Pentax 67-What Have I gotten Myself In-To

I've always been intrigued by the overgrown 35mm SLR beast known as the 67, but scratched the 6x7 itch a long time ago with an RB67 and had never been overly motivated to hunt out the Pentax competitor.

 

A visit to the local camera store today turned up one that arrived a few weeks ago, along with a bunch of other odds and ends. The more I talked, the more stuff came out and started getting thrown into the pot. I won't say the exact price paid, but it was a little more than what a nice 500C/M kit(WLF, A12, 80mm C T*) would run from a high volume dealer like KEH.

 

What I walked home with was:

 

Pentax 67 body(late, non-II version marked 67) with a TTL prism attached

WLF and wood grip included(neither attached)

105mm f/2.4 SMC 67 on the camera(last version)

55mm f/3.5 Super-Multi-Coated 6x7 (with a UV filter, which seems to be worth more than the lens itself!)

55mm f/4 SMC 67

135mm f/4 Super-Multi-Coated Macro-Takumar 6x7

165mm f/2.8 SMC 67

Kenko 2x TC

 

I know the TC is probably a garbage-worthy item, but the 55/105/165 pair seem to be the desirable late ones. I'm considering parting with the 55mm f/3.5 as it's a beast next to the f/4. Also, even though it was a more than fair price, the kit still wasn't a small amount of money, and that takes the sting off a little bit.

 

Any thoughts or comments on the above? From reading up, the 105 f/2.4 SMC and 165mm f/2.8 seem sort of benchmark lenses in the system, and the 55mm f/4 also seems well regarded. The 135mm seems a bit less impressive, especially considering that it really doesn't focus all that closely.

 

Also, how is the metering prism regarded? I haven't seen a ton of info on things like its metering pattern(wondering if it's simple averaging like the Hasselblad and Mamiya prisms I have, or if it's center weighted). I'm also wondering whether the meter ranges from "don't bother" to "good enough for C-41" to "exposes Velvia perfectly."

 

In any case, I'm anxious to run some film through it. I put a roll of recently expired Tri-X in, so I'll test that with all the lenses I have and go from there.

At least you know from experience with your particular neighborhood dealer that everything should be in good shape and he gave you a fair price. Much like Mamiya RB67, the days of bargains on good Pentax 67 kit are over: people are asking significant sums for it now, when you find it decent condition. Check the film advance for frame positioning with a roll ASAP, and check to be sure it doesn't eat batteries, otherwise the bodies are pretty sturdy.

 

Re the meter prism: if its working, it should be about as useful as what you'd have with a Nikon F Photomic FTN or Nikon F2 Photomic/F2A. Same deal with CdS cell, center the needle under the frame, needle trans-illuminated from a frosted window. Shutter knob and aperture ring couple exactly like a pre-AI Nikkor for open aperture metering. Only difference to a Nikon is the meter pattern is full averaging (not centerweighted), and sensitivity isn't great in low light (EV -2.5 at ISO 100 with the 105/2.4). Similar sensitivity to a Canon original F-1 or FTb, or Mamiya RB or 645 prism. The Pentax meter has an Achilles Heel: a tiny chain that transmits motion from the camera/lens controls to the meter gearing. This is often broken today, resulting in meter failure. It seems to be DIY repairable, I've seen tutorials on youTube and there are some related threads here at P-net.

 

Amusingly, you purchased the same configuration Pentax used for the cover of the deluxe brochure in 1975 (67 body, wooden grip, TTL prism and 55mm f/3.5 SMC lens). Tho actually, it seems you got the older Super Takumar non-MC with 100mm filter (runner up to the B104 of the old Hasselblad 40mm Distagon as rarest and most expensive MF filter size). It pains me to realize I'm old enough to have personally collected this brochure from the 1975 Japan Camera Show at the Statler Hilton in NYC:

 

Edited February 1, 2020 by orsetto

Thanks for the advice and information.

 

I did notice the rather peculiar chain and tab arrangement at the front of the camera with the prism removed-it looks fragile but mine works fine.

 

I've done well with negative film in an F2 Photomic/F2A, so I'll treat this one the same way. I've even done the occasional roll of Velvia with a CdS meter like a Canon F-1, but at current prices it seems prudent to double check with an external meter.

 

I can most likely shoot a roll or two tomorrow, and then develop it Sunday evening or so. Chuck doesn't film-test cameras he sells(how could he?) but I'm sure he'd make it right if there is an issue. I guess there is something t the sprocket holes on 35mm-on the whole it's very rare that a 35mm camera has advance problems(8 holes per frame makes a nice, countable standard) while it seems to be the achilles heel of a lot of MF cameras.

 

Just in playing around with it a bit, the camera with most of the lenses seems to handle/balance nicely but the 55mm f/3.5 seems to really upset that. I'm thinking I may try to find it a new home soon.

Nice find. Agree that bargains on quality MF gear are long-gone. Tons of online Pentax info. Mostly nice glass in common focal lengths. Hoods--any hood--helps with contrast. Be aware that the significant body+lens weight when switched to portrait orientation can topple a tripod unless you position a leg under the shifted mass. The metered prism? Use your spot/incident handhelds. Without MLU, it can be noisy but the vibration issues discussed endlessly by non-owners are post-exposure. Have fun.

The 1989-onward Pentax 67 had several notable engineering improvements, specifically in the winding mechanism, mirror damping, transport, film counter and shutter balance. This is the camera I recommend people look for rather than the often bashed and belted Pentax 6x7 (from 1969) which frequently turns up with age-related faults. These cameras also would have been used in quite heavy professional applications, with the winding mechanism over-represented in fault presentation.

 

No complaints about the 104mm, though its' not one I took too, going instead for the 75mm f2.8AL.

The 55mm f4 is a stellar performer, well known for its uniform sharpness, and is matched by its wider stablemate, the 45mm f4. It is optically superior to the earlier Takumar f3.5; both lenses, with a polariser in place, can be irksome to focus accurately with the standard coarse Pentax 67 / 6x7 focusing screen. This is where a right-angle viewing attachment can be mightily helpful.

 

The meter has a 5 stop range (+/- 2.5) and is quite good with exposure, but will require more care with slide film. Metering is down to 1 second only, so you will need to be versed in using a handheld spot/multispot/duplex/incident meter to stand-in where the camera leaves off.

 

MLU is most commonly employed to separate shutter inertia and mirror slap, both of which are pronounced in the Pentax 6x7 / 67 cameras, and this feature is used right across the lens f/length range with a tripod to guarantee absolute sharpness and freedom from blur, which is not visible in 6x4" postcard prints, but will be disturbing when the negative is enlarged to more than a meter (as I commonly do).

 

See the item I wrote in Pentaxforums.com regarding the safe removal and reinstallation of the P67 TTL prism to avoid breakage to the meter coupling chain. This does not render the camera inoperable, but will require stop-down metering until the chain can be repaired, often now with jewellery/beading wire. Note that the lens mount will require collimation for precise focus after reassembly. I do not consider this a DIY task, not even going so far to recommend YouTube videos. Eric Henderson at pentaxs.com can repair the chain.

 

Keep the shutter speed dial to B or X when the camera is not in use; it is known that leaving the shutter cocked and the shutter speed dial on a marked setting can result in derangement of speeds.

Edited February 2, 2020 by Silent Street

[...]Without MLU, it can be noisy but the vibration issues discussed endlessly by non-owners are post-exposure. Have fun.

 

Irrespective of MLU, either/both Pentax 6x7 and 67 are noisy.

I agree non-owners are a problem, fuelled by populist opinion and rabid herd mentality than fact based on long and enduring experience. Having said that, inertia-induced blur is at exposure, not post-exposure.

 

___________________________________________________

Qualification: 30 years use of 67

With reasonable precautions, that is, using normal and/or wider lenses and shutter speeds of 1/125 or faster, sharp handheld results can consistently be attained. The P67 kept hand-holding in mind, hence its 35mm SLR-like configuration.

 

This was on 320TXP, 55/4 6x7, 1/125 sec on my ancient non-MLU 6x7 handheld, on a walk through the woods:

 

 

I’m not implying tripod use isn’t recommended by any stretch, I’m just saying it can be handheld if required as long as certain conditions are met.

 

In any case congrats on your acquisition, and also be aware with some peace of mind that repair options still exist. Enjoy!

Edited February 2, 2020 by allancobb

Ben, at your age, you most likely have been made aware of the G.A.S. syndrome.... now suck it up and Enjoy your pickle ! Keep us posted. Aloha, Bill

Thanks everyone for the continued information.

 

I'm happy to report that I was able to shoot two rolls this weekend and tested out all the lenses. I haven't scanned or printed anything yet, but have given them a critical look on the light table. The 55mm f/4 is definitely the keeper, and I'm really pleased with the rendering I see from the 105 f/2.4.

 

Frame spacing is perfect

 

 

A few observations from two rolls:

 

1. Handheld, it doesn't seem to vibrate TOO badly or make too much noise. It's not as quiet and well damped as an RB67 or even a Hasselblad, and my experience with other MF FP cameras has been that the shutter itself can induce a lot of motion, but it's really not terrible at all. Of course, having once owned a reasonably complete Bronica S2A system, I have a fairly high standard for what constitutes a loud and vibration prone MF camera, but it's nothing like many internet reports would make you think.

 

2. I didn't last very long with the wood grip. The left side seems a weird place to put it, especially given that there's a very natural place to put your left hand under the lens, which is where I was taught it should go anyway. Should I want to use flash, I'll likely be using this either with studio strobes or will use a Metz "potato masher" so having an accessory shoe isn't a big deal. I might like the grip better on the right side-I understand there are aftermarket ones.

 

3. After using Hasselblads for my primary MF cameras for a few years now, the "straight shot" film loading is nice although I can pretty well load a Hasselblad magazine in my sleep now. Still, though, it's nice to know that the film is most likely going to catch the first time, and not have to worry about whether or not its tucked under the tab. At the same time, though, I have to keep reminding myself that I'm stuck with whatever I load until I finish it...

 

4. The meter seems a bit touchy. When it works, it's accurate enough(or at least agrees with Sunny 16 under the nice-ish conditions I was using it) but it seems to want to randomly turn off and not always come back on when I flip the switch. I'm wondering if the battery is getting low, although the camera didn't show any operational symptoms of a low battery

 

5. The last thing I need is another system to buy for, but I've been pricing out some things like the 45mm lens, either a 75mm or 90mm lens(looking possibly at the 75mm LS) and a 250mm to round things out a bit better. I haven't firmly decided on anything other than the 45mm being a top priority.

5. The last thing I need is another system to buy for, but I've been pricing out some things like the 45mm lens, either a 75mm or 90mm lens(looking possibly at the 75mm LS) and a 250mm to round things out a bit better. I haven't firmly decided on anything other than the 45mm being a top priority.

 

There isn't a 75mm LS in the P67 line-up. You may be conflating LS with shift (a 75mm shift lens, the cheaper choice of the stellar but pricey 75mm f2.8AL).

 

The two LS lenses are 90mm LS and 165mm LS. Either/both can allow multiple exposure (only a few Pentax 67 bodies were fitted with the factory fitted multi-exposure facility on the right hand side, to the left of the film format selector), but the 165mm LS (only) will not allow mirror lock-up in LS mode, the attendant risk being jamming of mirror and aperture mechanism. That 165mm LS lens, in my kit, is quite a heft, too, but surprisingly very sharp and contrasty; it is an annoying unbalance and added weight to an already heavy camera.

 

The 45mm f4 has a spring-loaded gelatin filter clasp at the rear element and the lens uses 82mm filters, which makes it stand out as an awkward piece of lens when everything else is 67mm or 77mm!

 

If the meter is erratic, that may be symptomatic of age-related drift. You will need to run a roll of transparency film through the camera to ascertain how accurately the meter responds, and take notes of what you are doing. Negative film has too much latitude, which is misleading when assessing old meter performance. Later TTL meters (from 1992) have improved electronics (though not much!) but rough handling, extended lack of use and even disassembly can affect their performance.

 

If your 55mm f4 develops a rattle during handling (well known and widespread with just the 55mm), this is indicative of a fault in bearing collar alignment/runout and can be fixed by service (does not affect performance by any stretch, but it is very annoying!).

Sorry, yes, I mixed up the lenses and the 90mm LS is indeed what I'm considering.

 

Not sure if I want to "waste" a roll of slide film testing the meter. I'll meter with an external and compare the two, but that's as safe as I'll get. If it's good enough for negative film I'll call myself happy with it.

If you have any further questions about the various lenses, let us know since many of us have had this system since the 1980's and 90's. The zooms are not mentioned much but are used professionally quite a bit. The 45 is an old design and has some mustache distortion but is fairly sharp. It is the landscape workhorse of the system.

We have snow in the forecast tomorrow, so I may venture a trek out to some of my favorite spots with the camera and even burn some slide film.

 

It's a shame the "understated" slide films are no more, but I have some Astia and E100G put back that I can try. I even have a half dozen or so rolls of E100GX in 220 that I can shoot, although I don't know if I want to tie up the camera with a rare/valuable roll of film and end up "wasting" it just to finish it.

 

It's a shame I don't do fashion photography in any form or fashion, as I've recently come into a decent sized stash of frozen 2006 ex EPP. That paired with the 105 f/2.4 almost seems like a fashion match made in heaven(I've always heard that EPP stuck around so long because of that specific market).