If i was going to get into Medium format - tell me why Pentax (or other)?

tuco · 08-01-2010, 07:21 PM

Originally posted by Rense

You could read this one... or did anyone else mention this link already?

Photoethnography.com - Classic Cameras

I've seen that article before. In the Myths and Truths sections, I'd argue some of the items.

1) I've said it before. With a WLF and a 90mm lens, the 67 weights almost the same as a Hasselblad 500C/M with a WLF and 80mm lens. And I've yet to hear anyone complaining that the 500C/M is a behemoth and will tire your arms or can't be use handheld. People shoot a Rolleiflex and Hasselblad camera handheld all the time. The 67 would be just like that with a WLF.

3) No, you don't need a good tripod. Well, yeah, you do if you have a 300mm lens and up on. But I've been shooting it for years on a small, compact tripod. My shots on that are just as good as one of my larger tripods. I've posted many a results here on PF. It all depends on camera configuration. See item 1.

4) Loading film a pain? Compared to what cameras, I wonder. I have a Rolleicord that will top it in the difficult department. And it's no harder than my Hassy 500C/M. So compared to the easiest loading MF out there, sure, it might be a pain but let's get real here.

5) Daylight flash sync with the leaf shutter lenses is an extra step of arming the leaf shutter but hardly a show stopper. If flash shooting dominated your photography, then sure you'd be better served with the recommended camera but otherwise no big deal.

Last edited by tuco; 08-02-2010 at 06:13 PM.

JayR · 08-11-2010, 06:05 PM

OK, thanks for all the replies.

Sounds like Pentax is a cheaper way into medium format then.

Is there much difference between the models available? ie is 645 more 'solid' than 645N with its autofocus? or dont have auto film advance, or are some more susceptible to mechanical failures?

From the small amount Ive read, im leaning toward the 645n and maybe the 67ii also, though havent seen any of the latter on ebay, just 67s...

GeneV · 08-11-2010, 09:51 PM

Originally posted by Bob YILDIRAN

As far as the 645 series is concerned, here's my two cents why I preferred it over any MF:

- Comperatively low cost for lenses, sometimes lower than the ones for the 35mm format.
- A spare body (manual) costs less than the repair cost.
- Less vibration compared to many MF SLR, great asset for handheld shooting.
- Almost all 645 lenses deliver top IQ and fine bokeh.
- Switch to the 645D and still use all your lenses. The samples shown so far exhibited that the existing 645 lenses work great with the 645D (probably better than any other Pentax MF lenses).

Basically my reasons, heavy on reason number one. Since the 645d was announced, prices have increased, but my 645 + 4 lenses + 3 film inserts I purchased less than a couple of years ago cost less together than any single DA lens I have purchased separately. I haven't found a quality TLR for less.

tuco · 08-13-2010, 08:50 AM

Originally posted by JayR

OK, thanks for all the replies.

Sounds like Pentax is a cheaper way into medium format then.
...
From the small amount Ive read, im leaning toward the 645n and maybe the 67ii also, though havent seen any of the latter on ebay, just 67s...

You can find a 67II on keh.com. You'll notice that you will pay over double the price for a 67II than a 67 in equivalent condition. I just looked at their lens selection. Man, the prices of 67 lenses are really low right now.

If you haven't seen this site before, here is a Pentax 67 Lens Guide. You'll notice that there are four generations of lenses using the following language:

Super Takumar 6x7
S-M-C Takumar 6X7
SMC Pentax 6x7
SMC Pentax 67

The guide notes if there was any change in lenses optics between generations. For instance, many SMC Pentax 67 lenses are just a cosmetic upgrade to the SMC Pentax 6x7 with a notable exception the SMC Pentax 67 55mm. The guide is helpful when you go lens shopping. It is sometimes difficult to know what generation is being sold because the seller does not use the distinguishing language. So you may need to ask if it is important. And note the guide rates the lenses relative to other Pentax lenses

JayR · 08-13-2010, 06:47 PM

Originally posted by tuco

You can find a 67II on keh.com. You'll notice that you will pay over double the price for a 67II than a 67 in equivalent condition.

What does the 67ii have over the other 67s?
From what i gather, mirror lock up is ideal and not all models have it?

hmmm, and the prism/finder is interchangeable on 67 but not 645?[/

tuco · 08-13-2010, 09:39 PM

Originally posted by JayR

What does the 67ii have over the other 67s?
From what i gather, mirror lock up is ideal and not all models have it?

hmmm, and the prism/finder is interchangeable on 67 but not 645?[/

Someone who owns a 67II can tell you more about the differences than me but from what I know you get double exposure (only available with a 90mm LS lens on 6x7 and 67), easy interchangeable focus mattes, lighter prism, auto shutter speed, better TTL metering and better handheld ergonomics to name some.

All 67 generation and most of the 6x7 generation have mirror lockup. It was not available on the very early 6x7 models. I mostly use MLU when it's a tripod shot. You can use it handheld but it has to be a pretty static situation. You lose seeing your composition when it's locked up.

Right, you get a choice of 4 focus finders with the 67 - prism, TTL metered prism, folding WLF and a rigid chimney finder. The 645 is fixed. Basically, the 67 and 6x7 is like a large K1000 when it is outfitted with a metered TTL prism. The 67II is more like, what, a ME Super or something.

Cideway · 08-14-2010, 02:58 AM

Before you invest in a Medium format system you need to ask 1 question... Will i go digital?

If the answer is never, then you can go and by into a dead system (one that has no digital backs and cannot accept them), that will save you a bucket load of money as everyone is dumping the dead systems.

If the answer is yes or maybe then it would be worth while looking at the ease and cost of going digital with the system and any limitations and restrictions that can be imposed by going digital.

The Pentax medium formats were the cheapest when they were new, as they didn't use interchangable backs, it made them better field cameras and reduce alignment issues and film flatness but was unpopular with people that like to change film after every shot.

I have used many medium formats systems mamiya, rollie, hassy and Pentax and i personally liked the Pentax 645 as it was the lightest easiest to use and produced fantastic results.

tuco · 08-14-2010, 05:15 AM

Originally posted by Cideway

Before you invest in a Medium format system you need to ask 1 question... Will i go digital?

Many people own more than one camera. The OP probably has a DSLR already.

**rparmar** · 08-14-2010, 06:06 AM

Originally posted by wlachan

If you want big, why stops at 645? Why not go P67? Or Mamiya M7?

Convenience. I bought a 645N because that gave me "enough" image quality while still being dead easy to operate and pretty easy to carry around. It's all a matter of compromise. Otherwise we'd all be using technical cameras.

One great reason to go Pentax is you can use all your larger format lenses on digital with the right adapter. Haven't tried this myself but I've seen nice results from those who did.

Cideway · 08-14-2010, 06:37 AM

Originally posted by tuco

Many people own more than one camera. The OP probably has a DSLR already.

What i should have said was "am i going to go digital medium format and use this system that i have invested a great deal of money in."

tuco · 08-14-2010, 06:37 AM

Originally posted by rparmar

...
One great reason to go Pentax is you can use all your larger format lenses on digital with the right adapter. Haven't tried this myself but I've seen nice results from those who did.

If your talking small format digital, it really is not as great a reason as it sounds. It is pretty pointless, IMHO, to put a medium format lens on them when you can use legacy 135 glass far more conveniently and get the same results. 645 lenses are much smaller and would almost be the same, however. But you still have to mess around with an adapter.

tuco · 08-14-2010, 06:47 AM

Originally posted by Cideway

What i should have said was "am i going to go digital medium format and use this system that i have invested a great deal of money in."

I see. But the OP could buy a 6x7 and several lenses cheaper than one DA* zoom lens for a Pentax DSLR. Not as cheap as picking up a legacy 135 camera of course but it still can be in that range of, "I'll get this system instead of a new lens for my DSLR" kind of thing.

stevebrot · 08-14-2010, 08:38 AM

Originally posted by tuco

I see. But the OP could buy a 6x7 and several lenses cheaper than one DA* zoom lens for a Pentax DSLR. Not as cheap as picking up a legacy 135 camera of course but it still can be in that range of, "I'll get this system instead of a new lens for my DSLR" kind of thing.

And there is the crux of the argument for medium format film. Right now MF systems (with the possible exception of Hasselblad and a few others) are dirt cheap. The larger negatives provide a step up quality-wise from APS-C digital at a very attractive price point.

Steve

**rparmar** · 08-14-2010, 03:11 PM

Originally posted by tuco

If your talking small format digital, it really is not as great a reason as it sounds. It is pretty pointless, IMHO, to put a medium format lens on them when you can use legacy 135 glass far more conveniently and get the same results. 645 lenses are much smaller and would almost be the same, however. But you still have to mess around with an adapter.

You are correct, it is not a "great" reason, my bad. But it is perhaps a small reason for those who would prefer to save money.

JayR · 09-01-2010, 04:20 AM

would the main difference between the 645N and 645Nii be the mirror lock up?

i looked through the comparisons, and apart from some improvements from one model to another, it appears as though mirror lock up is the big difference, ie its not available for anything other than the 645Nii.

Seems that used 645Nii is a lot more expensive than 645N. anyone think it makes a huge difference?

08-13-2010, 08:50 AM	#19
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,026	Originally posted by JayR OK, thanks for all the replies. Sounds like Pentax is a cheaper way into medium format then. ... From the small amount Ive read, im leaning toward the 645n and maybe the 67ii also, though havent seen any of the latter on ebay, just 67s... You can find a 67II on keh.com. You'll notice that you will pay over double the price for a 67II than a 67 in equivalent condition. I just looked at their lens selection. Man, the prices of 67 lenses are really low right now. If you haven't seen this site before, here is a Pentax 67 Lens Guide. You'll notice that there are four generations of lenses using the following language: Super Takumar 6x7 S-M-C Takumar 6X7 SMC Pentax 6x7 SMC Pentax 67 The guide notes if there was any change in lenses optics between generations. For instance, many SMC Pentax 67 lenses are just a cosmetic upgrade to the SMC Pentax 6x7 with a notable exception the SMC Pentax 67 55mm. The guide is helpful when you go lens shopping. It is sometimes difficult to know what generation is being sold because the seller does not use the distinguishing language. So you may need to ask if it is important. And note the guide rates the lenses relative to other Pentax lenses

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
About the Pentax Medium Format Forum	Adam	Pentax Medium Format	10	09-15-2011 03:53 AM
Pentax Medium Format Patent	ariahspam	Pentax News and Rumors	42	12-12-2008 01:39 PM
Pentax medium format lenses on a DSLR?	Rorschach	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	12-18-2007 06:30 PM
Suggestions for Pentax 35mm AND medium format	macdaddy	Pentax Medium Format	21	06-06-2007 06:34 PM

08-01-2010, 07:21 PM	#16
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,026	Originally posted by Rense You could read this one... or did anyone else mention this link already? Photoethnography.com - Classic Cameras I've seen that article before. In the Myths and Truths sections, I'd argue some of the items. 1) I've said it before. With a WLF and a 90mm lens, the 67 weights almost the same as a Hasselblad 500C/M with a WLF and 80mm lens. And I've yet to hear anyone complaining that the 500C/M is a behemoth and will tire your arms or can't be use handheld. People shoot a Rolleiflex and Hasselblad camera handheld all the time. The 67 would be just like that with a WLF. 3) No, you don't need a good tripod. Well, yeah, you do if you have a 300mm lens and up on. But I've been shooting it for years on a small, compact tripod. My shots on that are just as good as one of my larger tripods. I've posted many a results here on PF. It all depends on camera configuration. See item 1. 4) Loading film a pain? Compared to what cameras, I wonder. I have a Rolleicord that will top it in the difficult department. And it's no harder than my Hassy 500C/M. So compared to the easiest loading MF out there, sure, it might be a pain but let's get real here. 5) Daylight flash sync with the leaf shutter lenses is an extra step of arming the leaf shutter but hardly a show stopper. If flash shooting dominated your photography, then sure you'd be better served with the recommended camera but otherwise no big deal. Last edited by tuco; 08-02-2010 at 06:13 PM.

08-11-2010, 06:05 PM	#17
JayR Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Adelaide, SA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 273 Original Poster	OK, thanks for all the replies. Sounds like Pentax is a cheaper way into medium format then. Is there much difference between the models available? ie is 645 more 'solid' than 645N with its autofocus? or dont have auto film advance, or are some more susceptible to mechanical failures? From the small amount Ive read, im leaning toward the 645n and maybe the 67ii also, though havent seen any of the latter on ebay, just 67s...

08-11-2010, 09:51 PM	#18
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by Bob YILDIRAN As far as the 645 series is concerned, here's my two cents why I preferred it over any MF: - Comperatively low cost for lenses, sometimes lower than the ones for the 35mm format. - A spare body (manual) costs less than the repair cost. - Less vibration compared to many MF SLR, great asset for handheld shooting. - Almost all 645 lenses deliver top IQ and fine bokeh. - Switch to the 645D and still use all your lenses. The samples shown so far exhibited that the existing 645 lenses work great with the 645D (probably better than any other Pentax MF lenses). Basically my reasons, heavy on reason number one. Since the 645d was announced, prices have increased, but my 645 + 4 lenses + 3 film inserts I purchased less than a couple of years ago cost less together than any single DA lens I have purchased separately. I haven't found a quality TLR for less.

08-13-2010, 06:47 PM	#20
JayR Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Adelaide, SA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 273 Original Poster	Originally posted by tuco You can find a 67II on keh.com. You'll notice that you will pay over double the price for a 67II than a 67 in equivalent condition. What does the 67ii have over the other 67s? From what i gather, mirror lock up is ideal and not all models have it? hmmm, and the prism/finder is interchangeable on 67 but not 645?[/

08-13-2010, 09:39 PM	#21
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,026	Originally posted by JayR What does the 67ii have over the other 67s? From what i gather, mirror lock up is ideal and not all models have it? hmmm, and the prism/finder is interchangeable on 67 but not 645?[/ Someone who owns a 67II can tell you more about the differences than me but from what I know you get double exposure (only available with a 90mm LS lens on 6x7 and 67), easy interchangeable focus mattes, lighter prism, auto shutter speed, better TTL metering and better handheld ergonomics to name some. All 67 generation and most of the 6x7 generation have mirror lockup. It was not available on the very early 6x7 models. I mostly use MLU when it's a tripod shot. You can use it handheld but it has to be a pretty static situation. You lose seeing your composition when it's locked up. Right, you get a choice of 4 focus finders with the 67 - prism, TTL metered prism, folding WLF and a rigid chimney finder. The 645 is fixed. Basically, the 67 and 6x7 is like a large K1000 when it is outfitted with a metered TTL prism. The 67II is more like, what, a ME Super or something.

08-14-2010, 02:58 AM	#22
Cideway Inactive Account Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Adelaide, South Australia, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 364	Before you invest in a Medium format system you need to ask 1 question... Will i go digital? If the answer is never, then you can go and by into a dead system (one that has no digital backs and cannot accept them), that will save you a bucket load of money as everyone is dumping the dead systems. If the answer is yes or maybe then it would be worth while looking at the ease and cost of going digital with the system and any limitations and restrictions that can be imposed by going digital. The Pentax medium formats were the cheapest when they were new, as they didn't use interchangable backs, it made them better field cameras and reduce alignment issues and film flatness but was unpopular with people that like to change film after every shot. I have used many medium formats systems mamiya, rollie, hassy and Pentax and i personally liked the Pentax 645 as it was the lightest easiest to use and produced fantastic results.

08-14-2010, 05:15 AM	#23
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,026	Originally posted by Cideway Before you invest in a Medium format system you need to ask 1 question... Will i go digital? Many people own more than one camera. The OP probably has a DSLR already.

08-14-2010, 06:06 AM	#24
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,819	Originally posted by wlachan If you want big, why stops at 645? Why not go P67? Or Mamiya M7? Convenience. I bought a 645N because that gave me "enough" image quality while still being dead easy to operate and pretty easy to carry around. It's all a matter of compromise. Otherwise we'd all be using technical cameras. One great reason to go Pentax is you can use all your larger format lenses on digital with the right adapter. Haven't tried this myself but I've seen nice results from those who did.

08-14-2010, 06:37 AM	#25
Cideway Inactive Account Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Adelaide, South Australia, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 364	Originally posted by tuco Many people own more than one camera. The OP probably has a DSLR already. What i should have said was "am i going to go digital medium format and use this system that i have invested a great deal of money in."

08-14-2010, 06:37 AM	#26
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,026	Originally posted by rparmar ... One great reason to go Pentax is you can use all your larger format lenses on digital with the right adapter. Haven't tried this myself but I've seen nice results from those who did. If your talking small format digital, it really is not as great a reason as it sounds. It is pretty pointless, IMHO, to put a medium format lens on them when you can use legacy 135 glass far more conveniently and get the same results. 645 lenses are much smaller and would almost be the same, however. But you still have to mess around with an adapter.

08-14-2010, 06:47 AM	#27
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,026	Originally posted by Cideway What i should have said was "am i going to go digital medium format and use this system that i have invested a great deal of money in." I see. But the OP could buy a 6x7 and several lenses cheaper than one DA* zoom lens for a Pentax DSLR. Not as cheap as picking up a legacy 135 camera of course but it still can be in that range of, "I'll get this system instead of a new lens for my DSLR" kind of thing.

08-14-2010, 08:38 AM	#28
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by tuco I see. But the OP could buy a 6x7 and several lenses cheaper than one DA* zoom lens for a Pentax DSLR. Not as cheap as picking up a legacy 135 camera of course but it still can be in that range of, "I'll get this system instead of a new lens for my DSLR" kind of thing. And there is the crux of the argument for medium format film. Right now MF systems (with the possible exception of Hasselblad and a few others) are dirt cheap. The larger negatives provide a step up quality-wise from APS-C digital at a very attractive price point. Steve

08-14-2010, 03:11 PM	#29
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,819	Originally posted by tuco If your talking small format digital, it really is not as great a reason as it sounds. It is pretty pointless, IMHO, to put a medium format lens on them when you can use legacy 135 glass far more conveniently and get the same results. 645 lenses are much smaller and would almost be the same, however. But you still have to mess around with an adapter. You are correct, it is not a "great" reason, my bad. But it is perhaps a small reason for those who would prefer to save money.

09-01-2010, 04:20 AM	#30
JayR Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Adelaide, SA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 273 Original Poster	would the main difference between the 645N and 645Nii be the mirror lock up? i looked through the comparisons, and apart from some improvements from one model to another, it appears as though mirror lock up is the big difference, ie its not available for anything other than the 645Nii. Seems that used 645Nii is a lot more expensive than 645N. anyone think it makes a huge difference?