Would like to join the 67 club. Pentax 6x7 or Mamiya RZ67?

I would second what halfaman said: the 67 is perfectly usable handheld. It’s not stealth, not even a bit. But you don’t need a tripod. 1/30th can still give you sharp images handheld. Depends really on your posture and hand and lens.

If you compared side by side P67 enlargements handheld vs solid tripod, you'd probably see a significant difference in quality unless the shutter speed was high, and the focal length of the lens short.

Of course, a flimsy tripod or head won't help much, especially when big teles are involved. You need something solid. In an emergency, I've sometimes rested the camera on a hat or pillow (or hypothetically a bean bag) atop a car roof or fence post, rifle-style. That can make quite a difference too.

That’s for sure, Drew, but this is true to some extent for all slr with mirror slap

My brother once sold pro gear, esp Linhof and Rollei. He'd demonstrate how superbly dampened the mirror of the Rollei SL66 was by setting an upright dime atop the camera on a firm table, and then trip the shutter. The dime didn't even tip. If you tried that with a Pentax 67, the dime would land three blocks away, and the sound would get mistaken for a sonic boom (minor exaggeration - but you get the point). My brother owned a couple SL66 kits himself, but nonetheless always wanted to borrow my P67. It was a lot more ergonomic and convenient for him to use.

I've have had an RB67 and still have a Pentax pretty extensive kit, Koni-Omega 6X7 and Mamiya press. I recently picked up a Bronica GS-1 with 50mm, 110mm Macro, 150mm and 250mm. That camera is quickly becoming my favorite for a P&S 6X7 camera. I actually prefer the handling of the GS-1 over the Pentax. Lens wise they are really very good. Rendering is slightly different, but sharpnes is tied. If my decision was based on how the camera was to hold up mechanically I would probably have to go with the old "tried and true" RB67.

Hassasin said:

you must be joking

Click to expand...

He is not. When you have to do it to make the shot... you do. And it works.

The Pentax 67 is perfectly usable handeld.
The obsession for sharpness and the need for a tripod means that when the tripod is set and the camera installed the picture is often...gone.
So instead it is better to shoot as soon as something is relevant, no matter what. Because it might not come back.
Sometime sharpness is relevant, sometime sharpness doesn't matter at all to get magic.
It's all about the decisive moment described by HCB.

I use 2 systems, 4x5 Graflex Super D and pentax 67 (x3 all with 105mm). Never used a tripod with them and they are a joy to use handheld even at slow speed.
The fact that the body of the P6x7 is heavy is great for stability. The size of the graflex (not the weight, it's quite light) and the way you handle it is fantastic for stability.
I print them on 20x24in and they are sharp. No problem at all.
Had for a while the Plaubel Makina 67 and it stayed most of the time at home. Much better feel with the Pentax.

Now if sharpness is of utmost importance, before anything else. and you need to control everything, subject, light, composition, then tripod and you are set.
An RB67 would do great. Because the less electronic the better.

In the end it's about the style of shooting, how to bend or follow the rules... or not.
Even if I hate tripods (if you haven't noticed ) I do use it sometime for still lives with a larger format.

The Pentax 67II has an AE and multi segement metering prisim, but I don't know if it fits into the budget. As others have said, heavy, but usable.

Even what people call "sharp" seems to vary a great deal. One defines their own rules, or acceptable parameters.

DREW WILEY said:

Even what people call "sharp" seems to vary a great deal. One defines their own rules, or acceptable parameters

Click to expand...

Cannot agree more. Subjectivity is king.

Hassasin said:

2. I have the Bronica GS-1 and DO NOT recommend it, when it dies it is all over.

Click to expand...

Look at how many bodies "for parts" are on offer relative to functional ones. Then compare this to other brands and you will find no difference in the ratio to let's say the RZ67. It may make you wonder.
And a used, functional GS-1, body only, can be had for the price of a repair, when it was still possible and they are easily available.

Another advantage of the RB67, if you have any "pictorialist" inclinations, is the availability of the inexpensive 150mm F4.5 Soft Focus lens. This lens is sometimes disparaged as difficult to use but in fact is no more difficult than the classic Imagon. I use mine mostly for still life pictures but it has applications for portraiture and perhaps landscape as well. It is said that stopped down the lens becomes sharp, but I haven't tried that.

There is also a rather cumbersome 75mm F4.5 Shift Lens, useful for architecture.

Arthurwg said:

Another advantage of the RB67, if you have any "pictorialist" inclinations, is the availability of the inexpensive 150mm F4.5 Soft Focus lens. This lens is sometimes disparaged as difficult to use but in fact is no more difficult than the classic Imagon. I use mine mostly for still life pictures but it has applications for portraiture and perhaps landscape as well. It is said that stopped down the lens becomes sharp, but I haven't tried that.

There is also a rather cumbersome 75mm F4.5 Shift Lens, useful for architecture.

Click to expand...

The P67 system also has a soft focus lens--a 120mm ƒ3.5--but I've never tried it out:

Arthurwg said:

There is also a rather cumbersome 75mm F4.5 Shift Lens, useful for architecture.

Click to expand...

I used once the RZ version and I had enough of it for the rest of my life. The weigth and size are impossible for any field situation.

I would make my decision mainly based on the question if I wan't a modular cube or a 35mm-like design. As I'm quite accustomed to using 'Blads and liked their handling (but never the square negative) and flexibility of changing film midroll without carrying a second body this was easy for me. First I was leaning towards the RZ67 but as may already have transpired from my comment above, I picked a Bronica GS-1 and I am increasingly happy with it. It has its quirks but so has every medium-format camera but it handles just like a slightly bigger, slightly less mechanically refinded Hasselblad, a bit like my Nikon F3 vs. my Leica M4 even including the difference in AE-functionality. And to my surprise the Bronica works very well with AE-prism, in autoexposure and without a tripod and delivers results you wouldn't expect without using MLU and with a mirror this size.

skahde said:

I would make my decision mainly based on the question if I wan't a modular cube or a 35mm-like design. As I'm quite accustomed to using 'Blads and liked their handling (but never the square negative) and flexibility of changing film midroll without carrying a second body this was easy for me. First I was leaning towards the RZ67 but as may already have transpired from my comment above, I picked a Bronica GS-1 and I am increasingly happy with it. It has its quirks but so has every medium-format camera but it handles just like a slightly bigger, slightly less mechanically refinded Hasselblad, a bit like my Nikon F3 vs. my Leica M4 even including the difference in AE-functionality. And to my surprise the Bronica works very well with AE-prism, in autoexposure and without a tripod and delivers results you wouldn't expect without using MLU and with a mirror this size.

Click to expand...

The AE finder was one of the pleasant surprises for me also with the GS-1. I rattled off a roll of Foma 100 I had laying around using the AE finder in auto aperture mode and the exposure couldn't have been better. Yes, a very nice surprise indeed. I'm fairly new to the GS-1 camera, but I'm liking it more and more as I use it.

Hassasin said:

P645 would run ahead of a Bronica, unless switching film types mid roll is a consideration and interchangeable backs are important

Click to expand...

In which sense would a P645 run "ahead" of a Bronica? Are you aware that the Bronica ETR system has leaf shutters in all lenses? This is a mayor plus for the Bronica 6x4.5 system.

Hassasin said:

So do you mean 105/2.4 is larger aperture ? And don't be all sold on what public domain tells you about the 105, check out the 90, but it's only 2.8.

Click to expand...

Agree. The RB67 users have only a 90/3.8 lens. 90/2.8 lens is not only fast, but it gives the depth of field of approximatelly a 45/1.2 lens (in 35mm full frame terms), in my experience. It is also plenty sharp at all circumstances, and more compact than the 105/2.4 which of course is a great lens too.

Tomro said:

I would second what halfaman said: the 67 is perfectly usable handheld. It’s not stealth, not even a bit. But you don’t need a tripod. 1/30th can still give you sharp images handheld. Depends really on your posture and hand and lens.

Click to expand...

Hassasin said:

If you like the thrill of holding a bomb about to explode in your hand, and experience the explosion upon shutter release, go with P67 (otherwise great camera with great lenses).

Click to expand...

I feel there's too much misinformation regarding the Pentax 6x7 system. I have owned RB67 pro-S cameras (four) and Pentax 67 system cameras (three), and I am a camera tech, so perhaps I can be of some help.

Really, there are at least four or five Pentax 67 system cameras:

1. Early Pentax 6x7 camera without mirror lock up - 1969
1.1 Variation of this one, with some internal improvements
2. Pentax 6x7 Mirror Lock Up (MLU) camera - 1976
3. Pentax 67 camera - 1990. This one is "the same" camera as the previous one but internally very much improved.
4. Pentax 67II camera - 1999

This one is an entirely different camera and can't be compared or thrown in the same box as the other three.

Now, regarding the ones I had, which are #2 and #3, what I can say is the following:

- CURTAIN shock/slap is not too strong, no doubt thanks to the massive curtain braking system, which BTW was evolved on the early versions of the camera (1 to 1.1)

- Mirror shock/slap is depending on the following conditions:

a. The foams at the side of the mirror should be in fine shape (i've added even more padding just in case).

b. The FORCE for the mirror actuation can be calibrated by a camera tech (been there, done that!). This means that you can't generalize all 6x7/67 cameras!! For example my 6x7, after my recalibration, now shoots rather gently, while i couldnt recalibrate my 67 due to a screw that is very hard to unscrew, and it has significantly more force.

No doubt many 6x7/67 cameras that were serviced, disassembled by a tech, then were assembled by a tech that not necessarily took the care of calibrating mirror force for lowest slap (which would ALSO mean more risk of camera seizing if not periodically lubricated each 1 or 2 years...).

c. For practical purposes, using the wooden grip WILL make a big difference since it stabilizes the camera during the mirror up operation, as well as during the shutter operation.

THUS:

This explains why you can have on this forum, one person saying "I can't handhold the P6x7 at less than 1/125" while another saying "I can handhold the P6X7 at slow speeds with no problem at all".

It will depend on many variables!

Suffice to say that the Pentax 6x7 system is a wonderful system, but it is an entirely different thing to the Mamiya RB or RZ system.

Arthurwg said:

Another advantage of the RB67, if you have any "pictorialist" inclinations, is the availability of the inexpensive 150mm F4.5 Soft Focus lens. This lens is sometimes disparaged as difficult to use

Click to expand...

For anyone who cares, here Mamiya wins. The Pentax alternative is the 120/3.5 SOFT lens.

Yet the Pentax lens is difficult to use because:
a . The degree of "soft" depends directly on the aperture value. While the Mamiya lens can be "configured" for desired softness by interchanging some funny looking aperture inserts, indepently of the aperture.

b. The Pentax lens has a very strong focus shift, and the instructions should be followed to "correct" the focus position before shooting, otherwise you won't get optimal results.

c. 150mm obviously a more favorable focal length for portraits than 120.

On the other hand, the Pentax 120/3.5 is far more compact and light.

Skycreeper said:

I have shot extensively with 135 and 645, now would like to get a 67. Don't want to spend too much, something under USD1k, the cheaper the better
Shortlisted Pentax 6x7+105 2.4 and Mamiya RZ67+110 2.8+AE chimney finder.

Click to expand...

Decision is easy:

If you like to use tripod, or do studio shootings, macro photography, or use fill-in flash at daylight a lot (i.e. tricks with flash vs sun ratio), then get the RZ.

Otherwise, If you want to go out in the field walking and want to shoot 6x7 format, get the Pentax.

I've owned both systems (well, RB instead of RZ). Both systems have excellent lenses and are capable of astounding results.

Taylor Nankervis said:

broken or jammed film clasps and poles and (very common, especially among those using 35mm 'panorama conversion' kits in this camera, which have a disturbing history of jamming the mechanism) derangement of shutter speeds.

Click to expand...

+1

People who use those panorama conversion kits have a special place in hell reserved for them.

There's nothing dumber than hauling a camera for a 55mm x 68mm negative size yet choosing to use only a narrow part of such frame size by fitting a 135 cartridge that costs similar (or sometimes more!) than a 120 roll, which is what God ordered us to use on those medium format cameras.

Taylor Nankervis said:

I would suggest you stick with 135 and 645 — formats you are familiar with.

Click to expand...

But they're very different...

For me 645 is getting most of the convenience of 135 with almost 3X the negative size for a huge plus in image quality, plus less depth of field.

6x7 I see it as a compact, convenient alternative to 4x5" large format. Of course, without the tilts/rise/swing/etc.

flavio81 said:

6x7 I see it as a compact, convenient alternative to 4x5" large format. Of course, without the tilts/rise/swing/etc.

Click to expand...

I like this analogy. And the better systems also prevent you from exposing on the darkslide and all the other funny things you can do when handling sheet-film.

I skimmed the thread, and it looks like the RB67 has already been talked about a bunch. But, I wanted to put my two cents in.

Compared to the RZ, The RB Is extremely robust and very easily repaired compared to a lot of other 67 cameras, especially the RZ. I know someone that has had 3 RZs in 5 years… if they die, there is a good chance they can’t be repaired due to a lot of the failure modes requiring parts replacements that are not available anymore.

RB is extremely versatile, and you can customize it to your needs. I have a PD prism, and backs to shoot 120, 220, 70mm cassettes, 2x3 sheet film, and Instax square. Still on the hunt for a 220 645 back. Interchangeable backs is a massive win over the P67 for me.

RB67 mirror slap is much less than Pentax 67, lending it much more flexibility when shooting handheld. I have shot 1/8th handheld, and while admittedly this does have some evidence of camera shake, I have heard that the P67 can have camera shake issues at speeds as high as 1/30th.

I've had both my Pentax 6X7 bodies since the 80's and have never had one problem with either body. I'll admit that I didn't use them like I did my Hasselblad cameras, but they did get used. The Pentax user runs into problems when they don't follow instruction on prism/lens changing and lenses like the 165mm f4 LS lens. You operate the camera as recommended and it's as robust as any medium format camera, if not more. I've never had a big issue with mirror/shutter slap, but that's just me. I have severe nerve tremors in my hands and body from chemical exposure so automatically use a brace or tripod for slower shutter speeds, but I do the same for my other cameras too. If the Pentax had interchangeable backs it would be the only medium format system on my shelf. What really hurts now is the lack of 220 film, which I used a lot in the Pentax cameras. I think a thread like this ends up being long because most of the medium format systems cameras are all damn good, which makes opinions on which is best somewhat irrelevant and more like which feels the best in hand.

John Wiegerink said:

If the Pentax had interchangeable backs it would be the only medium format system on my shelf.

Click to expand...

On the other side, the camera body itself, with no prism and lens, is reasonably light enough to carry more than one, instead of carrying backs. If the P67 would have interchangeable backs, each back would be of a similar size than the current P67 camera, just not as deep. Or, they would be small backs but the camera gets bigger.

For me if the Pentax 6x7 would have:

- more leaf shutters, (instead of a 90mm that was already surpasssed by the 90/2.8 non LS, and a 165mm lens that can't focus close at all), or at least add two wideangles with leaf shutters

- a prism with 100% or at least 96% viewfinder coverage

Then it would be close to perfect.

What hurts me most is the poor viewfinder coverage of the prism. On my Bronicas i get close to 100% with the prism. The RB67 gives you 100% if i'm not mistaken, or very close. I can use the chimney finder, but then I get tied to horizontal composition.

John Wiegerink said:

I think a thread like this ends up being long because most of the medium format systems cameras are all damn good, which makes opinions on which is best somewhat irrelevant and more like which feels the best in hand.

Click to expand...

+1

Amen, brother, so much truth here.

My favorite is the Bronica ETRs system. But so many other systems are awesome, I immediately think of the RZ and the P645 for example.

The P67 prism is what mostly makes it heavy. Having a 100% size one would make it even worse in that respect. The deluxe chimney finder does provide 100%, plus brighter viewing and more critical focus, but not eye-level use or convenient vertical composition.

And if it had interchangeable backs, there would go all the "big brother to 35 mm" ergonomic handling the P67 is prized for. Every system involves certain compromises.