Pros | Affordable 6x7 system |
Cons | soft handed with film transport |
Rating | 9 |
Price (U.S. Dollars) | $350 |
Years Owned | 2 |
I can recommend this camera: Yes
Value, Features, Performance & Size
If you don't mind heavy or big. This camera is mostly a predictable image machine. It is the plush truck of a sports sedan of cameras. The lenses are mostly affordable and deliver sharp and contrasty images.
Camera Review
Firstly, I got the camera body very cheap... about 150. It looked great, however, I soon found out that the previous owner was a little too energetic with the film advancing and so the two test rolls were overlapping frames which meant it needed a $200 repair to the fried film clutch and little gearbox (120/220 switch). Post repair... A great joy to use this camera! Strange to some to hear due to the weight and I tell my wife that I get lots of exercise lifting it. However, I do like to use this camera because of it's layout and at the same time knowing I'm toting camera that is capable of producing absolutely beautiful images. Other systems are out there but few can compete with the full system of lenses and performance to price.
I am not a Pro, but I've had to use my P6X7 for work to shoot people and places for publication and thanks to the great lenses I had lots of really nice shots. I've surprise many with my 6x7 images when it came time to weed through the collection of digital and film shots. People were liking the film shots more than the 14.6MP digital shots. Hey!.. love those lenses on film!
Weight aside, this is a very maneuverable camera as it handle much like the diminutive 35mm cousins. Using the microprism that is standard on most P6x7s to focus was comfortable in average indoor lighting scenes and even with the lenses that are f4 maximum aperture. Differing from the common SLR would be setting the shutter speeds on the left side as opposed to traditional right side next to shutter release. However, when you get use to the other side selecting is smooth and positively. A feature hard not to notice are the four strap lugs up front and allow for the familiar wooden left grip and the mounting points for the strap providing horizontal or vertical use. I even found it convenient to mount the camera upside-down when shouldering as it will help to pull taught the strap for extra steadiness. Just make sure you have a properly functioning locks for the prism before you try this.
Since the camera's CLA and repair by a pro (Eric Hendrickson), all exposure were right on the money every time. No surprises with the film advance for 120 and 220 film anymore, just nice even spaces every time.
Easy enough to mount the lenses although if you are use to K-mounts, you will find it a little odd.
Here comes the negative points that are on my list
The camera has a
big mirror and this fact is known every time you released the shutter. That mighty "Ka-Chunk!" or "Ta-Flap!" in other hemispheres... is the sound that turns heads and gets digital shooters diving for cover. If you are not prepared for the effects of this big mirror on the move, then
fuzzy is going to be an extra feature to your images. Many sources out there will say: "...at speeds 1/125th and slower don't try it without a tripod..." Yet oddly... I've made shots at low speeds without the MLU or pod. They looked very sharp and I simply just braced myself to achieve this. At 1/15 and 1/30 wide open to 2.4 on the 105mm with the MLU, I don't see the vertical motion of the mirror at all on some of my shots. Could this mean I steadied the camera enough on some shots?
That brings me to the
Mirror-Lock-Up/MLU. I love it and sometimes hate it. I've gotten the hang of using it in low light conditions (speeds 1/60 to 1/8) and so with a flick of the finger for the MLU switch and followed by the twitch for the release, I've been getting 7 out of 8 low-speed shots that are sharp or very-very usable. Now sometimes that flick was an accidental one and leaves me with a choice of finding at least something to shoot at blind or plain waste the frame just to get that mirror back down.
Now the next obvious thing is the weight, but I'm talking more about holding that weight comfortably. The
ergonomics of hold such a heavy camera the likes of the P6x7 or P67 body... it just really needs a right hand grip like the P67ii. Those years in production...its amazing to me that Pentax never marketed one? It looks they were aware of the issue since they did bother to mold such a thing to the P67ii body. I've built and added a right-hand grip which gave me tons of stability to the use of the camera. The left grip is nice and sometimes is helpful too, but more an aid when you have a flash than a every day help...yes, that's my opinion and I've read about other who would never take the left grip off.
Focusing aid is a minor thing for me really. In extremely challenging low light conditions the microprism is almost useless and short of a flashlight, the only upgrade solution out there is the sometimes rare Beattie Interscreen that's a split-image aid with a brighten coat of some sort. You could home brewed laser pointer on a goose neck and shine it at a point of aim and try to focus on it. I've tried that in a test and it does work, but the real world human subject may not like that. So at f4.5 and narrower is a challenge.
Another thing to watch out for is the not-so-user-friendly method of a lens change when a
metered-prism is mounted. I don't own one yet, but I am aware and heed the warnings! If you are not careful and forget to remove or lift the metered-prism unit off before changing the lens, it could mean that the coupling mechanism (chain) in the camera can snap. So look up the proper procedures and memorize it!
So in conclusion (finally)
My P6x7 has delivered every time, for me it is a 95% love and 5% hate... yes I'm bias. It is a grand-ugly-hulk that adds up to handsome. Your mileage may vary... but if medium format is calling to you? The P6X7, P67 is a good place to go... or if your wallet is bigger, take a look at what the folks over at the P67ii review say.
Last edited by MysteryOnion; 12-11-2010 at 02:13 AM.
Reason: Sloppy proof reading...darn-it found another typo!