wow old school pentax

johnyeros · 07-20-2008, 08:36 PM

http://flickr.com/photos/awfulsara/19537427/sizes/o/

this is neato.. which one is this?

*Mike Cash* · 07-20-2008, 09:02 PM

One of the flavors of the 6x7cm medium format SLR.

ftpaddict · 07-21-2008, 01:48 AM

Best camera with a wooden handle.

Wheatfield · 07-21-2008, 07:09 AM

Originally Posted by johnyeros

http://flickr.com/photos/awfulsara/19537427/sizes/o/

this is neato.. which one is this?

Looks like my 6x7, except not as bashed up. That is an original, circa 1970-1990ish. Can't tell if it's an MLU model.

johnyeros · 07-21-2008, 10:31 AM

just the reflection of the flower off that lens I can tell it's a bad ass lens

pentkon52 · 07-21-2008, 01:12 PM

Originally Posted by Wheatfield

Looks like my 6x7, except not as bashed up. That is an original, circa 1970-1990ish. Can't tell if it's an MLU model.

Nor mine.LOL

I really need to get mine out more.

Oh and look, he's hand holding it.

Dave

Andres · 07-21-2008, 03:00 PM

I WANT A 67!!!!!! I really want one!!! There are a LOT of hand held shots at Flickr with that camera, everyone who owns it say that Its just perfect

Wheatfield · 07-21-2008, 08:21 PM

Originally Posted by Andres

I WANT A 67!!!!!! I really want one!!! There are a LOT of hand held shots at Flickr with that camera, everyone who owns it say that Its just perfect

I have a 6x7 and 8 lenses from 45mm to 300mm that i haven't used in years. I really should sell the lot of it.

*Peter Zack* · 07-21-2008, 08:52 PM

Ah I dunno Wheatfield. I did that and regretted it. The prices these days are nothing close to what they were worth. Never know, they may someday come out with a 645D and you can adapt the lenses over. I have seen a few adapters for 35mm as well but have never tried one and these are excellent lenses.

jgredline · 07-21-2008, 09:38 PM

I hope this does not start a rumor, but I noticed that my local brick and mortar store started to carry a bunch of medium format lenses for Pentax and when I asked about them, they said that Pentax is coming out with them again at the request of many pros...They cater to lots of rich folk their in Hollywood etc...
I mean, they have these on the shelf...Why do it if there was and is no buyers for them????

Browse Our Inventory | samys.com

So anyway, I did go out and buy me two bodies and 3 three lenses on craigs list for $1500.00 about 6 weeks ago...I have not used them yet as I sent the bodies to Pentax to have them gone through....They are heavy by the way..

zx-m · 07-22-2008, 09:57 AM

Sell a medium format rig?...in favor of digital?...

Medium format exceeds the quality of 35mm. If I did not mind the bulk, and if I had the cash for all of the necessary items, I would be shooting MF. The 35mm format is so easy to get into, but I cannot imagine favoring digital over MF (and I also could not imagine favoring digital over 35mm film).

*Peter Zack* · 07-22-2008, 11:02 AM

I've read a number of your posts with a grin ZX_M. I understand where you are coming from and I also have a number of boxes of vinyl albums in the basement. But they never get played any more. CD's are just too easy to handle. The old analog sound is nice and in some ways better but I don't miss the pops and snaps.

Face it, film is never going to replace digital (even if the medium formats are still superior) and even though a number of us cut out teeth for years on it and spent long nights in a darkroom, We'll mostly shoot Digitals or whatever comes next for the foreseeable future.

Film has it's pluses but DSLR's are better is a number of ways that a film camera will never match. I'll name one that no one ever comments on. Chemicals and the environment. Now we save out files to disk and only print the best of the best. Before we were developing and printing millions of images that all required some chemicals that are pretty nasty and not easy to produce or dispose of safely. I'm glad that has greatly reduced.

zx-m · 07-22-2008, 11:56 AM

I am glad my posts have given you an occasional grin.

The environmental issue is quite deep. I, too, am concerned about the environment, and such is why I have chosen to stick with film equipment. There is quite an intense debate about the benefits of digital in regard to the environment. Once I started doing some digging, I was surprised to discover how far the digital chain extends. First, there are all of those obsolete digital cameras--cameras that few will have an interest in using, as the technology is so radpidly developed--and rapidly obsolete. Hence, there will be (and probably is already) a huge heap of defunct, unwanted digital cameras. Second, there is a great deal of ancillary (i.e. computer) equipment that is necessary with digital--CPUs, scanners, monitors, cables, and on and on. Third, the chemicals and heavy metals that are used in making the chips, etc. in digital gear are worse for the environment than the chemicals associated with film equipment. Fourth, the manufacturing of digital equipment (like any of today's electronic gear) is very heavily oriented toward the use of plastic. Where will we put all of this plastic? How many thousands of years will it take for it to go away? Those obsolete "low res" monitors and "slow" computers will produce tons and tons of plastic. There are many other factors, and I encourage you to explore them.

In short, the same old story is true: the more man "advances," the more he tends to destroy. I would much rather recycle a perfectly usable film camera, and enjoy its simpler--and more environmentally safe--technology, as the next $5,000 computerized image machine (such as a Nikon D3) will, in ten years, be a crude and laughable paperweight. This is all assuming that the world will remain in existence for another ten years.

*Peter Zack* · 07-22-2008, 01:25 PM

My comment was not to be critical or condescending. But you realize you're rolling a snowball in the desert. Film will always be with us I hope but it will never be mainstream again. It will have a loyal following, it will create images that can never be done on a digital pickup (IE good night shots), it will have specialized uses for a number of shooters and applications. Heck I have a pair of ME Supers on the way and an SFx now that will be used on a new-to-me telescope. I know my DSLR just can't take a night image as well as a good slow film can.

You do have a number of valid points for some jurisdictions. I have considered those issues and more. But where I live it is illegal to discard any of the equipment and even more than you mention. We pay a fee on all the gear at the time of purchase so that it can be recycled and broken down to is most basic elements. To the point of separating the gold plating off a circuit board or the plastic case from a glass picture tube. Granted some items are combined and can't easily recycled or reused, but they are looking for solutions and ways to reused 100% of everything collected.
We have gone to the point of garbage inspections here. If your bag has (it must be clear to be easily seen through) items not allowed by law inside the bag is tagged and rejected for pick up. Repeat the offense and fines can be levied. We are now at the point where 70% of the waste stream is now recycled in one way or another. It is not uncommon to see 4 recycling bags and one half full garbage bag in front of any given home. Not perfect but much better than 5-10 years ago.

The plastics and heavy metals are all reused and recycled. The goal in my province is to get the average home down to less than one garbage bag per week. Many are already there and the push will continue to get us being more 'green'. You make a valid point that we continue to live in a disposable society. It gets worse as each year passes. But if some make the effort to at least keep it out of the landfills then we may make some stides in reversing the trend.

zx-m · 07-22-2008, 01:46 PM

I took no offense to your comment. I wish you well with your ME Supers and SFx. I hope more will choose to recycle those old cameras.