bob_cook

Lou: I carry two P67 bodies and 4 lenses (45, 90, 135, 200) in a Tamrac backback. I think it is great. The previsous answer mentioned that you have to lay it down to open it up; that's true. But with as much weight as you will have, a shoulder bag is alway unbalanced. With the backback, your hands are free for a tripod, hiking stick, or just balance. Hope this helps. Bob

George � I tried one for about four months on about 12 prints. In all cases but one, I ended up with bubbles after about 30 days. Either my technique is bad, could not get enough burnishing pressure, or whatever, but it didn't work well. Ended up buying a new dry mount press. But I still have a couple of CIBAs to mount. B.

Thomas - is the MX-EVS like my 2.8f? If so, you need to thread the film under the first roller (actually, it is going between two rollers). The camera senses the additional thickness of the film (compared to just the paper leader) when it passes between the two rollers, and then stops winding. Continuous winding is what happens on my camera when you don't thread the film between those first two rollers. However, there are a couple of models that don't use this method, and I'm not sure about the MX. Hope this helps, Bob

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.

After much tinkering with my tripod and head for my P67, I've settled on a Gitzo 340/341, using the plate only, not the column, and a Kirk BH-1 ball head. The whole thing is pretty big and heavy, but very solid.

I shot for the last two years with a Bogen 3221 and Bogen 410 mini geared head. Very, very convenient for landscape work, but not quite as solid as the Kirk ballhead (at least I think not as solid).

My only adaptation problem so far is in getting used to leveling the horizon with the ball head. Regards, Bob

You're right, John, about the RRS plates. I have seen, and plan to buy a couple of plates from RRS for the P67; but they will be for warm weather use, because they are not routed for the Pentax remote battery cord. That accessory is a must for winter shooting here in Michigan, and the Kirk standard P67 plate has a routed channel for the wire.

 

<p>

 

Actually, Brian's comments on the Kirk head were pretty objective, I thought. Mostly they would be valid if I were doing a lot of shooting of animals or other moving subjects with really long glass, which I don't. Regards, Bob

I purchased a Kirk ballhead a few weeks ago. Haven't given it much use, but so far I like it. I don't think, however, that my use mirrors what most of you do: I use a Pentax 67 and my longest lens is the 200mm. That's not even close to some of the really long glass you folks use.

 

<p>

 

I'm coming from a Bogen 410 geared head, so I also can't compare to an Arca. I talked with Brian at RRS, and he has decided he doesn't like the Kirk for a few specific reasons, none of which I took note of. He still recommends the Arca. I had heard from a number of people who don't think the Arca is all that great, so I decided to try the Kirk. I'll post more as I go along. Regards, Bob

I second Jim's suggestion. Of my four lenses, the 45 and 135 get the most use. Others are 90 and 200.

Daniel,

I've done a lot of landscape work with a Nikon FM2n over the years, and shutter vibration has never been a problem. Afterall, it's not a very big shutter (g), at least compared to my Pentax 67! As for mirror lock-up, some bodies, like my F3, have a lever that allows you to lock the mirror in the "up" position before you trip the shutter. Although the FM2n lacks this dedicated lever, you can still achieve mirror lock-up by using the self-timer. When you set the self timer and trip the shutter, the camera instantly swings the mirror out of the way at the start of the timer delay; after the 8 or 9 second delay, the shutter trips, and the mirror drops back down. Many of us who use this camera for lanscape work use this trick when needed. Can't imagine using mirror lock for birds, unless they are very big and slow? Regards, Bob

Leigh,

You can go to the Pentax site at www.pentax.com for a pretty complete rundown on both cameras. There are many similarities, and quite a few differences beyond autofocus. I'm still waiting to see one in the flesh, but the first reports are that it handles extemely well, and has very well-thoughtout controls.

 

<p>

 

Bob

In a pinch I have used my P67 on a Bogen 3001 with the standard pan and tilt head. No center column extension, and only two leg sections extended. (I think I was shooting in a stream in GSMNP) Otherwise I use a Bogen 3221 with the 410 mini geared head or a relatively inexpensive Canon ball head with a Bogen quick release plate attached. For general use, I personally think the 3221 is the smallest tripod you should consider for the P67.

Bob

Gary, you are absolutely right. I have two P67 bodies and four lenses, and use them only for landscape. Shutter vibration can be a problem, but it is easily controlled.

 

<p>

 

I also owned a Mamiya 7 and 43, 65, and 80mm lenses. It is a spectacular camera, but the lenses only focus to 1 meter. Couple that with no depth of field preview, and I found I was less pleased with those shots (although the lenses are technically superior) than with shots from my Pentax. As I said, the shutter vibration problems in a P67 are very easy to control; but you can't make a lens for the Mamiya 7 focus closer (hyperfocal distance technique notwithstanding).

 

<p>

 

Anyway, just my two cent's worth.

 

<p>

 

Bob

Warren,

The other answers you received are undoubtedly accurate, but here's something else to try. I apply gentle pressure to the left-hand (full) film roll as I wind the film onto the take up spool. It results in even spacing and tightly wound exposed rolls. Of course this won't help if the advance mechanism is actually malfunctioning, but it might be worth a try.

 

<p>

 

Bob

Paul,

Must admit, I'm amazed it won't fit. I have had two C330's and a 180Super (black) lens that fit on both. I didn't think there was a lens that wouldn't fit. Anyway, a good source of information can be found at:www.btinternet.com/~g.a.patterson/m_faq.html

 

<p>

 

Lots of good info on Mamiy TLR's there.

 

<p>

 

Bob

Mark,

Suggest you visit:http://www.users.dircon.co.uk/~jrf/pentax67.html for a very complete discussion of the shutter-induced vibration with a P67. It does occur under certain circumstances, but it is pretty easily controlled. Those of us who use the camera for landscape work routinely use shutter speeds from 1/30 down to 1/2 second, and need to control any vibration at all.

 

<p>

 

If you don't have I-net access, send me an e-mail and I'll fax or mail you a copy of the information from that site.Hope this helps.

Bob

I have two bodies that I've been using for about two years with no problems at all. Regarding uneven frame spacing: I've never had an overlap; and I have very little uneven spacing as long as I take care to start the film properly, applying pressure to the full roll as I wind on the start of the film on the take up spool.

 

<p>

 

B.

Ron,

You might try The Slideprinters in Denver, CO. Phone is 303-698-2962.

 

<p>

 

I've used them for custom elargements from 6x7 and have been very pleased. Can't tell from their price list what they would charge for some kind of direct 5x5 proof print, but from 35mm they charge $2.00 for a standard 5x7. Gues you'd have to call to explore pricing.

 

<p>

 

Bob Cook

Ray,

I think that they are really two significantly different cameras (take that with a grain of salt, of course, since I only own the P67). The 67 is the antithesis of automation, and the 645 is fully automated, to the point that it doesn't even take an interchangeable finder.

 

<p>

 

I don't photograph many people, and never need a studio flash setup for my work, so the P67 gives me a big neg or trans, and lots of flexibility in the field. And I think all four lenses I own (45, 90, 135, and 200) are outstanding. At least they are plenty good enough for me!

 

<p>

 

Most of the people I know who use the 645 have no complaints about durability.

 

<p>

 

Bob

Jim,

I owned a Mamiya 7 with 43mm, 65, and 80mm for about 4 months. I found it to be relatively easy to focus, once I got used to a rangefinder. It never became really fast for me, although that wasn't important.

 

<p>

 

None of the lenses focus closer than 1 meter, which didn't work out well for the type of landscape phgotography that I often like to do: important subject in the foreground, and the shot extending to infinity. I wnet back to my Pentax 67 and 45mm lens.

 

<p>

 

For general travel I can't imagine a better medium format camera. It is light, and the lenses are truly amazing.

 

<p>

 

Can't comment on the 150 because I never owned it, but I've see the "not great for tight portraits" comments from many owners.

 

<p>

 

Bob

Benson,

How do you like using the P67 with a Ball Head (assuming that is what you do)? I've been thinking about changing to one, but I'm concerned about ease of "fine tuning" adjustment. Currently I use a Bogen 410 geared head; slower than a ball head, but really offers very fine adjustment.

 

<p>

 

I've heard that the RRS plate for the P67 is nicely designed.

 

<p>

 

Regards,

Bob Cook

Nick,

I'm the one who sent you the e-mail with the request. Thanks very much for taking the time to comment on your use of the camera. I'm going to go ahead and find a used one to put in service as a "winter camera for the car." Here in Michigan, USA, relying on batteries in the middle of winter is an "iffy" proposition.

 

<p>

 

Regards,

Bob Cook

I don't have an answer, but I hope someone does. I have exactly the same problem. It is even worse with Ilford films. I think the size of the slots is just too small. I've even tried to enlarge them with my pocket knife when my frustration level gets really high.

 

<p>

 

Any suggestions?

 

<p>

 

Bob Cook

I use the 45mm, 990mm, 135mm, and 200mm. For my landscape work the 45 and 135 seem to get the most work.

 

<p>

 

Bob

I have had the same experience with my 45mm. Cutting off all but one of the slots on a Cokin P eliminates vignetting. On the other hand, I ran a test stacking circular filters and could not eliminate vignetting at any focal distance or aperture combination. But I regularly use an 81b with no problems at all. Of course I never shoot wide open; don't know if that would make a difference or not.

 

<p>

 

Regards,

Bob Cook

You can scan 6x7 and larger transparencies on a Kodak Photo CD Pro. In our market it costs about $5.00 per trans, I think. (Grand Rapids, MI) We use the same supplier for all Kodak CD's, including 35mm. Just check a local source in your market.

 

<p>

 

Regards,

Bob