Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Pentax 6X7
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2015 12:18 am    Post subject: Pentax 6X7 Reply with quote

As a young man, I always admired the work of Ernst Haas and was envious of his ability with the Pentax 6X7.
Of course in those days a Pentax 6X7 was beyond me financially, let alone getting a range of lenses to go with it.
Well, several years ago I noted that P67 lenses were as cheap as chips, and I started by acquiring one to use on my D300 with adapter.
I have been lucky enough to put together a small number of lenses like this, and at last went looking for a camera body to use with them.
Finally found one that didn't break the bank.
Happy camper am I.
OH



PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2015 2:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's a nice looking 6x7, OH. Is it a MLU model? Where did you buy yours from?

I was like you -- I've wanted a Pentax 6x7 ever since I saw one for the first time back in about 1982 or so. Just a few months ago, I finally got one. Like you, I went for one with a metered finder -- bought it from KEH. I bought it with the 135mm Macro lens and have since added a couple more lenses and a teleconverter to the outfit. I bought the other two lenses from Robert's Camera (they have good prices and loads of Pentax 67 gear) and bought the teleconverter from a Japanese seller on eBay. I haven't shot with it as much as I'd like, but I have at least developed some B&W images I took with it. I love that huge negative!

For me, as an outdoor photographer primarily, it just made so much more sense to buy the Pentax 6x7 than a Mamiya RB or RZ or a Bronica GS-1, all of which are primarily studio cameras.

So which lenses did you get with yours? I paid attention to what the guys over at the Pentax forum were saying about the 300mm f/4 -- that it was too difficult to get sharp photos with it -- and wimped out and bought the 200mm f/4 instead. But! I bought the teleconverter to make up for it. Cool And I think I might still buy the 300mm. I don't see why it shouldn't work just fine on a bright, sunny day. For a wide, I dug a bit deeper and bought the 45mm f/4. I really wanted the extra width. The 55mm is too close to a 35mm equivalent of 28mm, and I find 28mm to be boring, frankly. Next I would like to get a fast normal, either the 105mm f/2.4 or the 90mm f/2.8.

Reminds me, we've got flowers now. I need to get out and shoot with that beast.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2015 3:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Congrats! This is a reliable workhorse and it will shines in your hands.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2015 3:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you Michael and Calvin.
Out and about is great - give it a go.
My camera is on the high seas - or over them ATM so not here yet.
I bought the body only as I already had some lenses.
I have tried to buy through KEH before, but their freight costs to Australia are astronomic and they won't change them for some reason even though there are much cheaper shipping and postage options available.
I have found that ebay vendors in Japan are fastidious in their presentation and invariably honest, and so that is where I sourced this one. The postage is even better than the usual USPS rates from the US also.
Yes, this is the Mirror-up version of the older 6X7 so it pre-dates the 67 and 67II
As for lenses - I have a few - 4/55, 2.4/105, 135 macro, 2.8/165 and 4/200.
I was hoping to acquire a 45 some way down the track.
The biggest advantage of the P67 over the RB/RZ is the faster glass - apart from the ergonomics.
Having said that, I will be using mine on a tripod so it won't make a lot of difference, but the faster lenses are a plus.
My biggest problem will be sourcing film. The best deals seem to be from Thailand as there is precious little available locally at anything like a reasonable cost.
Thanks for the chance to chat
OH


PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2015 3:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hey OH, sorry -- forgot you live in Oz. Yeah, in fact, US Postag rates went up quite a bit a couple years ago, but USPS is still the cheapest way to get something there from here. I guess KEH must use FedEx or UPS, which is probably why their shipping charges are so high.

For a US source of film, you might also try Freestyle -- freestylephoto.biz -- they have an impressive array of film products. It might be that if you put together a big enough order, it would be worth your while.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2015 3:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you Michael for the link.
Some good prices there too.
I will check out their freight costs.
How do you find the performance of the tele-converter?
There are a couple of different ones I know - interested in your impressions
OH


PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2015 4:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

My TC is the gray one made by Pentax, like this one:

Click here to see on Ebay

I think I paid about a quarter of that price for mine, though. Sheesh, Germans. I don't know what the difference is between the gray one and the black one(s). I know that at least one black version uses the outer bayonet. The gray uses the inner bayonet, same as all my lenses. I know there are aftermarket TCs out there by companies like Kenko and Komura, which usually make very good TCs. But I found this gray one to be attractively priced and in mint shape, so I stuck with Pentax. I've shot with it, but I haven't gotten any of the film developed yet. As far as just looking through the viewfinder goes, it seems to be plenty sharp enough, though.

Do you ever visit pentaxforums.com? If not, you might want to. They have a group there for 6x7 users, it can be found at:

http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/groups/137-heavy-pentax-6x7-format-users/

Some knowledgeable folks there.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2015 6:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks again Michael.
I have posted some comments over at Pentax Forums in the past.
I should have realised that there would be a forum for 67.
Cheers
OH


PostPosted: Sat Apr 04, 2015 3:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Michael, what are your impressions of the 4/45mm lens.
There is lots of anecdotal evidence and repetition on the web about it being less sharp than the 55mm.
As a user your impressions would be valued over internet scuttlebut.
Cheers
OH


PostPosted: Sat Apr 04, 2015 6:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You know, I don't know how to respond to those sorts of comments. Because, first of all, I don't have a 55mm to compare my 45mm to, and secondly, I've only shot a few frames with mine. Take that back -- I've post processed only a few frames I've shot with it -- I've shot a total of about 10 frames in B&W with it. So, I took another look at the images. It was a cloudy, overcast day when I took the shots, so everything looks so dreary. I've tried punching up the brightness and contrast to improve looks some. I think it's helped.

To my eyes, the sharpness I'm finding with the 45mm is very good. I've scanned the images on my Epson 4990, set to 2400 ppi, and I can see the grain of ISO 400 Tri-X when the magnifcattion is set to 1:1, so at a 100% crop, what it shows is bascially as good as it's gonna get. And it seems that there is further detail the lens can handle -- beyond what the film can display -- or the scan.

So here are a few shots from around our house. All of them were taken with the 45mm lens. Keeping in mind that I'm looking at 2400 ppi scans, I think the lens did a good job.





PostPosted: Sat Apr 04, 2015 10:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you Michael.
Yes, my question was awkward. Your impressions are valued.
The results are good to my eye.
Cheers
OH


PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2015 1:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Congratulations! That bayonet mount is impressive, isn't it?

And the "ca-llaack" of the mirror is as well. Laughing


PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2015 11:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LucisPictor wrote:
Congratulations! That bayonet mount is impressive, isn't it?

And the "ca-llaack" of the mirror is as well. Laughing


Heh, it's always sounded more like perCLAPum to me Cool

And yep, that is one Big bayonet mount.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 07, 2015 9:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Camera arrived yesterday.
Holy behemoth Batman !
Small issue, one of the front retaining pins for the pentaprism has been broken.
It still sits in place but is not fixed (screwed in?)
Needs a new battery but everything else looks OK
OH


PostPosted: Wed Apr 08, 2015 4:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hrm . . . from how far away did your camera come? I'd write to the seller about the problem in any case. Maybe they can just send you the part(s) you need for the repair?

So let's see some pics once you got 'em! Both of the camera and from the camera, that is.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 24, 2015 9:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

cooltouch wrote:
Hrm . . . from how far away did your camera come? I'd write to the seller about the problem in any case. Maybe they can just send you the part(s) you need for the repair?

So let's see some pics once you got 'em! Both of the camera and from the camera, that is.


OK, the camera came from Japan and the seller was super co-operative in rectifying the problem.
All fixed.
I have loaded up with the first and only roll of 120 that I had on hand - Royal X pan - and only 25 years out of date, but who's counting.
Everything seems to work as it should. Results to come eventually
OH


PostPosted: Fri Apr 24, 2015 5:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Welp, I'm not familiar with Royal X Pan, but I take it it is B&W, yes? Here's my experience in dealling with Kodak Plus X that expired in 1983. I found that if I developed it for the listed amount of time the negatives were thin looking. And I had to boost contrast a lot in PP. But then I decided to extend my development times and that worked well. I think I have maybe one or two rolls of this Plus X left and what I do now is I'll develop it for 1 minute longer than the recommended time. That gives me a negative with good density. About the only other thing I noticed with my Plus X, which is 35mm, is a tendency for cupping, which doesn't really go away. So this may be something you'll find with your Royal X Pan. I've noticed with my 120 and 220 film, whether slides or B&W, that the film will cup severely as it's drying out, but then shortly later it will relax and go flat as a sheet. Hopefully yours will do the same.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 24, 2015 10:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the tips Michael.
Did I say that the film was out of date - my math was way out.
It is 36 years expired Very Happy
Very fast film - very very clumpy grain when I used it last.
OH





PostPosted: Wed May 06, 2015 8:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Today I found a 4/45 to go with the Pentax 67.
I am looking forward to using it.
OH



PostPosted: Thu May 07, 2015 4:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It looks just like mine. I suspect you'll like it. I really like mine.