67 Newcomer

ColColt · 10-27-2015, 02:16 PM

They have a variety of filter sizes, make no mistake. Nearly all Nikon filters are 52mm. Zeiss M lens filters are the strange ones at 43mm.

tuco · 10-27-2015, 02:24 PM

Originally posted by ColColt

They have a variety of filter sizes, make no mistake. Nearly all Nikon filters are 52mm. Zeiss M lens filters are the strange ones at 43mm.

Not all. I have a Zeiss 25/2.8 ZM with a 46mm filter which other M-mount lenses have.

'

ColColt · 10-27-2015, 02:35 PM

That's more normal that a 43mm. My 50 f2 uses that strange 43mm and I suspect their 35 f2.8 I'm considering is also of that diameter..

6x7 · 10-28-2015, 01:01 AM

Originally posted by tuco

That sucks. I gave up trying to get that lens. I wanted it more for the filter size than anything else. Apparently, Pentax did not give much thought to the filter sizes when they designed their lenses. They are all over the map with filter diameters. You can easily have to carry colored filters for BW in the 82mm, 77mm and 67mm filter size. What a PITA. Stepper rings suck because the lens hood does not fit it.

This played a role for my lens selection as well. I ended up with just two filter sizes, 67mm and 82mm (4/45, 2.8/75, 2.9/90, 2.8/185 and 4/300 ED). That's Ok.

**gofour3** · 10-28-2015, 07:17 AM

Originally posted by tuco

That sucks. I gave up trying to get that lens. I wanted it more for the filter size than anything else. Apparently, Pentax did not give much thought to the filter sizes when they designed their lenses. They are all over the map with filter diameters. You can easily have to carry colored filters for BW in the 82mm, 77mm and 67mm filter size. What a PITA. Stepper rings suck because the lens hood does not fit it.

That's one reason why I never bought the Pentax 6x7 zoom lenses or the 500/5.6, as they use a fourth filter size of 95mm. Then there's the old 55/3.5 that uses a 100mm filter....

Phil.

redrockcoulee · 10-28-2015, 09:39 AM

Originally posted by tuco

That sucks. I gave up trying to get that lens. I wanted it more for the filter size than anything else. Apparently, Pentax did not give much thought to the filter sizes when they designed their lenses. They are all over the map with filter diameters. You can easily have to carry colored filters for BW in the 82mm, 77mm and 67mm filter size. What a PITA. Stepper rings suck because the lens hood does not fit it.

Contrast that to my Hasselblad 500C/M. I can carry my 50/60/80/100/120 and 150mm CF T* lenses and only need one filter set (bay 60 = 67mm with adapter) and a few lens hoods. That really cuts down on the bulk you need to carry, big-time. And bayonet hoods are really nice compared to screw-on, rectangular lens hoods on some of my Pentax lenses which need alignment and that can mean not screwed on tight to get it in orientation.

Yes the advantage of Hasselblad having mostly one filter size. I have the 60/100/150/250 set and except for having to use the Bay50 to Bay 60 step up on the 100 (it is on permamently so I can use the hood on it as well) one set of filters and only two lens hoods needed. The downside with our Hasselblads is that my wife has the SWC not the SWC/M which would have also used the same filter and same hood as the 60. With the Bay 60 to 67mm adapter all the filters we are buying now for our Pentax and LF system fit on as well. We only have two lenses larger than 67mm, the Sigma 70-200 and a Schneider 210 both fo which use the 77mm.

If you are going to use filters a lot it may define which lenses you buy or avoid. Your other options are to buy into a filters system such as Lee or Conkin. I do not use them so not sure how hoods work with them.

tuco · 10-28-2015, 10:45 AM

Originally posted by redrockcoulee

Yes the advantage of Hasselblad having mostly one filter size. I have the 60/100/150/250 set and except for having to use the Bay50 to Bay 60 step up on the 100 ...

That's why I selected only CF/CFi lenses for my system. Many of the lens hoods fit a range of lenses. I found I can cut the 80mm lens hood a little short ( about a 1/4 inch off the end) in length and it still has sufficient hood depth to be used on my 60mm, 80mm and 100mm lens just fine.

gabro822 · 10-31-2015, 04:24 AM

Hi!
In order not to open another thread, I post here!

I have the opportunity to buy a P67+55,75,200 or a P67II+105 for quite the same price. On one side, I have 3 lenses, on the other, the new model.
Considering that I'm not a professional photographer and I will do mostly portraits, which kit is better, for you?
Is the 67II a real improvement?

Thank you very much
Gabriele

tuco · 10-31-2015, 06:38 AM

Originally posted by gabro822

Hi!

..
I have the opportunity to buy a P67+55,75,200 or a P67II+105 for quite the same price. On one side, I have 3 lenses, on the other, the new model.
Considering that I'm not a professional photographer and I will do mostly portraits, which kit is better, for you?
Is the 67II a real improvement?

Thank you very much
Gabriele

Milage will vary on an answer no doubt. The 67II is an improved camera if you like shooting this camera out in the field like the more nimble 35mm camera. And I suspect anybody that does that also uses it for that roll only part time because that is a lot of camera + lens options to causally haul around given most people also have other camera(s) they shoot too.

In my case, having used medium format gear for a long time, I don't need a built-in light meter. I'd rather meter it myself with a one-degree spot meter or no meter at all which much easier to do outside than most people think with BW film. And I end up using the folding hood in lieu of the prism most of the time because it gets the job done for many situations I shoot the camera in plus I like the reduction in bulk and not to mention the battery lasts for years on end. The camera is a system so reaching for a prism is there if I need it. So I basically only shoot my Pentax 67 for scenes that fall within the scope of this configuration and reach for another camera otherwise.

If the camera is going to be tripod mounted for those portraits, I highly recommend the folding hood (aka waist level finder - WLF). On a tripod, even portrait orientation is doable and you get 100% view plus a magnification for critical focus. But a WLF is not for everybody.

You gave the lens selection generically. We really need to talk about which generation some of those lenses are if you want to evaluate the cost and the deal. Refer to the following Pentax 6x7 Lens Guide. It shows all the different lens generations, a rating of that lens relative to other Pentax 6x7 lenses and importantly if the optics changed between generations. You can see most lenses only had a cosmetic change going from the 6x7 to the 67 generation, for example, but note what it says about the 55mm and 200mm.

The 67 generation of the 55/4 and 200/4 would improve the deal considerably. And if it had a 75/2.8 AL it would be super sweet. The 105/2.4 is a really good lens for a range of portraiture if you like selective focus. The leaf shutter versions of the lenses are also a serious consideration for portraiture. So for which camera, 67 or 67II, that's your call based on what you want to spend and how you want to use the camera.

gabro822 · 10-31-2015, 07:18 AM

Originally posted by tuco

Milage will vary on an answer no doubt. The 67II is an improved camera if you like shooting this camera out in the field like the more nimble 35mm camera. And I suspect anybody that does that also uses it for that roll only part time because that is a lot of camera + lens options to causally haul around given most people also have other camera(s) they shoot too.

In my case, having used medium format gear for a long time, I don't need a built-in light meter. I'd rather meter it myself with a one-degree spot meter or no meter at all which much easier to do outside than most people think with BW film. And I end up using the folding hood in lieu of the prism most of the time because it gets the job done for many situations I shoot the camera in plus I like the reduction in bulk and not to mention the battery lasts for years on end. The camera is a system so reaching for a prism is there if I need it.

If the camera is going to be tripod mounted for those portraits, I highly recommend the folding hood (aka waist level finder - WLF). On a tripod, even portrait orientation is doable and you get 100% view plus a magnification for critical focus. But a WLF is not for everybody.

You gave the lens selection generically. We really need to talk about which generation some of those lenses are if you want to evaluate the cost and the deal. Refer to the following Pentax 6x7 Lens Guide. It shows all the different lens generations, a rating of that lens relative to other Pentax 6x7 lenses and importantly if the optics changed between generations. You can see most lenses only had a cosmetic change going from the 6x7 to the 67 generation, for example, but note what it says about the 55mm and 200mm.

The 67 generation of the 55/4 and 200/4 would improve the deal considerably. And if it had a 75/2.8 AL it would be super sweet. The 105/2.4 is a really good lens for a range of portraiture if you like selective focus. The leaf shutter versions of the lenses are also a serious consideration for portraiture. So for which camera, 67 or 67II, that's your call based on what you want to spend and how you want to use the camera.

Thank you for reply!
Lenses are SMC Pentax 67 55mm f/4 andSMC Pentax 67 200mm f/4 and the 75 unfortunately is the SMC Pentax 67 75mm f/4.5 . They seem to be good lenses.
I have a handheld lightmeter, which I used with 35mm; I thought to use it also with the 67 if it comes without lightmeter. So the meter is not a big problem for me.
The only real problem is the price: the two options are 880$ for 67 and 1088$ for 67II: i think are good prices, but I can't spend much more, so what I buy now is what I have to use for long time without add new parts, until I can earn some more money (I'm a student). For this reason I try to find the most complete kit available, considering all pros and cons.
This is my situation, and I don't know what to choose!

**gofour3** · 10-31-2015, 08:10 AM

Originally posted by gabro822

Considering that I'm not a professional photographer and I will do mostly portraits, which kit is better, for you?
Is the 67II a real improvement?

If you are doing mostly portraits, then the 67ii might be your best bet as it has TTL flash support which the other models don't.

I have all three Pentax 6x7 models and the best feature about the 67ii is the user interchangeable focusing screens. I have five and swap them in seconds for different shooting scenarios. I find the older 67 and 6x7 are a pain to use for macro/telephoto/landscape work when your stuck with the default focusing screens. With the 67ii, you can pop in a grid or bright macro/telephoto screen and life is much easier!

For regular shooting there is not really any difference between models and then I usually just take the 6x7 or 67 and a handheld meter. This type of shooting is the most fun for me and the P 67ii is overkill.

Phil.

tuco · 10-31-2015, 09:29 AM

Originally posted by gofour3

If you are doing mostly portraits, then the 67ii might be your best bet as it has TTL flash support which the other models don't.

That is great for a single camera flash or candid work. But studio strobes for key, fill, hair and background, etc it is of little consequence, I feel.

tuco · 10-31-2015, 10:42 AM

Being a student and if you expect you'll have disposable income to support your photography after graduation, I think going for a cheap, bargain condition - but functional - 6x7/67 body is a good path. Put your money into the lenses. That gives you a lot of photographic scope and bang-for-your-buck.

Later, after graduation, you can decide if want a 67II body because by then it shouldn't be such a financial burden. If you really get into medium format film, most likely you'll want more than one camera brand too. They all seem to specialize in some style or way of shooting. But of course it can be a bold step to get a more manual camera for a lot of people and I can sometimes forget that it's nice to have that automation to get you started.

I'm looking forward to seeing some of your portraits!

**gofour3** · 10-31-2015, 11:47 AM

Originally posted by tuco

But studio strobes for key, fill, hair and background, etc it is of little consequence, I feel.

Agreed!

I have never used my 67ii in a studio, I always prefer my 67. All you need is the X-Sync socket to connect the lighting power pack or pocket wizard and you are good to go.

Phil.

desertscape · 10-31-2015, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by gabro822

I have the opportunity to buy a P67+55,75,200 or a P67II+105

Those two choices may not be what you need. Do you need the 55 and 75mm? Maybe it would be better to buy the body and lenses separately. A Pentax 67 body in good shape would be a good place to start. When I used to do weddings and other portraits, I used lenses from 90 to 300mm. The most commonly used 67 lens by portrait shooters are the 90 Takumar, 165LS, 120 soft, 150 Takumar and 200 Pentax. All of these are affordable. The 90-180 zoom has come down in price, so that could be a possibility. It is rather slow though at f/5.6.

10-27-2015, 02:24 PM	#17
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,022	Originally posted by ColColt They have a variety of filter sizes, make no mistake. Nearly all Nikon filters are 52mm. Zeiss M lens filters are the strange ones at 43mm. Not all. I have a Zeiss 25/2.8 ZM with a 46mm filter which other M-mount lenses have. ' Last edited by tuco; 10-28-2015 at 08:03 AM. Reason: Corrected aperture

10-31-2015, 06:38 AM	#24
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,022	Originally posted by gabro822 Hi! .. I have the opportunity to buy a P67+55,75,200 or a P67II+105 for quite the same price. On one side, I have 3 lenses, on the other, the new model. Considering that I'm not a professional photographer and I will do mostly portraits, which kit is better, for you? Is the 67II a real improvement? Thank you very much Gabriele Milage will vary on an answer no doubt. The 67II is an improved camera if you like shooting this camera out in the field like the more nimble 35mm camera. And I suspect anybody that does that also uses it for that roll only part time because that is a lot of camera + lens options to causally haul around given most people also have other camera(s) they shoot too. In my case, having used medium format gear for a long time, I don't need a built-in light meter. I'd rather meter it myself with a one-degree spot meter or no meter at all which much easier to do outside than most people think with BW film. And I end up using the folding hood in lieu of the prism most of the time because it gets the job done for many situations I shoot the camera in plus I like the reduction in bulk and not to mention the battery lasts for years on end. The camera is a system so reaching for a prism is there if I need it. So I basically only shoot my Pentax 67 for scenes that fall within the scope of this configuration and reach for another camera otherwise. If the camera is going to be tripod mounted for those portraits, I highly recommend the folding hood (aka waist level finder - WLF). On a tripod, even portrait orientation is doable and you get 100% view plus a magnification for critical focus. But a WLF is not for everybody. You gave the lens selection generically. We really need to talk about which generation some of those lenses are if you want to evaluate the cost and the deal. Refer to the following Pentax 6x7 Lens Guide. It shows all the different lens generations, a rating of that lens relative to other Pentax 6x7 lenses and importantly if the optics changed between generations. You can see most lenses only had a cosmetic change going from the 6x7 to the 67 generation, for example, but note what it says about the 55mm and 200mm. The 67 generation of the 55/4 and 200/4 would improve the deal considerably. And if it had a 75/2.8 AL it would be super sweet. The 105/2.4 is a really good lens for a range of portraiture if you like selective focus. The leaf shutter versions of the lenses are also a serious consideration for portraiture. So for which camera, 67 or 67II, that's your call based on what you want to spend and how you want to use the camera. Last edited by tuco; 10-31-2015 at 07:14 AM.

10-31-2015, 10:42 AM	#28
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,022	Being a student and if you expect you'll have disposable income to support your photography after graduation, I think going for a cheap, bargain condition - but functional - 6x7/67 body is a good path. Put your money into the lenses. That gives you a lot of photographic scope and bang-for-your-buck. Later, after graduation, you can decide if want a 67II body because by then it shouldn't be such a financial burden. If you really get into medium format film, most likely you'll want more than one camera brand too. They all seem to specialize in some style or way of shooting. But of course it can be a bold step to get a more manual camera for a lot of people and I can sometimes forget that it's nice to have that automation to get you started. I'm looking forward to seeing some of your portraits! Last edited by tuco; 10-31-2015 at 11:50 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
newcomer	samurai	Welcomes and Introductions	4	06-01-2015 08:43 AM
newcomer message	Papuchalk	Welcomes and Introductions	5	12-21-2014 03:46 AM
67 lens with 67 extension tubes on 645d	fatboy22	Pentax Medium Format	3	06-28-2014 04:44 PM
Newcomer	Tarcisio Pontes	Welcomes and Introductions	4	01-01-2014 01:35 PM

10-27-2015, 02:16 PM	#16
ColColt Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Posts: 196	They have a variety of filter sizes, make no mistake. Nearly all Nikon filters are 52mm. Zeiss M lens filters are the strange ones at 43mm.

10-27-2015, 02:35 PM	#18
ColColt Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Posts: 196	That's more normal that a 43mm. My 50 f2 uses that strange 43mm and I suspect their 35 f2.8 I'm considering is also of that diameter..

10-28-2015, 01:01 AM	#19
6x7 New Member Join Date: Oct 2015 Posts: 23	Originally posted by tuco That sucks. I gave up trying to get that lens. I wanted it more for the filter size than anything else. Apparently, Pentax did not give much thought to the filter sizes when they designed their lenses. They are all over the map with filter diameters. You can easily have to carry colored filters for BW in the 82mm, 77mm and 67mm filter size. What a PITA. Stepper rings suck because the lens hood does not fit it. This played a role for my lens selection as well. I ended up with just two filter sizes, 67mm and 82mm (4/45, 2.8/75, 2.9/90, 2.8/185 and 4/300 ED). That's Ok.

10-28-2015, 07:17 AM	#20
gofour3 Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 8,089	Originally posted by tuco That sucks. I gave up trying to get that lens. I wanted it more for the filter size than anything else. Apparently, Pentax did not give much thought to the filter sizes when they designed their lenses. They are all over the map with filter diameters. You can easily have to carry colored filters for BW in the 82mm, 77mm and 67mm filter size. What a PITA. Stepper rings suck because the lens hood does not fit it. That's one reason why I never bought the Pentax 6x7 zoom lenses or the 500/5.6, as they use a fourth filter size of 95mm. Then there's the old 55/3.5 that uses a 100mm filter.... Phil.

10-28-2015, 09:39 AM	#21
redrockcoulee Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Medicine Hat Posts: 2,306	Originally posted by tuco That sucks. I gave up trying to get that lens. I wanted it more for the filter size than anything else. Apparently, Pentax did not give much thought to the filter sizes when they designed their lenses. They are all over the map with filter diameters. You can easily have to carry colored filters for BW in the 82mm, 77mm and 67mm filter size. What a PITA. Stepper rings suck because the lens hood does not fit it. Contrast that to my Hasselblad 500C/M. I can carry my 50/60/80/100/120 and 150mm CF T* lenses and only need one filter set (bay 60 = 67mm with adapter) and a few lens hoods. That really cuts down on the bulk you need to carry, big-time. And bayonet hoods are really nice compared to screw-on, rectangular lens hoods on some of my Pentax lenses which need alignment and that can mean not screwed on tight to get it in orientation. Yes the advantage of Hasselblad having mostly one filter size. I have the 60/100/150/250 set and except for having to use the Bay50 to Bay 60 step up on the 100 (it is on permamently so I can use the hood on it as well) one set of filters and only two lens hoods needed. The downside with our Hasselblads is that my wife has the SWC not the SWC/M which would have also used the same filter and same hood as the 60. With the Bay 60 to 67mm adapter all the filters we are buying now for our Pentax and LF system fit on as well. We only have two lenses larger than 67mm, the Sigma 70-200 and a Schneider 210 both fo which use the 77mm. If you are going to use filters a lot it may define which lenses you buy or avoid. Your other options are to buy into a filters system such as Lee or Conkin. I do not use them so not sure how hoods work with them.

10-28-2015, 10:45 AM	#22
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,022	Originally posted by redrockcoulee Yes the advantage of Hasselblad having mostly one filter size. I have the 60/100/150/250 set and except for having to use the Bay50 to Bay 60 step up on the 100 ... That's why I selected only CF/CFi lenses for my system. Many of the lens hoods fit a range of lenses. I found I can cut the 80mm lens hood a little short ( about a 1/4 inch off the end) in length and it still has sufficient hood depth to be used on my 60mm, 80mm and 100mm lens just fine.

10-31-2015, 04:24 AM	#23
gabro822 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Milan Photos: Gallery Posts: 339	Hi! In order not to open another thread, I post here! I have the opportunity to buy a P67+55,75,200 or a P67II+105 for quite the same price. On one side, I have 3 lenses, on the other, the new model. Considering that I'm not a professional photographer and I will do mostly portraits, which kit is better, for you? Is the 67II a real improvement? Thank you very much Gabriele

10-31-2015, 07:18 AM	#25
gabro822 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Milan Photos: Gallery Posts: 339	Originally posted by tuco Milage will vary on an answer no doubt. The 67II is an improved camera if you like shooting this camera out in the field like the more nimble 35mm camera. And I suspect anybody that does that also uses it for that roll only part time because that is a lot of camera + lens options to causally haul around given most people also have other camera(s) they shoot too. In my case, having used medium format gear for a long time, I don't need a built-in light meter. I'd rather meter it myself with a one-degree spot meter or no meter at all which much easier to do outside than most people think with BW film. And I end up using the folding hood in lieu of the prism most of the time because it gets the job done for many situations I shoot the camera in plus I like the reduction in bulk and not to mention the battery lasts for years on end. The camera is a system so reaching for a prism is there if I need it. If the camera is going to be tripod mounted for those portraits, I highly recommend the folding hood (aka waist level finder - WLF). On a tripod, even portrait orientation is doable and you get 100% view plus a magnification for critical focus. But a WLF is not for everybody. You gave the lens selection generically. We really need to talk about which generation some of those lenses are if you want to evaluate the cost and the deal. Refer to the following Pentax 6x7 Lens Guide. It shows all the different lens generations, a rating of that lens relative to other Pentax 6x7 lenses and importantly if the optics changed between generations. You can see most lenses only had a cosmetic change going from the 6x7 to the 67 generation, for example, but note what it says about the 55mm and 200mm. The 67 generation of the 55/4 and 200/4 would improve the deal considerably. And if it had a 75/2.8 AL it would be super sweet. The 105/2.4 is a really good lens for a range of portraiture if you like selective focus. The leaf shutter versions of the lenses are also a serious consideration for portraiture. So for which camera, 67 or 67II, that's your call based on what you want to spend and how you want to use the camera. Thank you for reply! Lenses are SMC Pentax 67 55mm f/4 andSMC Pentax 67 200mm f/4 and the 75 unfortunately is the SMC Pentax 67 75mm f/4.5 . They seem to be good lenses. I have a handheld lightmeter, which I used with 35mm; I thought to use it also with the 67 if it comes without lightmeter. So the meter is not a big problem for me. The only real problem is the price: the two options are 880$ for 67 and 1088$ for 67II: i think are good prices, but I can't spend much more, so what I buy now is what I have to use for long time without add new parts, until I can earn some more money (I'm a student). For this reason I try to find the most complete kit available, considering all pros and cons. This is my situation, and I don't know what to choose!

10-31-2015, 08:10 AM	#26
gofour3 Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 8,089	Originally posted by gabro822 Considering that I'm not a professional photographer and I will do mostly portraits, which kit is better, for you? Is the 67II a real improvement? If you are doing mostly portraits, then the 67ii might be your best bet as it has TTL flash support which the other models don't. I have all three Pentax 6x7 models and the best feature about the 67ii is the user interchangeable focusing screens. I have five and swap them in seconds for different shooting scenarios. I find the older 67 and 6x7 are a pain to use for macro/telephoto/landscape work when your stuck with the default focusing screens. With the 67ii, you can pop in a grid or bright macro/telephoto screen and life is much easier! For regular shooting there is not really any difference between models and then I usually just take the 6x7 or 67 and a handheld meter. This type of shooting is the most fun for me and the P 67ii is overkill. Phil.

10-31-2015, 09:29 AM	#27
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,022	Originally posted by gofour3 If you are doing mostly portraits, then the 67ii might be your best bet as it has TTL flash support which the other models don't. That is great for a single camera flash or candid work. But studio strobes for key, fill, hair and background, etc it is of little consequence, I feel.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-31-2015, 11:47 AM	#29
gofour3 Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 8,089	Originally posted by tuco But studio strobes for key, fill, hair and background, etc it is of little consequence, I feel. Agreed! I have never used my 67ii in a studio, I always prefer my 67. All you need is the X-Sync socket to connect the lighting power pack or pocket wizard and you are good to go. Phil.

10-31-2015, 03:03 PM	#30
desertscape Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Arizona Posts: 1,272	Originally posted by gabro822 I have the opportunity to buy a P67+55,75,200 or a P67II+105 Those two choices may not be what you need. Do you need the 55 and 75mm? Maybe it would be better to buy the body and lenses separately. A Pentax 67 body in good shape would be a good place to start. When I used to do weddings and other portraits, I used lenses from 90 to 300mm. The most commonly used 67 lens by portrait shooters are the 90 Takumar, 165LS, 120 soft, 150 Takumar and 200 Pentax. All of these are affordable. The 90-180 zoom has come down in price, so that could be a possibility. It is rather slow though at f/5.6.