Pentax 67II vs. Pentax 645N

[chris_buchman]

I'm a photography student and am considering buying a medum format

camera. I have narrowed it down to the P645N and the P67II. I will

not be shooting weddings but want something that would be easily used

say out in the city or hiking. Studio work is secondary in

importance. I have 3 questions for all you photo gurus out there.

 

1)Just how noticable is the difference between enlargements from a

6x4.5 neg and a 6x7 neg? 645 is 2.7 times larger than 35mm and I can

tell a huge difference even on enlargments smaller than 8x10. 6x7

is half again bigger, at 4.5 times 35mm; will I be able to tell even

more difference, even on smaller prints?

 

2)I have read mixed opinions about the P67 (original), some said they

had major problems with mirror and shutter vibrations, some said they

had no problems at all. Some people also said the camera was

extremely handholdable and easy to use, others said it wasn't. I

would be getting a 67II instead of the original, and was wondering if

this new version solved any of the problems that the older model had,

or if they were really there at all.

 

3)Anyone know of any online or mail order stores that give big

discounts to students?

 

 

 

Whew I got pretty long winded there sorry, thanks for your responses.

--Chris

[peter_olsson]

Hi Chris,

 

use the answers you get here as guidelines only. Never make

an investment like this without handling the cameras in

person first. I mean it, don't buy without trying them

first. You should be able to find a good rental place,

maybe even get the rent taken off the buying price if

you decide to keep. Then, when you have tried the camera,

make some large prints and see if you like the results.

[brian_c._miller]

I own both the Pentax 6x7 and Pentax 645. While these are the older generation, I can give you a good view of the unobvious differences.

 

The P67 and P6x7 do have a large amount of shake. This comes both from the mirror and the shutter. How do I know? Easy: Put camera with 300mm lens on Benbo Trekker (wimpy) tripod. Set shutter speed for 1/4 second. Lock up the mirror. Let the camera settle. Fire shutter with cable release. Watch camera swing with the first shutter moving, and then swing again with the second shutter moving. Solution: bought a used Bogen ultra-massive tripod.

 

I spoke with a sales rep last weekend about the 67II, and he said that they had really toned down the mirror and shutter vibration.

 

The film grain in the 8x10 enlargements only shows for faster films. Fuji 100/1000 at 800 (and developed for 1000) shows some grain in the dark areas from a 6x7 image. I recently developed some Ilford 3200 (shot at 3200) on 645, but I haven't made prints from it so I can't comment on the grain. (I'm sure some will show, just don't know how much)

 

Both of these can be used hand-held. Neither of these can be carried around my neck for any extended period of time, and I mean with the normal focal-length lenses. Both are packable. Both are easy on batteries.

 

As far as I know, the manufacturer gives student discounts, not retailers. I don't know of a Pentax program for students, but it wouldn't hurt to ask. I know that Mamiya has a student program, and maybe also Bronica.

[david_daniel]

I went through this exact decision process about 6 years ago. I finally decided if I was going to step up from 35mm, I might as well go all the way. I got a P67 and have since added a P67II. There is a difference in the P67II vibration, but it still is there. While I have handheld this camera occasionally, I almost always use it on a tripod, and not a massive one, even when hiking. But then, I also shoot almost always on a tripod in 35mm also. Try them out Chris, the only way to know. Sit a 67 transparency next to a 645 one side by side on a light table. That will probably make your decision. Good luck.

[jeff_drew4]

Chris,

I think you should consider "the system" you are committing to, not just the camera or just the format. Personally, I like 6x7 to such a degree as to exclude 6x4.5. I have a close friend that is just the opposite. I'm somewhat of an "old fart", so my preferences are based on experiences using tools of older times. If I could start again, I would not hesitate to buy the Pentax 645N! Autofocus, sharp and compact lenses all add up to a quality system. If 80% of your output is smaller than 20x24", you won't miss the neg size from a 6x7cm. I think that the AF and camera size differential would also yield routinely better results if you plan to routinely hand-hold shots. If you are routinely using a solid tripod for most of your work, then go bigger negs.

[gene crumpler]

Chris;

 

I've heard that a lot of photography students got the p67 becasue of the low cost and then when they started their careers, ended up trading it on a 6x6 or 6x4.5 leaf shutter camera. The p67 is a great field camera (I own two), but is not as versatile as a blad or bronica for professional use.

 

With that in mind, I've encountered some unsharpness with the P67, I've not used the new p67II. MLU, a heavy tripod, avoiding the 1/30 to 1/4 sec. range and pressing down on the prizm gives great images. I don't find the p67 hard to handle, but I'm a big guy. It is heavy and bulky and after traveling with the p67 and three lenses, I picked up a used blad for travel where a lot of traveling is on foot. The p67 works great out of a rental car! A used blad is likely to return most if not all of your money, if you do decide to change.

 

Go to a shop and try out the different models. That will be the deciding factor.

[david_henderson]

In my view you won't notice much difference in print quality below

20 x 16. If you can't see yourself having prints made this size or bigger; or projecting the images very large to a very critical audience, then the 645n will be just fine. Strange that the manufacturer with the best mirror damping system in MF (the 645N) also make the camera which creates most comments about mirror slap/ shutter vibration. If you plan to print digitally rather than traditionally you can probably take that size up a bit before you'd notice much advantage from the larger format. But of course size isn't the only difference. The shapes are different too and I personally prefer the shape of 67 to 645 which is a little too close to a grown up 35mm for my liking. That said it's also heavier and you'll also need to carry a lot more film.

[rolland_elliott2]

1)Just how noticable is the difference between enlargements from a 6x4.5 neg and a 6x7 neg? ...I can tell a huge difference even on enlargments smaller than 8x10.

 

The difference is neglgible. Personally I don't see any difference between 35mm Nikon prints and Pentax 67II prints that are smaller than 8x10. I think it's all in your head.

 

2)I would be getting a 67II instead of the original, and was wondering if this new version solved any of the problems that the older model had, or if they were really there at all.

 

The P67II is a great camera, except for the slow flash synch. However since studio work is not one of your concerns a slow flash synch is not that detrimental. I haven't noticed any shutter shake problems using a stable tripod and head.

 

3. Cayman Camera located in the Cayman Islands in the gulf of Mexico has prices that are about 10 to 15% cheaper than B&H or other large NYC mail order firms. shipping is a little high, but if you're going to buy an entire MF system you'll save money. Research the archives for details. There's no need to regurgitate info that has been discussed before.

 

Personally I think both are very good camera systems.

[chris_long]

I to am a photography student and have used both of the cameras you are considering. First, to answer your questions....

 

1) There really isn't that big of difference. I have shot a lot of 645 and 67 and I have never come across a 645 neg that I wish I would have shot on 67. I can easily get great looking 20x30's off 645 (haven't gone larger yet) I really don't see enough difference to go with 67 when I like the advantages of the 645 format (smaller size, more images to a roll)

 

2) I never encountered to much trouble with the shutter vibration. I did experience a little softness once or twice when I didn't take the proper precautions. I found the problem to be around the 1/4-1/15 second area, and if I placed a firm hand or weight on the camera it seemed to solve the problem.

 

3) I don't know of any stores that do student discounts, usually it is the manufacturer, regretfully Pentax does not.

 

Between the Pentax 645 and 67, its a tough call. Both are nice cameras, but they both have limitations such as synch speed and non interchangeable backs. If that isn't a problem, then it really all comes down to how it feels for you. After working with both 645 and 67 and using both Pentax models, I think I would go with the 645, just because it feels better to me.

 

 

I just graduated from a 2 year photography program. I went in with a Hasselblad 501CM, had some troubles with that and switched to Pentax 67. I loved the camera and the lenses, but I found the 1/30 synch speed and non interchangeable backs to much of a trouble (I shoot a lot of studio/outdoor portraits with flash and different films) so I switched to Bronica ETRSi. I love the Bronica. It is small, easy to use, has great lenses and they give EXCELLENT discounts to students. They also have leaf shutter lenses which means they can synch at all flash speeds and they also have interchangeable backs which may or may not be of importance. If you havn't looked at them yet, I would suggest you do. That was by far the most poplular camera at my school. The lenses are great and reasonably priced and the bodies have all the features you need. Just thought I would mention it since you brought up the subject of discounts.

[andrew_schank]

I have several friends that used to shoot with the Pentax 6X7, and there main reasons for ditching the outfit is the weight. A Pentax 6x7 camera with prism and 3 lenses weight twice as much as the same equipment in Pentax 645. Twice as much. My one friend made the mistake of taking his 6X7 outfit with him to Hawaii, and was ready to hire somebody to carry it by the end of the trip. He still talks about it years later. Call me wimp if you like, but the weight of that beast is what kept me from getting into the system. I was all set to put together an affordable 6X7 outfit, and I had a chance to go to one of the big shows in San jose, CA where I got to handle the cameras and lenses. I was shocked at the heft. I couldn't imaging walking around with that thing on my neck, or toting a bag full of P67 stuff on an airplane or out into the woods. By the way, I also have gone 24 X 30 with Pentax 645 and the results are excellent. I can handhold the camera for fast shooting, and the winder is great-makes it almost like shooting 35mm.

[joseph_albert]

You will find that this topic has been discussed ad nauseum if you search the archives.

<p>

One small point about the above. If you want to compare the expected quality of different size formats, you need to use the linear dimension, not area. Thus, 645 is about 1.8x larger than 35mm, and 6x7 is about 2.3x larger than 35mm. 6x7 is about 1.3x as large as 645 (27% larger than 6x6 cropped to 4:5 aspect ratio and 33% larger than 645). The reason 6x6 cropped to 4:5 ratio is slightly larger than 645 is that 6x6 cropped is 44x55 but most 645 cameras are 42x55, but that difference is fairly insignificant.

<p>

That the linear dimension is commensurate with gain in image quality is confirmed in "The Medium Format Advantage" by Ernst Wildi, just in case you are tempted to believe that the gain in area is commensurate with gain in quality.

<p>

My own take is that the main limitation of 645 is that you need to compose full frame to take full advantage of the larger size, whereas with 6x6 and 6x7 you have more freedom to crop while still maintaining a quality image. For landscapes, my preference is 645 since I'll shoot slides and compose full frame so that the transparency is its own proof, including composition, and I want a reasonable weight camera to carry. Mamiya and Fuji rangefinders though offer 6x7 at reasonable weight which would be fine also. For other work, I tend to shoot negatives and prefer 6x6 for its ability to be cropped without loss of size of a 4:5 aspect ratio image. For studio work, I'd only consider 6x7 (or 4x5).

<p>

Cheers,

[mario_aplo]

In my opinion the P67 is a great camera as long as you understand some basic rules to get the best from it. A "must" rule is mirror lock-up [which I personally use it always with any SRL camera anyway], to get razor sharp images. The difference between the 6x7 and 6x4.5 negative is not so obvious at a moderate degree of enlargement like 8�x10�, but at 16�x20� you�ll notice the difference instantly. The P67 is not very light like the Mamiya 7, but I very much prefer the P67; looking through the rengerfinder is not me, I can�t get used to it, and then the polarizer is useless unless you�re willing to apply some time-consuming techniques. Still, it�s purely subjective.

Best,

Mario. Please welcome to visit my online gallery at http://www.marioabbatepaolo.com/

[michael_m3]

I am personally not a fan of any 645, as my uasge is primarily during hiking and climbing excursions and the portrait format is not favorable for most landscape compositions. I have never seen a 645, yes even the Fuji's, that handle well rotated 90 deg. I love the 67 format, just not the 67II. I would look at older P67, or Mamiya RB67. Another alternative would be a used Hassy or Mamiya C330. Why? I had a P67II for approximately 60 days. I used the 67II AE prism which locked up repeatedly. By "locked up" I mean it would meter for 2-3 shots, then entire LED's would light, w/o a reading. I eventually figured to shut-off camera, wait 10-15 seconds, then turn camera back on....2-3 shots later, deja-vu. Upon returning to shop on 2nd occasion, bus was replaced on prism. Problem recurred; bus replaced on camera. After 2 weeks (3 120 rolls) the shutter jammed open. This too was repaired promptly only to have electrical gremlins return. My camera shop mentioned they had an inordinate amount of service returns on 67II's. They agreed to accept return of camera and the 2 lenses and I now happily returned to my Hassy 2000FCW setup. It has no meter, the PME is too hard to focus accurately, but I get the results I desire. I think the 66 format is perhaps the most versatile. The P67 had a great, well earned reputation for quality, reliabilty and affordability. I assume Pentax needs to address quality control and design problems before the 67II can be accepted by pros who demand reliabilty above electrical conveniences. Any MF SLR, and most rangefinders or direct views will be sharper mounted on quality tripod. I used 67II with MLU for almost all shots. This greatly reduced vibrations. As noted above, a very lightweight tripod is inappropriate for MF, even when using MLU function. Good luck!

[greg_lawhon]

Michael M wrote:

 

"I am personally not a fan of any 645, as my uasge is primarily during hiking and climbing excursions and the portrait format is not favorable for most landscape compositions. I have never seen a 645, yes even the Fuji's, that handle well rotated 90 deg."

 

Michael, your answer might improperly cause other readers who didn't know better to think all 645s were portrait format cameras. The Pentax 645N that the original poster asked about certainly isn't. Pentax 645s are landscape format cameras, so they don't have to be rotated 90 degrees for a horizontal shot. I don't believe the Bronica ETRSi or Mamiya 645s are either (but I haven't used them, so I don't want to say for certain that they are landscape format too).

[michael_m3]

Pardon my ignorance. I saw a friends Mamiya 645 Pro this AM and indeed the film travel is vertical thus producing landscape format. The horizontal travel may be exclusive to Fuji 645. The 645 Pro has some very fast (EXPENSIVE!) glass and is readily available for renting if you are so inclined. I'll stick with Hasselblad F series, but the 645 Pro is a terrific system as well.

[warren_weckesser]

The Pentax 645 has sockets for the tripod on the bottom and on the side. I keep a quick release in both, so there is no problem switching between landscape and portrait.

[rob_black1]

Hey Chris- are you confused yet by all these answers? I sure am!!

I've shot with both 67 models as well as both 645 models so maybe I can shed a little more light.

 

I'll try to stick to your three questions.

 

1) If you use proper technique- a tripod whenever possible or even a beanbag, it's *extremely* difficult to tell the difference between 645 and 6x7 in up to a 20x24 enlargement (as has been mentioned above). This is, of course, if you are shooting slides. If you are shooting prints, it's almost worth sticking with 35mm unless you have a good pro lab for development. Too many variables in the printing process will make even a 35mm to MF comparison useless.

 

 

2)The 6x7 is a TANK!! The legendary vibration problems are usually because of mirror bounce. The earliest 6x7's had no MLU. Later 6x7's had MLU which greatly diminished this problem. However (and this is a big gum in the works), ***all*** 6x7's including the 67II need to be used with a tripod *and MLU* if you are shooting 1/30 and below. Too much vibration. Unfortunately the new 67II (and 645n) are mostly electronic upgrades rather than mechanical upgrades over the earlier models. That's one of the reasons why the flash sync of the 67II is still 1/30.

 

 

3) No student discounts that I've heard of. Sorry!

 

If you are doing mostly hiking and city work weight becomes a major issue after a few miles on your feet. I would lean towards the 645 for this reason. The loss in quality would not be that great, IMHO, if you are shooting prints.

 

 

Rob

[witold_grabiec]

I just could not leave it without one of my own. This is in relation to an earlier response that quoted Ernst Wildi's book "the medium format advantage". Film grain (for all practical purposes) is two-dimensional. As you enlarge it, it expands, or contracts, in two directions. Thus it's AREA not LINEAR dimension that gets in on grains' size, which ultimately affects the sharpness of the print. One can say that grain will change size in two linear directions (say vertical and horizontal) but both need to be multiplied for proper size change interpretation. As larger negative requires lesser enlargment, it'll yield a sharper print. I admit, I have not read that book, now I don't even want to.

[witold_grabiec]

For those looking for a student discount program. Go to:

 

www.pentaxusa.com/student

 

You can download their discount program rules and application.