So who is using Pentax 67

[Soeren]

So I got this old Pentax 6X7 with a 75mm f/4,5.
I kind of like the focallenght And the performance is just great though I'd like a f/2.8. Now should that be a 75mm or a 90mm.
I am in the market for a 45mm f/4.0 soon and the last addition will be either a 135mm or a 165mm. What are you guys using and what are your thoughts ?
There is something about the format I really like. I do like 6X6 as well but never got used to 4.5X6. 6X7 is about the perfect format for me but I can't just not say why.
Cheers
Søren

 

[david b]

I am using a shutterless Carl Zeiss 180mm 2.8 lens with my P67.

Let us know how you will hold/sleeve your 10 negs.

 

[Soeren]

I am using a shutterless Carl Zeiss 180mm 2.8 lens with my P67.

Let us know how you will hold/sleeve your 10 negs.

The negs goes into the ordinary negsleeves if thats what you meant.
180mm Carl Zeiss ? I'd like to know more about that.
Cheers
Søren

 

[david b]

I'd like to know how you cut and store them.

As for the lens...it's an oddball. It has a Pentax mount. It does not have any shutterblades on the inside so I can only shoot it at 2.8. THe bokeh is amazing though.

 

[Soeren]

I'd like to know how you cut and store them.

As for the lens...it's an oddball. It has a Pentax mount. It does not have any shutterblades on the inside so I can only shoot it at 2.8. THe bokeh is amazing though.

So far I had my negs developed by a lab and they cut them and put them in ordinary neg sleeves. I recon Ill do as I did with my 6X6 negs. Cut them with a pair of scissors, just sleeve them and store them in a ring binder. I guess you ask because they tend to be a couple of mm's wider than the sleeves they go into, right ?
Cheers
Søren

 

[jss]

soren,
i have a beautiful 67. it came with the 2.8/90.. but what gets the most play is a 4/45mm. i've taken it backpacking, walked around with it in the city, used it with flash strobes. its my favorite medium format for the time being. 6x7 really is a great format.

before i was doing MF, i found myself taking more wide angle shots in 35mm. as soon as i saw the 4/45, i knew i had to have it. i picked mine up from KEH.

 

[Charles Webb]

I have been using the Pentax 67 since it was introduced. The camera is heavy, but the results are excellent. I have never liked 6x6 though I used Rollei and Hasselblad for years. Still have three Hasselblads, but seldom use them. The Pentax does what I want with no fuss. Some claim the shutter slap is so bad that it can ruin and image, it is loud, but I have never been able to see any effect caused by S.S. on a negative from 1/125 up. I won't argue with the xperts, but I am satisfied with the negative quality 100 percent. I love the 6x7 format, it fits my way of seeing. I use the 105 mm
as a normal lens. Prefer the 162 mm 2.8 for head and shoulders to 3/4 length
portraits. Also does a wonderful job with brides full length. Seldom use w angle but have them if needed. I use the 55 mm most often as it appears a bit sharper than my 45 mm. The fact is I use the W WA so seldom I am not even sure what focal length it is. The bottom line here is: Pentax 6x7 works for me.

Charlie.........................

 

[wildbill]

I use the 67II with 55mm 90mm and 150mm. I love it and it mostly replaces my 35mm gear. The 55mm is the sharpest and heaviest i've got. You'll need a very sturdy tripod and head. My 410 geared head didn't cut it and neither did the 3021 tripod. I always use MLU too.
I always hope for one neg that's no good but usually end up putting 2 in the 9th pocket. Larger print file sleeves are available that hold more 6x7 negs but aren't readily available and won't fit in most binders.

 

[Bill Hahn]

I use a P67 built in 1981, with 55mm, 105mm, 135mm macro and 200mm lenses. Since I also shoot other formats, use of this camera has long fallow periods followed by periods of intense usage. I once shot a beautiful turquise-blue damsel fly with the 105mm lens plus a couple of extenders - it was like handling a bazooka, but it got the job done. The DOF was so shallow that only the damsel fly's body was in focus, everything else was beautiful bokeh....

Anyway, great camera - built like a tank. About that loud shutter - anybody hear rumors about the "red-ear reduction" mod?

 

[davetravis]

Soeren,
Those four lenses you listed are a great start!
When I'm doing my nature thing, they are part of my "basic pack." But most times I use the 55mm instead of the 45mm. I never shoot off-tripod, and always lock up the mirror before exposure. The 135mm is super sharp for close-ups at f16, and even f22, if you keep the edge to edge area nice and flat to the focal plane.
Tons of stuff on ebay for this system.
Good luck and enjoy!
Long live Ciba!!!

 

[jovo]

55, 90, 200 and will probably get a 135 eventually because they're so damn inexpensive used, and my wife wants the macro capability. (Actually, the 135 was the first lens I bought, and it was promptly stolen the first day I used it. I set it on a backpack on the ground behind me in a park in Westchester and never saw the thief. Boy was I upset!!! Stupid and angry at the same time.)

The shutter vibration has only affected one set of negatives in all the years I've used my P67 and they were long exposures (45 seconds or so) made at night from the roof of an apartment building in NYC. There are double images of point source lights that are only visible...and up close at that....in 11x14 prints.

Love that camera system!

 

[ineffablething]

I have a couple of P67 bodies and the the 75/2.8,105,165,and the 300 (older version). Plus some extension tubes and a couple of adapters that let me use some older brass lenses on the body. Right now, I can use Voightlander Heliar, and some older Dallmeyer Patent brass lenses on the P67 and they create some really special images. I have to say the 75/2.8 is the sharpest of the lot.

 

[Soeren]

Oh yes I forgot, the extensiontubes. I have all three of them. They work great with my 75mm, but the lightloss.........
I noticed that a lot of you use the 55mm and not the 45mm. Same thing with the 6X6 cameras. People tend to use the 50mm instead of the 40mm, why ? Especially when talking 6X7, why ? Is it the price ? Angle of view ? When it comes to the square format I'd recon it's the difficulties controlling the amount of sky in the pic but in 6X7 it's not that much of a problem, is it ?
Or is it the static format vs the dynamic perspective of the lens
Cheers Søren

 

[abeku]

Another Pentax 6x7 (without MLU) user. The format works great for me (although the Fuji 645 is a good companion too!). Very fond of the 105 Takumar lens, but I also have the 75 shift lens and the 55 mm lens. I'm so attached to the format so I have even modified a Holga to become 6x7 toycam.

 

[Bill Hahn]

It wasn't a choice made on technical comparisons for me. There was this beautiful new 55mm lens on the store counter, and this money in my wallet,....

I haven't seen the angle of view with the 45mm, but I suspect it may be too much for me. I seldom go below 28mm on a 35mm system.

 

[Loose Gravel]

P67II with 55, 90, 135macro, & 165. Ext tubes. A very capable camera and lenses are 'cheap'. I use it when the Mamiya 7 isn't right.

I'd like to get a diopter lens. Anybody use these?

 

[jovo]

My 55 is my least used lens (as was my 28 for the 35mm). Wider would probably never be used at all. It's hard to manage that large a field of view and have all the elements count for something in the photograph. Perhaps in the western wide open spaces it's different, but not here in the east for me.

 

[Karate Dad]

Pentax 67

I've have a couple of the older 6x7 MLU bodies. I use the 105mm f2.4 as my normal lens. I also have a 165mm f2.8 and 55mm f3.5 lens. I really like the 55mm lens as it's very sharp. My 105 has started to yellow so it's currently sitting on the window sill wrapped in aluminum foil!

John

 

[Soeren]

Not many girls using the Pentax 67 (youre about the only one Darr), wonder why
BTW great pics on your weblog.
Cheers Søren

 

[luvcameras]

Pentax 67 Lens Information Page

http://members.aol.com/dcolucci/p67ss.htm

Dan

 

[Woolliscroft]

I use a 67II for air photography with the f2.8 90mm and Tri-X 220 film (I used to use Delta 400 before it ran out). One day I'll get a wide angle for it and use it on the ground too. It's a bit of a pig to re-load quickly in a cramped cockpit, but the results are worth it.

David.

 

[Russ Young]

Pentax 6x7

I began with a Bronica S2a. Some of the lenses were good, some weren't. The 50mm Zenzanon was marvelous. Moved up to a used Hassleblad system c. 1978. Then a friend offered to loan me a Pentax 6x7 for a weekend. I've never looked back. It is important to distinguish between the various models of lenses- in most cases, the newer versions are sharper. The 55 mm is incredible. The soft focus 120 mm is without equal, assuming you like soft focus. Mirror slap has never been a source of unsharpness although it can garner a lot of attention!

About six years ago, I bought a used Mamiya 7 and now have the 150, 80 and 65 lenses. They are unbelievably sharp and the lowest flare you can imagine. It is smaller and lighter than the Pentax but I'll keep the monster forever. The SLR feature in particular makes it valuable for macro and, via the extension tubes, to mount small period brass lenses.

Very few cameras in history have been manufactured for as long a period (without any major modifications) as the Pentax. There's a good reason!

 

[resummerfield]

I use a 67II for air photography with the f2.8 90mm and Tri-X 220 film (I used to use Delta 400 before it ran out).........It's a bit of a pig to re-load quickly in a cramped cockpit, but the results are worth it.

Aerial photography was the main use of my 67. I mainly used the 55 and stayed low to show a receding background past my site.

 

[Feral Donkey]

I wish I would have found this site before buying my new rig. For a while I was undecided between the Pentax645 and the Pentax67. The 67 is what got my attention with the medium format. I was originally looking at a 67 but couldn't find very much information on it. I have a friend who shoots a 645N and I got a lot of good info from him.

These articles are what helped me decide on the 645.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pentax67ii.shtml

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/645nii.shtml

If I would have read this last week, I probably would have gone with the 67. The shutter slap myth is mostly what frightened me away. I was using the 35mm as a backup to the 4X5. So another deciding factor is I was looking for a 35mm slr replacement and not a LF replacement. I'm using it for close-ups and land scapes for promotional images.

Would I have been better off going with the 67?

 

[jbbooks]

I was using the 35mm as a backup to the 4X5. So another deciding factor is I was looking for a 35mm slr replacement and not a LF replacement

But, you would be using it for the same thing as you were using the 35mm? Isn't a backup to be used as a replacement?

I bought the 67 because I wanted to use it for slides and as a backup to the 4x5 in places where tripods are not allowed. The format matches the 4x5 and you don't lose as much area as you do with the 645. Besides, I could get the 67 for less money. I will say, however, that I am not a fan of the awkwardness of loading film in them. In the end, I liked it enough that I bought a 67II for the slide film and kept the 67 for B&W.