PDA

View Full Version : Anyone have a Pentax 67 machine?


knikki
22nd March 2010, 11:56 AM
I am thinking of getting one of these bits of kit, the one with MLU and a metering prism.

So I was wondering if anyone on here uses them and if so what are they like, apart from heavy.

Any lens recommendations or user issues?

(PS I don't need one I just fancy getting one G.A.S again :D)

Dave miller
22nd March 2010, 01:18 PM
For some reason that escapes me I have never owned one. An oversight on my part.

Trevor Crone
22nd March 2010, 02:01 PM
Knikki, I used to own one but PXed it for a view camera some years ago. IMO a great piece of kit, quick to use and great lenses. My favourite was the 45mm which I used for most of my landscape work back then. I also used the 135mm macro, although not a true 1:1 without tubes, was still great for close-ups and portraits, tack sharp.

Never owned the metering prism just the standard prism, preferred hand held readings. Although I can see the metering prism would speed things up considerably.

The only downside that I could find with the camera was its fixed back, so you have to stay with one film until completed. A second body is of course an option but the extra weight is problematic. The camera can be hand held (which I've done), heavy but nicely balanced if the lens isn't too long.

Phil
22nd March 2010, 03:23 PM
Hi Knikki - it all depends what you're using it for too!
I had one of these for about 7 months but the one I had proved to be too unreliable and I ended up returning it to the vendor. That being said it was a great camera, with a lot of interesting quirks that you either get used to or end up hating.
My main one was that even on a reasonable tripod, and firmly secured with the mirror locked up, the movement of the shutter on mine was such that the camera would torque! (honest) . . the only solution I found was to put it on B and use the lens cap to uncover and then cover the lens in a turn of the century sort of way :eek: Strangely it really worked and some of the images I made like this are my favourites. Some people recommend pressing down hard on the prism if it's on a tripod, but I found this too suspect for introducing more movement.
I had the 90mm lens which was pretty good, though not apparently as stellar as the 105mm.
Handheld and at wider apertures and decent shutter speeds it's a very easy and comfortable camera to use. Must admit, if I weren't so taken up with 5x4 I might consider buying another more recent model. Mine was the 6x7 MLU, and had obviously seen a hard professional life . . . but strangely had the most accurate shutter I've ever owned.
If you are buying one, see if you can try it first as they aren't for everyone.
Phil

Alan Clark
22nd March 2010, 04:40 PM
I had one for a while, with 150mm lens and MLU. On the tripod, at slow shutter speeds I coudn't get a sharp picture out of it. The problem was vibration caused by the large focal plane shutter opening.
This is a well-documented problem apparently. See the Luminous Landscape website.
I would never have another. I may have been unlucky, but the camera was a total pain...though very nice in every other respect.

Alan

Mike O'Pray
22nd March 2010, 05:42 PM
I know this sounds like the joke: How do I get from A to B? Reply: Well if I were you I wouldn't start from A :D:

But is there a special reason why you want a 6x7 and not a 645? Let me declare that I have never had either but I have handled a 67 and it is a big beast compared to the 645 which is said to have a much better damped mirror so "slap" isn't a problem. AF is also possible with the 645N but at an additional cost.

It depends on what kind of photography you intend to do but the 645 will do street photography, social stuff(weddings) and some action stuff with the 80-160 zoom.

A 645 neg would probably need to be enlarged above 12x16 and probably up to at least a 16x20 print before the 67 neg starts to make even a slight difference to resolution.

Mike

Daud
23rd March 2010, 05:50 AM
See if you can borrow the original 645 with a good hand held meter – quite cheap and some very good lenses (SMC A type) with the exception of the 35mm F3.5 which seems to have batch problems – some good some bad ( I tried one and was not happy but others say they can be very good)
If I did not have a large investment in Nikon gear, I would use this camera for most of my landscape work. Although when you have hauled it up a mountain side; it makes one marvel at Ansel Adams with the gear he used.
The mirror problem is almost nonexistent on the 645, so hand held is very possible.

I know the feeling though; also got this because I fancied trying one or the other, but 6x7 was just huge! And coming for a Nikon F4s user that is saying something…….

David.

Phil
23rd March 2010, 08:40 AM
I forgot to add, that at one time they were a highly regarded camera for fashion photography (Testino et al) and also they were really popular for aerial photography.
I'll agree with David that they are heavy, but in a peculiarly comfortable way. Oh oh . . sounds like I'm talking myself into looking at one again . . .to which the other half of me says 'Remember being in that Glen, and when the shutter/mirror went off you scared that flock of birds' :D
Phil

knikki
23rd March 2010, 08:59 AM
Dear all thank you for your views.

I have looked at 645 machines a while ago and they do have lots of advantages I agree. However that time I bought a Yashica TLR :D

I don't know why I fancy a Pentax 67, just one of those things. I have done some research and seen images created using Ilford FP4, Velvia, Provia 100 etc, so the mirror/focal shutter vibration can't be an issue all the time. Althought I do recognise that some have hard a hard life so they may vibrate more that others.

Somtimes I go to the motor racing with a EOS1 RS and Nikon F4s so I don't think the weight of the Pentax should put me off.

There is a camera fair next month so I will go to that and try one and see how it feels in my hands.

Best watch this space. :D

Phil
23rd March 2010, 09:25 AM
Good luck Knikki - I thnk you might well find them a case of once handled, strangely appealing.
The big wooden grip makes a difference in just holding it, and I would also recommend trying to get a strap (Optech make new ones that fit . . .the 67 has those wee knobbly lugs) as that way you are sure you won't drop it accidentally, which is easily done with something of that weight.
Oh, and try and get a 67 or a 67II - the old 6x7's are probably a wee bit past their sell-by . . ..
And yes, you can get very good long exposures when it's on a tripod, I just found that the only way to get them was to use mirror-up, B and a lenscap!
Phil

Alan Clark
23rd March 2010, 09:41 AM
I should clarify my earlier post by saying that the camera shake I was getting was definitely caused by the shutter, because I always had the mirror locked up. Lens cap exposures wtth the shutter on B as Phil has suggested, would work, but be difficult to do with exposures around the half second mark.
If you are hand holding the camera and using fast shutter speeds you ahould have no problem with camera shake. A friend of mine had my camera to do street photography and he really likes it.
Alan

Roger Hicks
23rd March 2010, 10:17 AM
Thirty years ago, I worked for a company that had three Pentax 67s -- in order to have two in working order at any one time. I believe that the later models were a lot more reliable but the early ones certainly weren't. Sorry I can't help with serial numbers, but 35 years ago when I worked in advertising in London they enjoyed a similarly dubious reputation, so it wasn't just ill luck.

For a completely different 6x7 experience, have you considered a Linhof Technika 70? I know which I'd prefer. And the 56x72 Linhof format is bigger than Pentax's too.

My own view is that 645 tips the quality balance, but only just; 6x7 or 6x9 gives a lot better quality, more easily.

Cheers,

R.

Neil Smith
23rd March 2010, 10:42 AM
I have handled a Pentax 67 but never used one, a bit too big and heavy for my liking, I much preferred the Bronica GS1 or the Mamiya RB/RZ for 6x7 format.

Neil

Dave miller
23rd March 2010, 11:27 AM
Didn’t Terence Donovan like to use a Pentax 6x7?
To possibly quote him:

"The magic of photography is metaphysical. What you see in the photograph isn't what you saw at the time. The real skill of photography is organized visual lying."

Mind, I believe he had large hands!

Trevor Crone
23rd March 2010, 12:14 PM
Didn’t Terence Donovan like to use a Pentax 6x7?
To possibly quote him:

"The magic of photography is metaphysical. What you see in the photograph isn't what you saw at the time. The real skill of photography is organized visual lying."

Mind, I believe he had large hands!

Yes. he did so I did Sam Haskins who did a lot to promote the camera.

One of my favourite US photographers, Robert Adams, used one but wasn't bowled over by lens quality. Personally I found them to be really good.

With regard to reliability - I must have been lucky for I had many years of trouble free service from it and no problem with the shutter causing unsharp images. Mind you I did use it on a heavy Gitzo Studex Performance tripod with a Gitzo pan and tilt head. Now I think of it the whole kit out-weighed my current 4x5 outfit.

knikki
23rd March 2010, 02:28 PM
Roger Hicks? is that the same Roger Hicks that has written a number of books on Medium and Large Format photography and writes in the back of AP?

If so then I am aware of your love of Linhof and Mamiya RB67 (well certainly is in this book I have :D).

The Linhof is a fine camera and I can see why you like it. But like all these things I have handled one as well as the Mamiya 67 and I just did not get on with them.

Knowing the way I work I will probable end up with something completly different. :rolleyes:

Roger Hicks
23rd March 2010, 02:38 PM
Dear Knikki,

The very same.

You are absolutely right to place your opinions above mine. The most important thing is to use a camera you like: after all, very few cameras are below the 'quality threshold', where the photographer can take pictures better than the camera can.

I know what you mean about 'completely different'. Here's another idea: Graflex XL. Or if money is no object whatsoever, an Alpa.

Cheers,

R.

knikki
23rd March 2010, 06:25 PM
HMMMMMMM!!!!!! Alpa http://i39.tinypic.com/5y5j7m.gif

I handled one of those at Focus on Imaging show last year, gee they are a fantastic piece of engineering.
And yes it is on the list of "Things to buy when I win the lottery....." :D

Graflex? I do know of a place where they are selling a Miniature Speed Graphic which has 6x7 & 6x9 backs for not much money.

Phil
24th March 2010, 09:05 AM
HMMMMMMM!!!!!! Alpa http://i39.tinypic.com/5y5j7m.gif

I handled one of those at Focus on Imaging show last year, gee they are a fantastic piece of engineering.
And yes it is on the list of "Things to buy when I win the lottery....." :D

Graflex? I do know of a place where they are selling a Miniature Speed Graphic which has 6x7 & 6x9 backs for not much money.

Hi Knikki - good luck finding the Graflex XL . . someone gave them an awfully good write-up in his book :D
It occured to me last night that if you don't mind going a bit wider, the Century Graphic (later model) is good for 6x9 - I'd avoid the Miniature Speed as apparently they have bellows issues which the Century's don't.
Also the Mamiya Press Universal and the older Mamiya 23s are very fine 6x9 cameras built like brick outhouses and still very servicable - you can also get 6x7 backs for them. You also have the advantage of not having the massive focal plane shutter going off and scaring everyone in half a mile, as both these are leaf shutters in the lenses. Yes they are rangefinders, not SLRs, but you know, it was just a thought. There's also the Fuji rangefinders, fixed focal lengths, but great as well.
Phil

knikki
17th January 2011, 11:37 AM
After a little dance I have resurrected this thread :)

Well after much research I narrowed my choice down to the Mamyia RZ67 and a Pentax 67.

The RZ because it allows cocking and film wind on in one go, the ability to stick a metering prism on at a later date, and a little lighter than the RB.

However I went for Pentax 67 :) . It is a little 'well loved', paint loss and brassing in one bit, however the lens 105 f2.4 and the inside of the camera were mint. I may at some point look at repainting it and sticking a some coloured leather on it, pimp my camera. :D

I have used it and its great, not as noisey as I was expecting (I am sure the T90 is louder), handleing is great. The 105 lens is not as sharp as some, but it has a lovely contrst to it which make people images look very nice. Oh and when using at F2.4 & 2.8 the bokeh is ace.

So thank you all for your imput into this orginal question I post so long ago.

Trevor Crone
17th January 2011, 12:14 PM
Nice one Knikki may it give many years of absolute joy:D

Neil Smith
17th January 2011, 12:26 PM
Now you have made the plunge, enjoy it and show us some results when you can.

Neil

ShaunH
22nd January 2011, 04:30 PM
I used a Pentax 67 around 2005 with a 165mm lens and I can quite honestly say that the lens quality was astonishing. I used it handheld for portraits with studio lighting and the combination was amazing.