 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / Medium format / February 2008Pentax 67 question
I am considering buying a used Pentax 67. I understand that there have been a few different models. My question is: Are the lens mounts the same on all of them? Will a lens that works on one model work on them all? Thanks. > I am considering buying a used Pentax 67. I understand that there have been > a few different models. My question is: Are the lens mounts the same on > all of them? Will a lens that works on one model work on them all? Yes, all Pentax 67 lenses work on all of the three-ish Pentax 67 body models. (Threeish: Original Pentax 6x7, Pentax 6x7 with mirror lock-up, Pentax 67 and Pentax 67ii). >> I am considering buying a used Pentax 67. I understand that there have >> been [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > (Threeish: Original Pentax 6x7, Pentax 6x7 with mirror lock-up, Pentax 67 > and Pentax 67ii). Many thanks. Much appreciated. Also, get the wooden grip, it really helps. There's a seller on eBay by the name of inoyoon who also sells wooden right-hand grips that he makes. It improves the hand-holdability some more. It's still quite the cannon, but easier to handle than without the grips. > Also, get the wooden grip, it really helps. I always kept mine on. It makes it much easier to handle (I had the Pentax one). You don't want that tank hanging from your neck. I'll second the right hand grip idea. It really transforms the P67's handling as it makes more sense to grip and control the camera with the right hand and focus with the left. The focus handles help, too. Did Pentax make a right-hand version of their wooden grip? The Pentax grip can also be handy for holding shoe flashes. >> Also, get the wooden grip, it really helps. > >I always kept mine on. It makes it much easier to handle (I had the >Pentax one). You don't want that tank hanging from your neck. Craig Schroeder craig nospam craigschroeder com snip >>> Also, get the wooden grip, it really helps. >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Craig Schroeder > craig nospam craigschroeder com Thanks to everyone for their responses. I'm getting plenty of ideas. > I'll second the right hand grip idea. It really transforms the P67's > handling as it makes more sense to grip and control the camera with > the right hand and focus with the left. The focus handles help, too. > Did Pentax make a right-hand version of their wooden grip? The Pentax > grip can also be handy for holding shoe flashes. I think they must have. I wound up with a right hand grip which has the Asahi Pentax logo on it. I'm still waiting on delivery of my lens, though, so I haven't actually been able to shoot anything with my 6x7. But from just handling the camera, the right hand grip does seem to make a big difference in the way it feels in your hand. > Also, get the wooden grip, it really helps. > > There's a seller on eBay by the name of inoyoon who also sells wooden > right-hand grips that he makes. It improves the hand-holdability some > more. It's still quite the cannon, but easier to handle than without > the grips. Thanks. I had been considering that as well. I'll check that seller. > I am considering buying a used Pentax 67. I understand that there have been > a few different models. My question is: Are the lens mounts the same on > all of them? Will a lens that works on one model work on them all? I believe the mount is the same for all models. I had the mirror-lockup model back in the late 80s/early 90s. The sucker is a handful, and I always used the wooden grip. I didn't care for it in the studio or for weddings, but for pictorials and other location work, it was wonderful. Can't beat those big negs/transparencies. It's a bitch to handhold though. I usually used a tripod. >> I am considering buying a used Pentax 67. I understand that there have been >> a few different models. My question is: Are the lens mounts the same on [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > negs/transparencies. > It's a bitch to handhold though. I usually used a tripod. But it is one of the greatest cameras ever built and the old Kodachrome 25 transparencies I took with it in the 80's are unequaled by anything I've ever done with any other camera.  SignatureMichael > But it is one of the greatest cameras ever built and the old > Kodachrome 25 transparencies I took with it in the 80's are > unequaled by anything I've ever done with any other camera. Are you sure you don't mean Kodachrome 64? I don't think there was ever K25 in 120 format. SignatureFredrik Sandström fs@iki.fi >> But it is one of the greatest cameras ever built and the old >> Kodachrome 25 transparencies I took with it in the 80's are >> unequaled by anything I've ever done with any other camera. > > Are you sure you don't mean Kodachrome 64? I don't think there was > ever K25 in 120 format. Yes there was K25, in the 70s and 80s. By the 90s it was gone, with only K64 remaining (and for a time there was K200). And now no Kodachrome at all for MF. SignatureMichael > Yes there was K25, in the 70s and 80s. I need to ask again: Are you quite sure? Can you provide a reference? A scan showing the film codes beside the picture? I'm really curious, because this is not the first time I've read about people recalling they've shot K25 in 120 format, but I have never been able to verify that such a film has ever existed. Indeed in this supposedly complete list of Kodachrome emulsions: http://www.arp-geh.org/FileUpload_demo/KodaEktaSmall_Aug9_2005.pdf (on page 10) there is no mention of it. SignatureFredrik Sandström fs@iki.fi > I need to ask again: Are you quite sure? Can you provide a reference? > [...] I must say i too have never heard about K25 being available in 120 format either (and i was 'around' in the 70s). I do, however, remember being disappointed that when Kodachrome finally became available in rollfilm, it wasn't K25... > I need to ask again: Are you quite sure? Can you provide a reference? > A scan showing the film codes beside the picture? I'm really curious, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > http://www.arp-geh.org/FileUpload_demo/KodaEktaSmall_Aug9_2005.pdf > (on page 10) there is no mention of it. I don't recall it going that slow for 120. I have three rolls of PKR 120 (ASA 64) in my refrigerator. Yep, all 67's have the same mount, be sure to get one with MLU (Mirror lock up), believe me it's essential as is a sturdy tripod. My tip is, engage MLU then count to 15 before firing the shutter at any speed below 1/250. Rob. Signature(\__/) This is Bunny. (='.'=) Help him and his friends by supporting the (")_(") Rabbit Welfare Association: www.houserabbit.co.uk >I am considering buying a used Pentax 67. I understand that there have >been a few different models. My question is: Are the lens mounts the same >on all of them? Will a lens that works on one model work on them all? > > Thanks. But see: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/645-mlu.shtml > Yep, all 67's have the same mount, be sure to get one with MLU (Mirror > lock [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >> >> Thanks. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pentax67ii.shtml This page is more relative to the 67. I have a 67 MLU Mk1 and a 55-100 zoom. With that set up there us a definite need to let the mirror slap vibration die down for longer exposures. WIth the std 105 kit lens this might not be such an issue. Rob. Signature(\__/) This is Bunny. (='.'=) Help him and his friends by supporting the (")_(") Rabbit Welfare Association: www.houserabbit.co.uk > But see: > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >>> >>> Thanks. > http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pentax67ii.shtml > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Rob. Thanks for the tips. I'm considering the 105 mm lens as my first lens. > Thanks for the tips. I'm considering the 105 mm lens as my first lens. It is excellent in sharpness and one of the fastest normal lenses for a medium format camera - and probably the fastest in 6x7 format. If your kit does comes with the standard non-metered head, keep an eye open for a metered head. I would also recoment considering using a WLF (Waist Level Finder) and a good hand held meter, and cable release (std threaded type, quite cheap and easy to get hold of) for landscale work. Rob. Signature(\__/) This is Bunny. (='.'=) Help him and his friends by supporting the (")_(") Rabbit Welfare Association: www.houserabbit.co.uk > http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pentax67ii.shtml > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >>>> >>>> Thanks. > But see: > > http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/645-mlu.shtml Eh...never cared for 645 format from any manufacturer. I had a Pentax 645 for a while didn't like it, I now ahce a mamiya 645 Pro TL far more capable camera in my view, aA lot easier to carry. But when I want the image recording in glorious detail out comes the 67! Rob Signature(\__/) This is Bunny. (='.'=) Help him and his friends by supporting the (")_(") Rabbit Welfare Association: www.houserabbit.co.uk >> But see: >> >> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/645-mlu.shtml > > Eh...never cared for 645 format from any manufacturer. > I had a Pentax 645 for a while didn't like it, I now ahce a mamiya 645 Pro > TL far more capable camera in my view, aA lot easier to carry. But when I > want the image recording in glorious detail out comes the 67! Well, I spent a lot of time contemplating: The Pentax or the Mamiya 645? The mamiya had some obvious advantages: switchable film backs and a faster normal lens (80/1.9). On the other hand, I already had the Pentax 6x7 and thought I'd probably like to use some of its lenses on the 645. One of the things I never quite figured out for myself was the size and weight difference between a Mamiya 645 (super/pro/pro tl) and a Pentax 645 (or 645N). How would you describe the difference? ..there's no going back now, I have a nice bunch of P645 lenses already, but it's nice to know :) I found the Mamiya 645 to be a little bit heavier, bit with the 401 grip and winder (the good one) it felt better balanced to me. I also find that with interchangable bits for just about everything the mamiya is a more flexiable system. What swung it for me was the abailty to swab backs so easily. The ability to have backs loaded with B&W, Transp or differend speeds is a boon. I have 3 backs plus 2 film cartridges for fase reload. Great system, not nocking the Pentax 645, but the Mamiya works for me. Rob. Signature(\__/) This is Bunny. (='.'=) Help him and his friends by supporting the (")_(") Rabbit Welfare Association: www.houserabbit.co.uk >> I had a Pentax 645 for a while didn't like it, I now ahce a mamiya 645 >> Pro [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > ..there's no going back now, I have a nice bunch of P645 lenses already, > but it's nice to know :) Thanks for all the suggestions and advice. I wound up getting a 6x7 body with mirror lockup, a standard, non-metered prism, and the wooden grip. Now I've got to keep an eye out for a deal on a 105 mm lens. I like the suggestions regarding a metered prism and a waist level view finder. Those will have to wait for now, though. If you don't have a manual for it this link may be of use. http://www.butkus.org/chinon/pentax/pentax_6x7/pentax_6x7.htm Rob. Signature(\__/) This is Bunny. (='.'=) Help him and his friends by supporting the (")_(") Rabbit Welfare Association: www.houserabbit.co.uk > Thanks for all the suggestions and advice. I wound up getting a 6x7 body > with mirror lockup, a standard, non-metered prism, and the wooden grip. > Now I've got to keep an eye out for a deal on a 105 mm lens. I like the > suggestions regarding a metered prism and a waist level view finder. > Those will have to wait for now, though. Pentax still has the material on their imaging site, too. http://www.pentaximaging.com/customer_care/manuals_literature/show_manual >If you don't have a manual for it this link may be of use. > >http://www.butkus.org/chinon/pentax/pentax_6x7/pentax_6x7.htm > >Rob. Craig Schroeder craig nospam craigschroeder com > Pentax still has the material on their imaging site, too. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Craig Schroeder > craig nospam craigschroeder com Thanks for the links. Very useful. >I am considering buying a used Pentax 67. I understand that there have >been a few different models. My question is: Are the lens mounts the same >on all of them? Will a lens that works on one model work on them all? > > Thanks. I now have the 6 x 7 and a 105 mm. lens. I'm having great fun with it. It is definitely not a camera for weaklings! However, I am running into trouble with trying to use a flash with it. I have an electronic flash. Following what I do with my other medium format camera, a Yashica D, I put the flash in manual mode, and set the shutter speed at 1/30 or less, or on X, but I get no flash. I've looked around for information about what the problem may be, but I haven't been able to figure it out. I know the flash works. It works perfectly well with my Yashica D and with my digital SLR. I've also checked to make sure the PC cord is plugged into the X socket, not the FP socket. Any suggestions? > However, I am running into trouble with trying to use a flash with it. I > have an electronic flash. Following what I do with my other medium format [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > it out. I know the flash works. It works perfectly well with my Yashica D > and with my digital SLR. I used mine with flash on a pretty regular basis. Could be a bad cord or something messed up inside the camera. >> However, I am running into trouble with trying to use a flash with it. I >> have an electronic flash. Following what I do with my other medium [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I used mine with flash on a pretty regular basis. Could be a bad cord > or something messed up inside the camera. It's either the flash, the cord, or the camera. The standard PC socket can be tempermental, and a cord that works on one camera might not make good contact on another. Try another cord. Try squeezing the outer barrel of the cord connector very careflully. Get hold of an Ohmeter (electrical continuity test meter), and see if there is continuity at the time that the camera fires. Did the camera previously work with flash? If so, perhaps the flash you were using has a higher trigger voltage. There may be some corrosion on the sync circuit in the camera that the higher sync voltage didn't care about. Or the higher synce voltage may have caused some pitting in the contact surfaces and now your flash with lower sync voltage can't get good closure. snip > It's either the flash, the cord, or the camera. The standard PC socket can > be tempermental, and a cord that works on one camera might not make good > contact on another. Try another cord. Try squeezing the outer barrel of > the cord connector very careflully. Many thanks! One slight squeeze of the outer barrel of the cord connector and it works like a charm! > snip > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Many thanks! One slight squeeze of the outer barrel of the cord connector > and it works like a charm! Well, it worked once anyway. On to work on other possible fixes. snip > It's either the flash, the cord, or the camera. Turned out to be the cord. The cord I had worked fine with my Yashica D, but just wouldn't work with the Pentax 67. Got another cord, and it works like a charm. Thanks again for the suggestions. > Turned out to be the cord. The cord I had worked fine with my Yashica D, > but just wouldn't work with the Pentax 67. Got another cord, and it works > like a charm. I've been doing photography in one form or another since 1966, and we've had the same crappy PC connector for all that time (and I don't know how long before). With my Hasselblads, I had to keep my finger on top of the connector most of the time to make sure that it flashed. In the studio, a rubber band made sure that there was good contact. It's just a crappy connector. You'd think after all this time that someone could have come up with a better idea. > It's just a crappy connector. You'd think after all this time that > someone could have come up with a better idea. There are hundreds of connector designs - its annoying as its not even something regular electronic component suppliers stock. Signaturehttp://www.petezilla.co.uk >> It's just a crappy connector. You'd think after all this time that >> someone could have come up with a better idea. > > There are hundreds of connector designs - its annoying as its not even > something regular electronic component suppliers stock. It certainly is annoying as hell. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.