Pentax 67 or Mamiya 6?

[ricardovaste]

<p>I was just about to spring on a nice Pentax 67 body, mirror up and with an AE prism. However, there was something in the back of my head, a small amount of doubt. It wasn't over the pricing anyway, these are surprisingly cheap at auction on ebay! A small amount of doubt over it's longer term usage and how appropriate it is. The main reason for the Pentax 67 was originally for art projects to give a greater tonal range, print size & the character that can be achieved with it... I know it will work excellently in that area. However, I'm currently building a wedding portfolio, where I think I would eventually like to intergrate such camera into the set up... not as a main camera, just an alternative. I'm not entirely sure whether a fully manual set up would work well for me in such situations, where you can't take the shutter too low, or with such a large camera that is difficult to physically hold.</p>

<p>I'm not sure. I love the samples I've seen from the 45/4, which is the first lens I would go for. But in a quick moving situation, perhaps a Mamiya 6 would be more appropriate? I even looked at a fuji fixed lens rangefinder, the wide one, but they don't seem particularly well made...</p>

<p>Any thoughts?</p>

<p>On the upside, I've found a fairly local processor with a great reputation, who does high res scans too all for a reasonable price. So that certainly cuts out some of the added time/labour/expense that I initial thought I would have.</p>

[sergei_antonov]

<p>Mamiya 6 is 6x6 camera, optics is great, but too slow for quickly moving objects (like runaway bride...). And for some common issues there is no repair anymore. If you don't like to present square format shots in your wedding portfolio, you will crop, and Mamiya will give you the same result as 645 format camera, which could have faster lenses, more choices and be as easy to handle. Or consider Mamiya 7 -- you will get 6x7 here, complete service still available and best lenses.</p>

<p>--Sergei</p>

[d_purdy]

<p>You are truly talking apples to oranges or even watermelon to onion. The cameras are so different and each with strong points and weak points. Neither is great for weddings though I have used my P67 for wedding portraits. The Mamiya is a range finder, which is a whole different beast and won't show you depth of field and is hard to focus quickly and needs a special viewer for close ups. The Pentax 67 synchs with a flash at a slow speed and you have to know what you are doing to do outdoor daylight flash.<br /> The good news is that you will be getting a used Pentax and you can buy it try it and sell it if you don't like it and it won't cost much but time. Probably most people going into a different system buy and sell a few times, I know I did. <br /> You might want to look into a 645 system.<br /> Dennis</p>

[denniswms]

<p>"The main reason for the Pentax 67 was originally for art projects"<br>

That may be. Since the mid eighties everyone I know who uses a 67 shoots fashion on location and that includes me. I do not find it difficult to hold at all and with a 90mm 2.8 I doubt it is particularly bigger or heavier than a Canon 1DsMk111 with a kit lens.<br>

I have shot two weddings as personal favors -both on the 67 with great success. The stipulation is I had control over the shoot as if it were a magazine editorial. From what I read most wedding photographers are not in that position. If you have a discerning clientele, then for the investment having access to large, film based originals when appropriate - say outdoors with two hours to sunset quality light_ it's definitely a good thing.<br>

Just as having a 1DMK1v with a 300mm 2.8 and auto focus can be a good thing.</p>

[vince-p]

<p>Any chance you'd share the name/location of the processor with reasonable rates for hi res scans etc?<br>

On your question: I concur that the Mamiya rangefinder is too tricky to focus for wedding shots and the 67 might be a little unweildy. One of the issues is that if you are hand holding it and need the mirror it's kind of like you have someone inside the prism throwing around a piano. Camera shake is a definite downside. But Dennis' picture shows it can be beautifully done. And if you need flash sync at higher speeds there are leaf shutter lenses available.<br>

Dennis: do you recall what aperture you were at with that photo? And film? Where would you say the sharpest plane of focus falls? It's hard to tell at this size.... But it's a great picture. Thanks for posting it.</p>

 

[predrag_vranic]

<p>I never used P67 myself but from what I hear from people who own this system is that they become faulty over time and choosing newer P67II seems like a much appropriate choice.</p>

[ricardovaste]

<blockquote>

<p>I never used P67 myself but from what I hear from people who own this system is that they become faulty over time and choosing newer P67II seems like a much appropriate choice.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Really? I've read the exact opposite! That the older versions are more reliable.</p>

[ricardovaste]

<blockquote>

<p>Any chance you'd share the name/location of the processor with reasonable rates for hi res scans etc?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Don't want to get your hopes up, as I'm in the UK. It comes out at £8.50 with return postage, for a develop and scan of a 120 film (discounts with more films of course). He says he 6x7 scans are around 4666x5617 pixels (75MB) then compressed to 18mb approx. Files are JPG. Scanner is Noritsu HS-180. </p>

[ricardovaste]

<p>Thanks for the input everyone. I think I was just attracted to the Mamiya 6 because it's considerably more compact and has aperture priority. However, after reading your comments, it doesn't seem it's really much quicker at all compared to the Pentax 67, slower to focus accurately if anything, so I will gladly ignore the Mamiya 6 now. I'm thinking with taking time to adjust, I could likely find the Pentax 67 very usable, even handheld.<br /><br />Dennis, great image, thank you for sharing it with us! Can I ask why you chose the 90/2.8 over the 100/2.4? Was it just for flash sync or do you prefer the slightly shorter standard lens?<br /><br />I like the idea of the P67II, simply because you get a real grip and you get aperture priority. Those two things could make it considerably more usable handheld I think, especially in a wedding situation. However, I will go with the advise here, start with the original version (MLU & metered prism) and see how I go. If after a year or so of use I take to it or make some profit from it, I may be able to consider the P67II. The lenses I'm looking at are the 165/2.8 (mainly for portraits/people), the 45/4 and then something like a 100/2.4 just to fill the gap. I'm thinking a bulk order of Fuji 800 press might not be a bad idea either.</p>

[d_purdy]

<p>If it was me (now in retrospect as I have 7 P67 lenses) I would start with the 55, 90 Leaf shutter and the 135 macro. Unless you know for certain you don't want a leaf shutter then the 105 instead of the 90.</p>

[ricardovaste]

<p>Thanks for your advise :). ~85mm FOV in 35mm is one of my favourite lenses to work with, so the 165/2.8 was the natural choice for me. The 45/4 was one of the main reasons I was attracted to the P67 system too, so I will definately start with those two. I've never used a leaf shutter on lenses this big before, or on an interchangable system, so I really have no idea how they work out in real life (only ever used leaf shutter on an old 35mm fixed lens rangefinder)</p>

[steve_rasmussen]

<p>I suggest going with the 165 f/4 leaf shutter not the f/2.8 since you will be doing a number of weddings. The 90 LS is designated as Takumar.</p>

[ricardovaste]

<p>Hi Steve, thanks for your advise. Do you suggest this lens purely for flash syn reasons? I ask as my intention would be for natural light only.</p>

[iversonwhite]

<p>There is a 165mm 2.8 w/out the leaf shutter. The 90mm LS is notorious.</p>

[steve_rasmussen]

<p>I had suggested the 165LS due to its flash synch ability but since you will be doing natural light weddings, the 165 f/2.8 is better. The weddings I've shot have been with natural light and I used the 105 and 150 Takumars.</p>

[noah]

<p>I use both the Pentax 67 system and the Mamiya 7 system for my personal and client work.</p>

<p>A bit less than a year ago I decided to switch back to film for my documentary projects and any client work that isn't on deadline. I went for a Mamiya 7 kit since I had always been a leica shooter in my 35mm days. Many of my thoughts on the 7 would probably apply to the 6 as well. I personally prefer the 6x7cm. format.</p>

<p>The Mamiya 7 system is very nice, I have the 50, 65, 80 and 150mm lenses, but do nearly all of my work with the 50 and 80mm. I have few real complaints about the system other than the build quality of the bodies, but (knock on wood) they've never broken or failed. They just don't have the solid feel of a Leica or Hasselblad.</p>

<p>Recently I dug out my old Pentax 67. I was thinking I'd use it as a supplement to the Mamiya for times when I needed a closeup, longer lens or faster aperture. I'm loving it and I wouldn't be surprised if it takes over as my main system.</p>

<p>There are some advantages to the Mamiya. You can handhold it at slower shutter speeds, definitely 1/30th but I get fairly consistent results at 1/15th with the 80mm. I like the accuracy of RF focusing, especially in low-light or backlight situations. And the camera is very quiet. I never use flash, but the leaf-shutter lenses would be ideal for outdoor and fill-flash situations if you need it. The lenses are very, very sharp. They don't focus very close though, which isn't a huge problem for my documentary work but it can be an issue for portraits, fashion and commercial work. It would definitely be a problem for weddings.</p>

<p>The Pentax has some advantages too. First, there is a huge selection of lenses available at great prices. The lenses are fast, some of the fastest in medium format. The 105/2.4 is beautiful and the 165/2.8 is very useful for my work. This somewhat makes up for the fact that the Pentax can't be shot at as slow of a shutter speed handheld. Usually I'd rather have faster glass than a slower handholdable speed. Especially since I usually shoot people, and a faster shutter freezes their movement better. There are special-purpose lenses like the 75mm shift, which is on my wish list, and also very long lenses, macro lenses, etc. There are some leaf-shutter lenses, but the fastest lenses use the focal plane shutter which would make fill-flash difficult or impossible. However for indoor and studio flash they work fine. I'm an available-light shooter, so I love the fast lenses. I don't have any wide lenses for the pentax but I'm looking for a good 45mm. If I like it as much as the Mamiya 50mm, then I may even be able to go all-pentax.</p>

<p>The pentax has a WL finder option (or you can just pop off the prism and use it like one). This is great for my documentary and street photography work, and it's also nice for working on a tripod in general. </p>

<p>I do shoot some weddings. I'm new to the wedding thing and haven't tried either camera for weddings yet. But I'd probably choose the pentax. Neither of them are really ideal wedding cameras unless you have the kind of freedom Dennis mentioned.</p>

<p>The systems are very different but their uses overlap to be sure. You really can't go wrong, it will probably come down to your personal preferences. You'll likely have to buy used with either system, so you can resell for not too much of a loss if you make the wrong choice...</p>

 

[bob_h]

<p>If you are interested in building that wedding portfolio, the Pentax 645 is a nice camera to use. It was designed and built to be more of an "in the field" camera than the 67. It is infinitely faster to work with and yields very nice results. Try one.</p>

[ricardovaste]

<p>Thanks for the input all. Noah, thank you for going through that in detail, it was really very useful! I've found a P67 with AE prism & 105/2.4, MLU, all working well, although it's shows obvious signs of use, as well as a small crack on the auto/manual lever on the lens... 250 GBP + P&P... think I might get it...</p>