That is, it does not dampen the mirror "up" movement but the mirror "down" movement, which happens AFTER the exposure. No kidding!

Thus, i had one of the biggest "WTF?!" engineering moments of my life. What a disappointment.

Anyways, and in fairness to Pentax, the mirror-up movement is interesting. The mirror also swings-back, like in some Swedish machines. And the mirror movement is performed by a cam-and-slot mechanism. I would guess that this would make the mirror movement a bit smoother.

Also, there is no typical mirror bumper foam on the machine (only a tiny square of foam). Second WTF moment. And it's not my camera's fault. Other users have reported the same in forums.

So what was going on Pentax engineers' heads back in 1969? The 6x7 is 1969, In 1970 the RB67 had a centrifugal mirror-up governor to slow down the mirror-up movement. Even in 1959 the Canonflex camera had a clockwork mechanism for achieving the same. WHY pentax did not incorporate such mechanism when it would be obvious that a 6x7 mirror would require it? Who knows.

Now, in all benefit to Pentax, perhaps the fact that the mirror doesn't really go straight "up" but it goes up and then slides backward in a continuous movement, makes vibrations of lesser concern. Or in any case, the vibration would not be in the "up/down" direction but towards the photographer ("back/forth" direction); this would explain why vibrations are still supposedly a problem when using a tripod with no MLU. It would also explain why the firstime P6x7 user is suprised by the recoil: the mirror is shooting back the vibration directly to the photographer, not upwards. Thus, the mirror damper is the photographer itself!

And also, in fairness to Pentax and the 6x7 users, perhaps the actual mirror vibration -regardless of how it's felt by the user- is similar to other 35mm SLRs, but the result is amplified by:

a. The resolution of the 6x7 being higher
b. The DOF of the 6x7 being narrower
c. The expectation of the end user (regarding the image quality) being far higher than the expectation of the 35mm user.

Now, as I think I've mentioned before, the SHUTTER has frictional brakes built in, which if going out of alignment would increase the shutter vibrations. Also the P6x7 service manual mentions those being replaced by frictional springs (or something like that) so it seems they were trying improvements on this. On my P67 the curtain open movement (felt when using MLU) is remarkably smooth, to be honest.

Conclusion: Use a tripod and MLU. Always. Always.

Yes but if one is forced to always use a tripod and MLU with the P6x7, then its advantages of smaller size and (slightly) smaller weight go down to the toilet. If i was going to place it on a tripod, a Mamiya RB67 would be a far better choice. And a 4x5" view camera would be lighter.

I would say that the reason for using a P6x7 es exactly for being able to handhold it comfortably...