Is the end of the Pentax 67 nigh??

[steve_gosling]

See Tamron have recently announced the end of the Bronica SLRs due to

the impact of digital technology - how long before Pentax announce

the demise of the 67? Contrast the Pentax approach to that of Mamiya

who recently announced at Photokina the launch of new digital

products including a body that accepts 645 lenses. Now wouldn't it be

nice if Pentax got themselves into gear and launched something

similar for those of us with 67 lenses?! (I'm not holding my breath

though).

[jim_richards1]

My guess is the 645line ,will go out of production first , and that 67 gear will be produced for some time to come , mmmmmmm only guesses here.

Jim

[allan_jamieson2]

I guess the determining factor here is how much contribution does the Pentax

67II camera and lenses make to Pentax's profitability. The design costs are all

sunk costs now, if it is making a reasonable profit chances are it is safe for a

few years to come.

 

However, if anything I'd say that the Pentax 6 x 4.5cm range is likely to be

around for longer. Technology has just arrived at the point where full frame (

or very close to full frame ) digital backs for 6 x 4.5cm cameras are coming

onto the market. Mamiya has just launched a new 22 megapixel medium

format digital camera called the ZD, which is an encouraging sign, but it is

based on 6 x 4.5cm format again with a sensor 48x36mm ( 2x the size of a

35mm frame), just a bit smaller than 6 x 4.5cm. If anything, you'd expect

Pentax to do something similar to this, but a 6 x 7cm sensor sized digital

camera would be rather expensive at present though, so a digital version of

the Pentax 645NII is more likely, which should allow you to use your P67

lenses via an adapter. But at present, all we can really do is to speculate and

wait on new announcements from Pentax to enlighten us.

 

Personally speaking I like looking at my Velvia transparencies, but as more

image libraries go digital, there is going to come a time when they (and other

publishers, magazines, etc) are only going to accept digital submissions

because of the time involved in scanning medium format transparencies and

the space needed to store large quantities. Which leaves us as

photographers the choice of sticking to film and investing in a good film

scanner that will do our transparencies justice. Or cutting out the scanning

process entirely and moving over to digital entirely.

 

It is an interesting albeit unsettling period, with digital technology advancing

so rapidly at present.

[dave_cheng1]

It is technically very difficult to make a CCD of 6x7 full frame, or

even 645 full frame. CCD photo transistors pretty much need light

hitting it vertically. When the CCD is made as big as 6x7 full frame

the light coming through the lens will not all fall on the CCD vertically or near vertically. Digital sucks in my opinion because of this. Don't count on camera companies producing good digital backs for

MF. Someday it may be possible but not for a long time from now.

[ilkka]

My thoughts are very much in line with what Allan said.

 

I think Pentax will come up with a new 645 body within a year, either a digital only, with built in 16MP or so digital back or a new version (645ND?) that has an exchangeable film back that allows mounting of a digital back. That camera is built for current 645AF lenses, and all 67 lenses can be used with an adapter.

 

I don't think 67 line will disappear in the near future, but I don't see any further development in it either. Bronica has not done anything new in medium format SLRs in quite a while. Pentax made the new 67II not that long ago and is likely to support it for a few more years. I don't think there will be a full frame 6x7 cm back anytime soon, if ever. Let's first see a few full frame 6x4.5 cm backs shall we? Not too many of them around yet. It may turn out that 6x4.5 is enough to get all the resolution one actually needs and that would mean anything larger than that would be very rare special purpose equipment, something like a 8x10 view camera is at the moment. Unlikely to have several suppliers competing for that slice considering the costs of doing so and the profits available elsewhere.

[dan_edwards]

I wonder if Pentax is even making new 67 bodies, parts, lenses, etc anymore? Or,

are they just (very slowly) selling of the stock they have on hand.

 

Let's face it, there will be no more new 6x7 (or even 6x6) cameras, from any of the

major manufacturers. 120/220 film is slipping into the 'craft' market-size like

large format did several decades ago.

 

Yes, it is sad. I still have my 67II, but should have sold it years ago. As it is, just

this week it is going up on eBay to see if I can salvage any $ out of it...

[steve_gosling]

An interesting view Dan. I recently had to return my 67II to Pentax UK - they couldn't repair it (still under warranty) and said they'd replace with a new body. They didn't have any in stock in the UK and had to get through the European HQ - they were also out of stock and I waited two months before they could get a replacement. Does make you wonder about the future availability doesn't it.

[fernando_mcsoto]

Ilkka said: "Bronica has not done anything new in medium format SLRs in quite a while"

 

 

 

In fact, Bronica no longer makes any medium format camera as of this month. They will still keep the Rangefinder RF645 (great camera by the way) but all the have stop manufacturing all the other models. They are the first major medium format manufacturer to withdraw from the market. Others will follow.

[ilkka]

Why would others follow?

 

Bronica was never a very popular medium format camera in pro circles. It was kind of like a cheaper alternative for Hasselblad or Mamiya. Mamiya will certainly stay in medium format, as evidenced by their new digital MF body. I believe Pentax will follow Mamiya rather than Bronica. Hasselblad has already made their mind by buying Imacon. I am sure they will bring many MF digital products out over the years.

The only 'major ones' that could disappear are Rollei and Contax. Both can accept digital backs and are thus safer than Pentax in this race. And Contax seems to be among the most popular bodies for digital MF shooters now.

 

I believe medium format digital will be much more popular than it is today once the prices of digital backs come down a bit. Lenses are the real investment in any medium format system. Whether I can use my old film body is of no importance as long as I can make use of all the lenses. And besides, film can still be a good backup. To carry two digital backs in case one breaks may be too high investment even for many pros. To have a film back or two as a backup, and ten rolls of slide film just in case may be good insurance for a long time to come.

[ilkka]

I forgot Fuji. They are developing the H1 system together with Hasselblad, building all the lenses and selling the camera as Fuji 645AF in Japan. So just as unlikely to go our of MF digital business as Hasselblad itself.

[robert meier]

My Pentax 67 and 67II are just as useful, even essential, as they have always been. I get better big prints from them than I could get from any digital camera, and they have better viewfinders, better lenses, are more portable, and are cheaper to use. Plus I have the actual physical transparency to look at and to keep, rather than a digital file saved on a disk. I have no interest in a digital body for my 67 lenses: I'm very happy with what I've got.

[franka t.l.]

I too doubt there would be any advance for the 67. The 645 could see a major advance if Pentax manage to sqeeze a CCD in there ( which shouldn't be too hard though. The 645 format is far more rosier than the 6X6 & 67 format in term of Medium format Digital as it does offer more lens choice at a price we can still afford; and certainly the AF, Metering and System portability are all right up to today's photographers expectation.

 

Remember though, the 67 lens can always be used on the 645 with that 645/67 adeptor, but not the other way round. So making a digital 645 make a lot more sense than a digital solution for the 67 system.

 

What I am not optimistic about is Pentax investment in R&D on digital imaging. As I do shoot with the *ist-D also, and out of experience; I applaud Pentax way of not over-process the image right out from the camera / raw software. What I do not care about is the primitive control/feature sets/performance of its software ( especially the RAW development ). If Pentax aim to stay in the game. they will have to learn and improve on this aspect of digital imaging ( FAST ) ....

[jack_jacobs]

There are still a lot of photographers out there such as me that think digital is just plain phony imaging. No matter what back or what format, you still end up with the same cheap looking flat and dry image that you don't get with even consumer film. We prefer bright colors and lots of latitude that you can't get with electronic imaging. Turning the 100 megapixel equivalent film camera into a 22 is just plain idiodic.