Thinking of getting a used Pentax...

[willscarlett]

So far I've just been a 35mm and digital person, but I'm thinking of picking up a used Pentax medium

format because of the good price. For someone who has never used medium format before, which would

be a better entry - a 645 or a 67? Is the negative size of a 645 worth it if you're moving up from 35mm?

[stp]

Good move. I've had both the 67 and 645, and ended up (still) using the 645 because of

erogomics and weight. The 645NII has a lot of nice features, and it's a big step up from

35mm.

[jon_bergman1]

The nice thing about the Pentax67 is that it is like a big 35mm SLR. I haven't used the 645

but would very much recommend the 67 so you take a full step in to MF photography. The 67

is a work horse that many proffesional photographers use.

 

Jon

[nealcurrie]

I have Pentax LX, 645, and 6x7. The 645 and 6x7 were recent acquisitions.

 

I would recommend going to the 645 as a first step up. The 67 is much larger and heavier than what you're used to using. If you like to walk around this can easily be done with the 645 and 3 lenses without carrying a bag. I do it with the camera around my neck and a lens in each jacket pocket. It is hand holdable with 400 film, but not quite as much as 35mm.

 

This option with 6x7 is not possible. You'll need a bag to carry more than one lens around. 6x7 isn't very good for hand-held work, and requires either a tripod with a MLU body, or a pretty hefty tripod with a non MLU body.

 

I'm going to (when my used darkroom arrives next week) compare 16x20 prints from ISO 100 film with the 645 and 6x7 to help me decide which to keep. I suspect they won't be much different, but we'll see.

[trooper]

I have both systems. I owned the P67 for a number of years before getting the 645 and wish I had made the move sooner. I do mainly black & white with these and for the degree of enlargement that I do (mostly 8X10 and some 11X14), the 645 is very capable. It's easier to focus, hold and control on a tripod and this helps to make up for the negative size difference. Careful use of the P67 will give some advantage but the 645 has a nice, bright finder, motor drive, film inserts, etc that make the camera more friendly to deal with. I find that the P67 with prism is very difficult to use in dim light situations and I tend to get to get focusing errors quite easily. I like the fact that I can use my accumulated P67 optics on the 645 body with the adapter and the 2 systems make a great combo to own. I can use the 645 with an 8 pound tripod vs the 12 pound that the P67 requires for critical work and I find that it's becoming much easier to reach for the 645 as time passes (and I get older!).

 

The 645 would give you a noticeable advantage over 35mm, especially in tonal rendition/transition and the P67 another step up from that.

[www.antiquecameras.net]

Here is some <a href="http://members.aol.com/dcolucci/p67ss.htm">Pentax 67 Lens Information</a>

[willscarlett]

I am very used to walking around with my 35mm SLR. I don't do a whole lot of tripod work with it... generally if I'm doing a long exposure, I'll find a flat surface to put the camera down on.

 

I read that with the 67, you need the shutter at 1/250 to do handheld...is this generally true? Or does it depend on the kind of lens. I guess to start out, I'd just get a normal lens, depending on the system.

[zachariah_edwardson]

Hello John-paul

 

I have used both 35mm and Mid formats (TRL, old folders, and a 645) and I can say that you will be nicely surpised by midformat. I do generally Tripod the Midformat camera (minus the folder) just to get a better shot.

[dave_cheng1]

"I read that with the 67, you need the shutter at 1/250 to do handheld...is this generally true?"

 

It's completely false. I often shoot at 1/60th with no problems. I use my 67II handheld 99% of the time. I would shoot at 1/30th if necessary.

 

I go hiking with 3 to 4 additional lenses in my backpack. I am not talking about long hikes. But within a mile or two is not a problem.

[willscarlett]

Dave - or anyone, what speed film do you generally use with the shutter at 1/60? Are you

using MLU for this?

[WJT]

Hi John-Paul. Here is photograph with my P67 and 55mm SMC that I took in <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/2809990&size=lg" >Vienna</a> handheld at 1/4 second and f8, using ISO 100 Fuji RVP. I did not use the MLU and it is reasonably sharp enough to print 11x14 very comfortably (in my opinion). I have other similar and better handhiled shots. Would I do this as routine? No, probably not. My workflow is to use a good tripod, cable release, and mirror locked up. But if one <i>has</i> to have that shot, the P67 can deliver it. You just need to brace yourself, hold your breath, stop you heart from beating, and fire away! Regards.

[dougmiles]

Hi John-Paul -- Many combinations of light level, lens opening, and film speed could result in a decision to set the 1/60th second shutter speed. As one film speed example, the correct exposure in bright sun with a ISO 64 speed film would be 1/60 sec at f/16. This coincidental relationship (set film speed as shutter speed, set f/16 in sunshine) is called "Sunny 16" :-) In lower light you could still use 1/60 but with a wider lens opening. Faster film would extend you into even lower light but start to restrict your options in sunlight. For instance, an ISO 1000 film speed used in bright sunlight would mean 1/1000 sec at f/16 or another equivalent combination like 1/500 at f/22, but as you see the options have narrowed.

 

I think ISO 400 is a good general purpose film speed, with good choices of brands and types. Pretty flexible, and in medium format the grain is not intrusive. If you know you're going to be in well-lit surroundings you might choose ISO 100-160 or so.

 

I've used the 6x7 system for a long time and like it, but there's no denying it's on the bulky side. I don't have a 645 SLR but do use rangefinder cameras in that format. They're definitely easier to have with you casually. The 6x7 is more deliberative but is easy enough to have over a shoulder for a few hours.

[willscarlett]

Walter, that was at 1/4 second? I don't see any motion blur on the people... how is that

possible?

[godfrey]

I can't say which would be better ... only you know what kind of photography you're trying

to achieve ... but 645 is a huge and very useful step up from 35mm format. It is already

almost 3x the negative area where 6x7 is a bit less than 5x the negative area.

 

I was loaned a Pentax 645 kit recently and I find it a superb camera, with excellent hand

holdability, and it's a great camera to work with on a tripod too. The Pentax 6x7 is much

much bulkier, I doubt I'd want to use it hand held very much.

 

Godfrey

[willscarlett]

I ended up getting the 645... the price of the 67 went to $560, which was out of my price

range.

[nealcurrie]

Just for info of anyone reading this:<br>

<br>

135 makes negatives of about 24mm x 36mm = 864mm squared.<br>

645 makes negatives of about 41mm x 56mm = 2296mm squared.<br>

6x7 makes negatives of about 55mm x 70mm = 3850mm squared.<br>

<br>

The "normal lens" for 135 is 43mm.<br>

The "normal lens" for 645 is 69mm.<br>

The "normal lens" for 6x7 is 89mm.<br>

<br>

645 is 2.7x the area of 135.<br>

6x7 is 4.5x the area of 135.<br>

6x7 is 1.7x the area of 645.<br>

<br>

Assuming that the aspect ratios, film type, lens quality, and image quality are the same:<br>

A 645 neg will make prints that are 1.6x as long each dimension.<br>

A 6x7 neg will make prints that are 2.1x as long each dimension.<br>

a 6x7 neg will make prints that are 1.3x as long each dimension.<br>

[dave_cheng1]

"I ended up getting the 645... the price of the 67 went to $560, which was out of my price range."

 

Well, there will be other opportunities always for good prices. If you go for 645 now you may need to step up one more time from 645 to 67 in the future. The mistakes I made for lower priced stuff was a lesson for me. I spent on a bunch of of cheap TLRs, including Yashica, Rolleicord, and Mamiya 330s. I thought a Rolleiflex with a planar lens was where I would be completely happy. Well, 3 days after I got my Rolleiflex the shutter fell apart and the repair bill would cost more than the camera itself. I was fortunate to be able to return it back to the store. I never wanted used equipment too old any more.

 

Then I realized I could have saved all those money for a decent Hassy. Eventually I got my Pentax 67II, bypassing Hassy's 6x6. I simply decided no more waste on money for anything on the way up. I have found that 6x7 is the biggest film size for me. I don't think I will do any more step up again. My Pentax 67II has been just perfect for me.

[john_mcmillin]

I have a P645 now, and used a 6x7 way back in the dim dawn of time (1980). I still remember

the mirror slap of the bigger version; it was a seismic event! Compared to that, the 645's

shutter is like a sleepy kitten curling up to sleep on a velvet cushion. I think the P645's

shape, grip and finder are more ergonomic, too. Both camera bodies are monsters, compared

to 35mm gear, but the 645 lenses are reasonably compact. I'll go for Door no. 2.