Please help me sort out my 6x7 thoughts

Yardkat, you mentioned interest in the Mamiya 7 without being able to afford one. To me that suggests you should consider the Koni-Omega and Rapid-Omega rangefinders. The prices are very reasonable for the bodies and lenses, and they are very rugged. You'll need an external light meter, but you probably have one anyway.

Paul.A said:

2F/2F said "the people I know who prefer the Pentax are folks who are really pretty technically inept, intimidated by medium format, and prefer it's "big 35" look and feel. "

Never considered myself as technically inept before, 25 years in the industry writing technical articles on photography, and now I'm considered technically inept because of the brand of camera I use. What a load of fucking bollocks.

Click to expand...

Some of my friends produce excellent images from Pentax 67s. Not sure how these 'technically inept' folks do it, but somehow they pull it off.

Paul.A said:

2F/2F said "the people I know who prefer the Pentax are folks who are really pretty technically inept, intimidated by medium format, and prefer it's "big 35" look and feel. "

Never considered myself as technically inept before, 25 years in the industry writing technical articles on photography, and now I'm considered technically inept because of the brand of camera I use. What a load of fucking bollocks.

Click to expand...

Well, yeah... but he's young.

I am sure after he's taken his 10,000th photo he will realize what we know. A camera is just a portable black box.

Best of luck to you.

tim in san jose

"Never considered myself as technically inept before, 25 years in the industry writing technical articles on photography, and now I'm considered technically inept because of the brand of camera I use. What a load of fucking bollocks."

It seems that a lot of the pissiness is coming from connotative understandings of words. When I say "technically inept", all it means is "technically inept". It doesn't mean "F-ing idiot incapable of producing anything worthwhile". I seem to have forgotten that this is an election year, so people will be pulling whatever sound bites suit their mood and taking them as complete statements. To make things more clear, here is the entire paragraph I wrote:

"I thought I wanted a Pentax 67 as well when I had just started, but then I discovered RBs. In my experience, the people I know who prefer the Pentax are folks who are really pretty technically inept, intimidated by medium format, and prefer it's "big 35" look and feel. This in no way makes the Pentax a bad camera, nor does it mean these people don't produce outstanding work! There is just a bit of a different approach to using it, I think. Better suited for people who want the utmost in simplicity and ease of use, while the RB is better suited for those who are more interested in functionality, and versatility features."

I didn't mean anything personal by it; honestly. I did not mean it as an insult to anyone. (Why on Earth would I?) I did not even state, nor did I imply, that being technically inept was a bad thing! In fact, I specifically stated otherwise. I did not call anyone technically inept except for people I personally know, nor did I say anything bad about those who use these cameras. If you have been writing technical articles for 25 years, then you should also be a good reader and not overreact to straight, plain, clear, and appropriately disclaimed language. It's the Internet. Don't be so sensitive. If you react this way to some post on the Internet, how do you walk down the street in town without suffering a nervous breakdown?

As for Tim's comments, just let me have my sarcastic moment in response and state that I have taken more than 10,000 actually, and I have done it on many cameras that truly are black boxes. Also, I spent my "youth" running a nuclear reactor for the country instead of learning photography (as did you, with different specifics, of course), so I will thoroughly dispute your use of age and inexperience against me. (If I hadn't actually spoken with you, it probably would not bother me that much.) IMO, age, number of exposures, or camera used has nothing to do with it, but energy expended does.

This is not a gear bashing or person bashing tear that I am on. I think you know how I feel about all cameras being great tools and great fun. I was simply describing a difference in features between the cameras that makes the Pentax more suited to those who are technically inept. The Pentax is a more simple and less featured camera, which the technically inept people I know prefer over an RB. Stating that the Pentax is well suited to those who are technically inept is *not* the same as stating that only technically inept people use the Pentax. They are not even close to being the same statement.

I have owned Pentax 67II for some years, and although I don't consider myself technically inept, I'd agree with 2F/2F that it might appeal more to some people used to 35mm cameras. As opposed to the more down-to-the-photography-bones of the other MF cameras like RB/RZ or Hassie or even a Rolleiflex. When the P67 is used with the metering prism, it is a 35mm on steroids.

Now I consider my affair with Pentax67II an important transition from shooting 35mm to using real cameras (both MF and LF).

And technically inept people IMO can sometimes make better photos because their minds are not cluttered by the technicalities...

2F; what if I told you you were an idiot?

We all know that "idiot" comes from the latin "idiota", meaning a common person, a laymen. So it's a simple way to describe many of us here: laymen, amateurs, enthusiasts, etc. We're all idiots.

Of course, nobody would ever be offended by that.

:munch:

Well, I am for sure an idiot, and probably technically inept as well. (See the winky face? My tongue is in my cheek and I'm being lighthearted! yay!) I think I'm going to order a Pentax. I went to a local repair/store that had an RB for sale, and I have to say, I know they're all big, but the RB was just ginormous. I know the Pentax is big, too, but I was just turned off by the mamiya. I'm not even sure exactly why, truth be told. But I'm going to wait until next week, because I need to make sure about a couple other things before I whip out my much abused charge card. ;0

I fail to see where etymology comes into this. I am talking about current uses of the words "inept" and "idiot", not their roots.

...and, the real point: *I never called anyone here any of those words*, nor would I, nor did I state or even imply that being technically inept was a bad or shameful thing. I referred to it as a factual state of being of many of my personal friends, and that is it. Please read what I actually wrote.

Both cameras are fine. The Pentax is just more simple and less full featured. The only reason I mentioned this is that some people I know (who shall remain without description) prefer it exactly for this reason. If you find something good, go with it...and don't worry about how technically adept or inept you are.

2F, my point is simply that there is no escaping the usage of words, regardless of what the correct meaning is.

Nobody really uses "inept" in except as a slur. Even though it does not mean it exclusively.

Oxford English Dictionary 'inept; unskillful, absurd, '

The implication was definitely there, Mamiya RB = skillful, and knowledgeable, Pentax = you don't know your apertures from your f-stops.

From your tone in your subsequent posts you come across a right "merchant banker", and if you want to know what that means I suggest you do some research into the English language and the usage of idiom.

"The implication was definitely there, Mamiya RB = skillful, and knowledgeable, Pentax = you don't know your apertures from your f-stops."

Hogwash. There was no implication. That's the way you took it. Why in high hell would I bother to chuck insults around on the Internet when people are asking what camera to use? I happen to like the Pentax 67 myself.

I can see an Internet misunderstanding if someone did not read the post thoroughly. Nowhere in it did I imply that only technically inept people use Pentaxes. Just read the paragraph. It is plain as day. People want to focus on one phrase instead of actually trying to understand the paragraph. It's ridiculous.

I believe that is a cockney slang for wanker. I have no idea why I know that and the following as my only cockney slang. I also happen to know what a strangely weird is.

If you don't like what I say, you needn't call me a name in a chickenshit roundabout fashion. I agree that I am right, however.

If you will bother to actually respond to my points (first of all..uhm...how I didn't even say what you are getting so upset about), maybe there will be something worth writing about.

Honestly; How do you make it through the day being so darned sensitive to implication? If you want to get your underwear in a wad over some little thing, go do it at Photo.net. If you don't like something someone says in earnest response to an OP, you just have to suck it up and argue it properly, free of angry and overreactive outbursts.

Paul.....There is something to what you have said, though I still think it may be a bit overreactive and harsh. Direct language is troublesome on the Internet. Let me just say, instead:

I am sorry to have offended you. I did not mean what you think I meant. My intent was much more simple. Tempers tend to fly when we can't see each other face to face. This is pointless, and I apologize. I can only say that I was not trying to do anything close to insulting someone, although the implication could be read by some.

That is much more simple and easy, and hopefully causes lots of warm fuzzies for us all.

What I would advise would be to think more about what you wish for as an end result of owning another camera. Then think about where and the conditions under which it is likely to be used. Then be honest with yourself and determine whether the use of the camera justifies the expense and investment. If you live in a habitat that has nominal space then you will be less likely to reap the benefits of the ablility to produce 20x24 prints of high quality. You will find, I believe, that the more print sizes you accumulate the more complex becomes the storage of your body of work.

I have a hard time using more than 1 camera at a time...actually, I have challenges enough with one camera at a time. The more cameras one owns the less facile one becomes at a particular camera's infrequent use. This would not be as much of a problem when using a unfamilar camera by yourself in quiet contemplation and a minimum of distractions from outside influences. However, you will be distracted by having your husband there. If however, you were to be sometimes be working with a dynamic subject, for instance a child, that would benefit from operational proficiency then such lack of familiarity with the camera's features etc could be very problematic.

When working from a tripod with a non square rectangular format a rotating or revolving back is extremely nice...I mean really wonderful. Will the application benefit from ground glass usage? Would you receive greater benefit by expanding your Nikon system as opposed to getting a 6x7?

I own a Mamiya RZ67 with 4 lenses. In the past 10 years I would guess that I have exposed all of 10 frames by handholding the camera. Actually I probably have overstated the frames so exposed. I have shot a good deal of film with it. An overlooked benefit of a heavier instrument could be improved fitness through additional exercise...perhaps enough so that a creampuff could be consumed with exercise offsetting calories injested. This would be hard to accomplish by delegating the exercise to your husband. The larger film size allows for much improved gradation in larger print sizes but I believe that the primary benefit of a bigger format is the larger ground glass for greater ease of and resulting improvement in composition. Certainly, my opinion is that they do little to improve quick handling.


Are you comfortable that a 6x7 is right for you?

Claire, you bring up some very good points. It's perhaps the case that I've had one too many of my husband's home brews to adequately discuss them, but I will try a little bit.
I will grant, I do not need this camera, but I think I want one. I think this is one of the fun parts of a hobby, buying things that one don't necessarily need. Also, since it's a hobby, I buy really used and wait out the cheapest deal I can, since I can't justify it by telling myself it's ok because I can write it off. Also, I print at an art center darkroom, so I don't have to worry about print size and buying new trays, enlargers, etc...all that stuff is already there.

"The more cameras one owns the less facile one becomes at a particular camera's infrequent use."
I get that, it makes sense. considering...

"However, you will be distracted by having your husband there."
you know, you may be right, but he's really great. He's super patient, waaaayyyy more patient that I would ever be if the tables were turned. I'd be all "can't you set up that shot by now? Let's GO!" And he's never said a word to me. Never. Anyway, he entertains himself while I do my thing, he's great. I think I could probably (maybe, don't want to press my luck) even go out with LF and he'd be ok with it all. (Someday when I'm not totally intimidated by LF, I'll try it out and see.) He just takes pics with his digicam, then tromps around with the dogs, then tromps back, and tromps around some more. Sometimes I feel the pressure to hurry up, but none of it's from him. Also, the project I have in mind has to do with some land his family owns, so it's not an issue, really. But still, I have considered it, and will probably continue to do so.

"If however, you were to be sometimes be working with a dynamic subject, for instance a child,"
Not likely to happen! Not mine, at any rate! ;0 and if I were photographing someone else's child I'd be bringing my Nikon which I'm pretty familiar with.

"perhaps enough so that a creampuff could be consumed with exercise offsetting calories injested."
Yup, have thought of that, too! And really, I don't intend for my husband to carry anything other than the tripod, and he only carries that b/c it straps on his pack nicely and I can access it quickly. I'm not a *total* wuss, except for when I am a total wuss...
I'm not really looking for super quick use, I kind of know what I'm getting into, but I'm just afraid if it's *too* heavy I won't bring it out at all. I just want to be comfortable while hoisting around a brick. Thank you for your point, though, it's all great stuff to think about.

I know you are stuck on 6x7 but 645 might work if you like that type of aspect ratio. If you print to the long side the improvement is only from 6 to 7cm. Cameras like the Mamiya 645 are fairly light, cheap, lots of lenses and take more negatives per roll of film. I've made some nice 11x14's off my Fuji 645.

Thank you to everyone for your helpful suggestions. Thanks to a local Utah Apugger, I have purchased a really pretty Pentax 67 kit! I'm very exited, and can't wait to get out and try it out! It's bulky, but not as heavy as I thought it would be, although I may have to start using the big camelback for our outings! Anyway, thank you everyone, thank you local Utah Apugger (I won't divulge your identity unless you say it's ok) and if anyone has any advice on using it, tips, tricks, etc, please let me know!
Thanks so much!
Julie

Julie - Good luck with your new (to you) camera. Have fun with that Pentax!

gene

yardkat said:

Thank you to everyone for your helpful suggestions. Thanks to a local Utah Apugger, I have purchased a really pretty Pentax 67 kit! I'm very exited, and can't wait to get out and try it out! It's bulky, but not as heavy as I thought it would be, although I may have to start using the big camelback for our outings! Anyway, thank you everyone, thank you local Utah Apugger (I won't divulge your identity unless you say it's ok) and if anyone has any advice on using it, tips, tricks, etc, please let me know!
Thanks so much!
Julie

Click to expand...

Hope you have a lot of pleasure out of your new "Texas Leica", and make good use of your husband to help you carry it.

I thing it´s perfectly right to go for any Pentax 67, I´ve got two and used them handheld with much sucess, they are so heavy they don´t vibrate much. As a matter of fact, just handholding dampens much of the vibrations. Whatever scientists say, its the reality that matters, ie getting sharp pictures. Of course, try to keep your shutterspeeds high enough for handheld, never slower thas focal length of your lens, 60 is the slowest for a 55 mm handheld and som on.
But just go out and se for yourself!
Patrik Paulsson, Gothenburg, Sweden

T am a long time GS1 USer and I love it. I am over-camera-ed and the GS1 is one of my most favorite ones. And yes you do want a grip. For Sure the grip. if you want to shoot verticals you have to rotate the camera and it is heavy so the grip really helps a lot there. The 100mm lens is a super performer. I did a trip to Maine with the GS1 as main shooter and it did very, very well. Results can be seen on my web page at loganphotographics.com.... have fun... I know you'll love it.
Logan