Possible 645N II puchase...quick question

<p>Hello,<br>

I am considering my first medium format camera which will most likely be a Pentax 645N II. Question: how is the 6x7 negative positioned? Meaning, if I take a picture without turning the camera, will the negative be in portrait layout? </p>

<p>CORRECTION: I meant 645 format, not 6x7</p>

<p>The film transport (and shutter travel) is top to bottom in the Pentax 645's. The image area is 6cm wide by by 4.5cm tall. The image orientation is horizontal (landscape) just like most 35mm cameras.</p>

<p>The Pentax 67 series cameras are 7cm wide by 6cm tall.</p>

<p>No, as Matt said, it will be in 'landscape' orientation. There is a second tripod mount on the side of the camera however to ease 'portrait' usage. While some of us here have some knowledge of the Pentax MF systems, this Pentax forum specializes more in the 135 and digital SLR system; you might want to address further questions in the <a href="../medium-format-photography-forum/?category=Pentax+645">645 Medium Format forum</a> instead.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Welcome to Pentax medium format.</p>

<p>horizontal (landscape).</p>

<p>But as noted, the dual tripod mount is genius an not found on many other cameras. For me it means I don't need to spend a ton of money on a panoramic head. I can break my Nodal Ninja down and use the bottom slide alone, or by RRS slide for about $100. Either are cheap compared to buying a dedicated "L" style panoramic head for medium format (about $300-1000).</p>

 

<p>It'll be in landscape, but the rolls ride so that the film will spool from bottom to top. The spools ride with their axis parallel to the horizon. It'll yield 15 shots on a roll of 120. When you inspect the camera, this will make sense right away. </p>

<p>Just a note, unless you have a really specific reason for the NII or found a great deal, the difference between the NII and N is minor, and insignificant, but the price is often 2X for the NII.</p>

<p>I'm sure I'll add an NII after prices drop some more, but at this time, the N price is so much lower it makes no sense to add an NII.</p>

<p>Yeah, the major difference is the addition of a mirror lock on the N II (mirror pre-fire actually - like the K series DSLRs), but the N is supposed to have a dynamic braking system on the mirror that keeps it from shaking as much as a traditional SLR.</p>

<p>Then again, go for the N II. I'm in the market for another 645N, so you'd be one less buyer to compete with! :o)</p>

<p>The N vs. NII vibration test I've seen overwhelmingly said MLU was not needed. I think Luminious Landscape has such test.</p>

<p>I'm a huge fan of MLU for squeezing sharpness out of images, and allowing my to stop down to optimal apertures, so I had real questions about a MF camera sans MLU, but the test I saw, and responses from people shooting these cameras for years and years convinced me that it wasn't worth a 100% premium at this time.</p>

<p>I think the bigger advantage of the NII is it has contacts for a digital back that may or may not exist in China (i've seen photos, but photos can be altered or concept shots and I've heard rumors of existance) but we know nothing about it. It could be an APS-C sensor, it could be horrible, or it might not exist. I still don't understand why a digital back was never produced. There certainly had to be money in it since Pentax 645 was one of the more mass produced and in circulation cameras. Maybe the percent of 645NII cameras was so small vs. 645N/645 that I'm wrong on the volume sales of backs that could have been achieved.</p>

<p>The second advantage is the 15 vs. 16 frame spacing. On the N it's 16 frames which Pentax was very proud of, but a problem was noticed if film was left in the camera that the frame lost flatness. The solution, if you shoot a roll slowly you need to burn a frame at the start of the day if it's been sitting. In some ways I think this isn't a big deal. Remember you lose a frame every roll at 15 shots, over time that might be hundreds of frames. At 16 shots on a vibrant day of firing off rolls you gain a few shots. In the end you might break even at 16 shots on the N (or NII) even wasting the first frame, but you will always shoot less frames shooting at 15 via the custom functions.<br>

<strong><br /> </strong><br>

<strong>So really, discounting the mythical back, and discounting the MLU, it's only frame spacing that is relevant. </strong></p>

The difference between the 645N and NII is not insignificant. Apart from user selectable customfunctions, the main difference is that the 645NII takes 15 frames on a 120 roll instead of 16 on the 645N. This solves the film flatness issue of the N which was severe in my case....

I would say avoid the 645N and buy the NII if you want AF and the features associated with the later bodies. If you want save money go for the original 645....

<p>I had an 645NII for quite a few years and loved it, but the convenience and savings of digital eventually won out. I loved the data imprinting and the dual tripod sockets. Pentax had (or has) a real winner with this camera, but it's a shame they didn't make the adjustment to digital, because there were so many users out there that would have stayed with them (although amateur users like myself couldn't have gone digital via that route due to the cost).<br>

That camera, with the FA 45-85/4.5 and 150/2.8 is a great setup. You owe it to yourself to check out the 150/2.8 - it's simply a joy to use.</p>

<p>I ended up loosing the auction in the last minute. It jumped from 700 to 1200 dollars in 30 seconds. Oh well, the 645 search continues. </p>

<p>I'm not surprised, the NII has been going for > $1K usually--a pretty big premium over the 645N though maybe worth it if you're jumping in with both feet.</p>