Comments on Pentax 67

[eileen_wentworth]

I have only ever used 35mm and have decided it is

time to enter the medium format world. I am totally

overwhelmed trying to decide what to purchase. I am

considering the Pentax 67. Would appreciate any comments

you have on this camera. Also what would be the best lens

to start with. My main interest is in portraiture.

Thank you for your help!!

[jack_congson5]

I, too, got into medium format recently with a very small budget constraint. I tried each camera I could, including the Pentax 67. I just found its mirror slap very loud and startling. Pentax makes very fine affordable lenses, but I think the Pentax 67 is more suited to landscapes or nature shots.

 

<p>

 

I could not afford a Hassleblad and my camera use is going to be in weedings and portraiture. I ended up buying a Mamiya C330s 6 x 6 with 3 of its best lenses 55mm, latest 80mm S type, and a 180 mm Black Super, which gives me nice headshots. It took me a while to put everything together as I scrounged every pawnshop and second hand camera store in Toronto. It was fun hunting for the equipment as it became available.

 

<p>

 

After I get enough practice with this camera, I will ultimately settle on a Mamiya RZ Pro II 6 x 7 with a 100-200 mm zoom which will allow me to be flexible with group and tight head shots without moving the camera position. The RZ's back can be rotated for horizontal or vertical composition without moving the camera itself. I particularly admire Anne Lebowitz portraiture style and she is totally sold on the RZ.

[marc_fraioli]

There is some information on the Net about the P67 too:

 

<p>

 

<a href=http://users.vnet.net/btw/pentax67.htm>http://users.vnet.net/btw/pentax67.htm</a>

 

<p>

 

<a href=http://www.users.dircon.co.uk/~jrf/pentax67.html>http://www.users.dircon.co.uk/~jrf/pentax67.html</a>

 

<p>

 

<a href=http://web.mit.edu/dennis/www/pentax67/lens-info.html>http://web.mit.edu/dennis/www/pentax67/lens-info.html</a>

 

<p>

 

Plus there's the <a href=http://www.pentax.com/>Pentax Home Page</a>, which I believe contains some information on this camera and its system accessories.

[bob_cook]

Eileen: I'll give you my very subjective thoughts on the P67. I have two bodies and 4 lenses that I have been using for approximately 2 years for landscape and a little amateur architecture shooting. All my lenses are great. The bodies are very reliable. It is a little loud and heavy, but it is medium format, and to some extent that comes with the breed. It is very simple to use, as well.

 

<p>

 

You don't mention what kind of portraiture, i.e. studio, candid, etc. I would think that for studio work, it would be ok. It has a very slow flash sync of only 1/30 sec., which some find disconcerting. I don't use flash, so I can't comment. My 200mm is great for head and shoulders stuff, which I have done a couple of times, with available light. There is also a leaf shutter 165mm, which eliminates the sync problem, and is reportedly very sharp and perfect for portraiture.

 

<p>

 

For handheld candid portraits, I personally think there would be much better candidate cameras, e.g. Mamiya 6 or 7, or Hasselblad, or one of the many 6 x 4.5 versions around. The P67 is difficult to handhold, especially with a prism finder and long lens. Hope this helps, Bob.

[steve_bingham]

Dear Eileen,

 

<p>

 

I am on my third P67. I have used a Pentax 6x7 off and on over the last 25 years. As with any camera, it has certain advantages and disadvantages. If you could tell me your intended uses, it would help. For example, it would make a lousy camera for a wedding photographer - although I have done weddings with it.

 

<p>

 

The lenses are tack sharp. The body is tough. However, there are some problems that must be addressed.

 

<p>

 

By the way, I have owned six other medium format cameras, a couple of large format cameras, and dozens of 35s.

 

<p>

 

Steve

[tapas_maiti2]

Eileen

 

<p>

 

I am on my 2nd Pentax67 outfit after a brief and expensive flirtation with a Hasselblad.

I find the Pentax superb for portraiture and landscape, fill in flash is the weak area for which I have bought the 165mm leaf shutter lens this time around, having said that I rarely use fill in flash and if that was a key consideration Iwouldn't buy the pentax.

The flash sync speed doesn't really matter in a studio but for general use where the flash provides main power I have found that 1/30 second allows sharp prints whilst giving the ambient light a chance to "fill in" which is a nice effect.

The lenses are excellent I get very smooth black and white prints that I haven't achieved on any other camera.

 

<p>

 

The other main advantage of the Pentax is that it is dead easy to use!

 

<p>

 

Tapas

[sergio_ortega]

Eileen, I owned a Pentax 67 for several years. I had the 55mm, the 165mm LS and 300mm lenses. I agree with most of the coments in response to your query.

 

<p>

 

The lenses were very good. Certainly on par with just about any other MF lenses you could mention. The 165mm LS (has a leaf shutter in the lens, in addition to focal plane shutter in camera) lens is particularly good for flash photography and portraiture. Pentax also made a 90mm LS lens, it can be found from time to time on the used market. The 55mm WA is an excellent lens for landscapes. The Pentax 67 system has an incredible range of lens choices, from fisheye to very long telephotos. The 800mm tele is about the biggest thing I have ever seen! I am not personally familiar with the older lenses, everything I've heard about the newer ones is very positive.

 

<p>

 

The body was very strong and well made. An extremely rugged hunk of metal. I never experienced any problems. Operation is very straightforward, particularly for someone coming from 35mm SLRs. The TTL finder was, for the most part, very accurate. I invariably got good exposures with Velvia, etc.

 

<p>

 

On the downside, it is very heavy. The mirror slap is very loud. I cannot say how much the mirror vibration affects image sharpness, I always used mine on a tripod with the mirror-up function, and a cable release. I have seen people using this camera handheld, though I never did. I would say it's not the best 6x7 to use handheld; you would be better off with a 6x7 rangefinder camera.

 

<p>

 

I found the lack of interchangeable backs a bit of a drawback. Though most people will simply buy a second, or third, body to use instead of spare backs--they cost about the same (used) as backs for other MF SLR's. So this is not a problem. Polaroid backs for the Pentax 67 are expensive and difficult to attach and remove. Most users also get another body and dedicate it for polaroid film, leaving the polaroid back permanently attached to the body. Remember, all these bodies take up space, and weigh a ton!

 

<p>

 

All in all, a real good camera. I ended up selling mine after a long trip through Colorado, New Mexico and Utah--with lots of hiking. I still walk with a stoop.

[mark_uehling]

I have owned and/or used about 10 different medium format cameras over the last 20 years. I currently use both a Pentax 6x7 and Mamiya 6 for my work which is primarily weddings and scenics.

 

<p>

 

I would have to amplify the earlier comment made that the best camera for your needs depends primarily on what you plan to photograph. So what works well for me might not work well for you if you do different work.

 

<p>

 

Let me explain why I use these two cameras for my work.

 

<p>

 

First the Pentax 6x7.

If you haven't had the opportunity to hold one of the cameras, go to a camera swap meet. This camera is beautiful. It is big, heavy, and durable. It is the most robust of any medium format camera out there. Hardly any plastic at all. You will want to use this camera on a tripod. The lenses are fast, which I find very useful for available light photographs during weddings. I also use it in the studio. Its main weakness is the slow flash sync (1/30 second). I highly recommend the rigid magnifying hood which provides much better focusing than the prisms, and I always use the mirror lockup. I would not recommend this camera with out the mirror lockup. A medium format mirror is very big and has a tendency to cause vibration.

 

<p>

 

My other camera is quite the opposite. The Mamiya 6 is great for mobile shots, like during a wedding reception. Focusing is by rangefinder. I can focus this camera easily in the near darkness conditions found at many wedding receptions. Since there is no mirror, vibration is not much of a problem, and I often use this camera at 1/30 second hand held. The framing is not that accurate, and it doesn't focus that close. It is great for hiking as it is very light and a tripod, while preferable, is not always necessary with this camera.

 

<p>

 

Recently Mamiya has come out with the Mamiya 7 which I had seriously considered. However, for weddings, the square negative is better in that you don't need to be constantly turning the camera sideways to shoot verticals.

 

<p>

 

The lenses for both of these camera are superb. If you have sharpness problems with either, it is probably your technique, not the camera. Also, neither of these cameras attempt to make the film curl backwards like some interchangeable back cameras do. I have found this can also be a factor affecting sharpness as the film does not always lie flat.

 

<p>

 

I hope this helps.