[desertscape]

Agree that technique is critical for hand held shooting. With tripod shooting, there is a proven shutter problem with certain lenses and certain speeds. The 300 and 600 Takumars are notorious for being affected by the shutter in the 1/2 to 1/15 second range.

[Silent Street]

I've owned my Pentax 6x7 since 1973. I was fortunate though to have a father who was a professional photographer - commercial illustrator they used to call them. Navy-trained on big Fairchilds and Speed Graphics. He showed me how to hold an SLR-type camera to minimize shutter / mirror bounce. All of my field work with the 6x7 has been hand-held, some as low as 1/15 sec. While *I* might shake, I have never seen any evidence of the *bounce* so often alluded to in the popular press. I use a strap - over my shoulder - and a three-point support technique to hold the camera (my 35mms too). The left hand supports the lens and focuses, the right holds the body and fires the shutter, the strap is taut against my body and the camera, and my left elbow rests against my left rib cage. When everything's tight, squeeze the shutter. Ker-chunk! I offer this 6x7 image and enlargements from 1974 at Monte Cassino. Ektachrome, probably at around f/11, 1/125 sec., 150mm lens. Scanned at 4000dpi, gamma / color corrected, no sharpening or contrast enhancement, period. Please, show me the blur. You can count the beads on the rosaries.
link: Update your browser to use Google Drive - Google Drive Help
All images are copyrighted.

All well and good at an individual level, but it is the exception rather than the norm.

The best results in imaging with the Pentax 67 are achieved with refined technique of using mirror lock-up followed by shutter tripping, and the camera mounted on a tripod during this process. Desertscape is correct in stating that a number of lenses are prone to showing the effects of inertial blur (mirror and shutter travel).

I find it incredulous another post has appeared here extolling the virtues of handholding the P67 at low shutter speeds when it is new users, especially, who are the most vocal (and easily deterred) at complaining about the effects of blur ruining their images with these big cameras — I deal with these people a lot: "I read on the internet [insert groan and eyeroll here] where the camera can be handheld at 1/15 for super sharp pictures and —" Oh, bullshit.

Hence there is much to be gained when they skill up with tripod-based shooting so they understand how the effects of blur (however slight) and focus error can be virtually eliminated through considered technique. A number of my students have become firm devotees of tripod-mounted shooting with cameras such as the P67 (but also Hasselblads, Bronicas and Mamiyas), absolutely enthralled by the perfection achieved by learning a technique that guarantees sharp images for any enlargement size (not 6x4" postcards!). Tripod mounted shooting is also fully justified over any other technique if one is printing quite large, as I do (typically close to 1 metre across). You never saw a 4x5" camera being handheld at 25 seconds did you...?

[cobbu2]

With a wide-angle lens (55mm and wider) and higher speed film (TX, TMY, etc.) that allows shutter speeds of 1/250 (even 1/125 if using the above-mentioned techniques) or faster, handholding the 67 is a non-issue.

Taken handheld with the 55mm 6x7 f/4 on 320TXP, 1/250 sec. at f/8 or so:

[TwoUptons]

I noticed a long time ago that the 67 shook a ton more than the contemporary Mamiya RB/RZ and Hasselblad 500 series.

Then I noticed it was the only one with an instant return mirror, so a lot of shake that you notice while shooting happens after the picture is taken. With the other brands you never noticed the return shake as it happened while you were cocking for the next shot.

That said, I could never reliably get a good handheld shot on film with the 105 any slower than 1/60.

But that camera begs to be used handheld.

-Eric

[Jellygeist]

I use the 6x7 a lot at night, wide open with slow shutter speeds. Never noticed a shaking problem down to 1/30th or so, which is about the limit I'd go down to.

[Lord Lucan]

the 67 shook a ton more than the contemporary Mamiya RB/RZ and Hasselblad 500 series. Then I noticed it was the only one with an instant return mirror, so a lot of shake that you notice while shooting happens after the picture is taken

That is what I understood - that the worse shake happens after the picture is taken.

I thought that the 6x7 was made the shape it was, like a 35mm SLR rather than like a Hasselblad/Bronica etc, so that it could be hand-held more effectively.

[Silent Street]

That is what I understood - that the worse shake happens after the picture is taken

How is that plausible when/if blur is visible in the finished image you are viewing on the lightbox or on the print (not at tiny print sizes, but at enlargements of 1 metre across)?
It is at the moment both mirror and shutter inertia combine to introduce blur, if the camera has not been firmly stabilised or improper technique is used (such as not separating mirror travel and shutter travel by using MLU).

[Davidw0815]

Hi,
I own the 6x7 and 67II. I use both cameras most of the time handheld. My experience with the 105 mm and shorter lenses is: with 1/250 and faster I don't need to worry. For shutter speeds between 1/250 and 1/90 I paid extra attention to stay still. For all longer shutter speeds I use a tripod. If you plan to shoot handheld I definitely recommend to use a 400 speed film. Due to the long lenses compared to 35 mm you need to stop down all the time.
Best,
David

[Lord Lucan]

That is what I understood - that the worse shake happens after the picture is taken.

How is that plausible when/if blur is visible in the finished image you are viewing .... ? It is at the moment both mirror and shutter inertia combine to introduce blur, if the camera has not been firmly stabilised or improper technique is used (such as not separating mirror travel and shutter travel by using MLU).

Noy sure how it is plausible. Clearly it does not matter about the mirror-induced shake as it goes back down after the picture is taken, but the mirror must rise just before the picture and the camera could still be reverberating from that when the exposure is made.

I had in the back of my mind mind the review of the 6x7 in the British Amateur Photographer magazine, 7 July 1971. I have a copy and have just dug it out : it says "The noise level is certainly high but presumably unavoidable, and quite a kick is felt on firing, but it occurs after the exposure is made, so does not affect performance.". I am not saying that is gospel though, and it may be what the maker told them.

Incidentally. the price new then was £449 with the 105mm lens and non-metering pentaprism. Generally, they liked it.

[Davidw0815]

From using MLU I would say that the mirror going up is quite well dampened. The mirror going down seems to be responsible for the noise and the kick you feel on firing.

[destroya]

i was curious one day so did a little hand held experiment ( i was just really finishing a roll i shot in yosemite that i wanted to develop). I took 2 shots handheld. I composed the first, locked up the mirror, tried to hold the camera still to keep the framing, and then shot. next shot was hand held with no mirror lockup. i used the 105 lens with a shutter of 1/125. the 2nd shot clearly had some motion blur in it but the shot with mirror lock-up came out fine. no i did not enlarge the image hugely to check, just a good scan to check. yes it was without motion blur but the framing was off a little from using mirror up and waiting 2 seconds to shoot.

the feeling of the camera was clear to me that the mirror moving up, hitting the bumpers caused quite a lot of camera vibration. with using the mirror up, the vibration was a lot less. try it yourself without film in the camera and see if you notice the difference