[Femto1969]

Hi, Gang,

I wanted to start a thread where people discuss their Pentax 67 model, viewfinder, accessories, lenses, and filters. I want to learn why people use the gear they do, what tips they have for making the most out of their lineup, and which accessories, features, and lenses they can't live without. I'd also like to hear the pros and cons of specific choices.

I'll start! Since I don't have a ton of money to throw at my new adventure into medium format film, I have a rather spartan, but hopefully somewhat complete kit.

Body: Pentax 67, 1989+ version
Pros: Mirror up, more recent construction
Cons: None, I suppose, except its not a Mark II

Viewfinder: First generation TTL
Pros: The metering through the lens is great, particularly since I do not have a light meter (yet). But boy does it take getting use to flicking the switch to meter and slowing to make sure I'm properly exposed before a shot. I'm trying to use this camera as close to a point-and-shoot style as I can... but that may not be possible.
Cons: I suppose there is some advantage of the newer version, maybe accuracy and longevity, but I'm not sure of how big of a deal it is.

Does anyone use a different viewfinder, like the waist-level, or chimney magnifying? Does anyone use the magnifying eye-piece? Are any of these must-have items?

Lenses:
-SMC Pentax 67 55mm f/4 (newest model)
Pros: Its supposed to be one of the best lenses in the system. Its wide enough for landscapes and some architectural photography. Common filter size. But it hasn't arrived yet, so who knows if I will like it!
Cons: Its not as wide as the 45, and a bit slower than the 55 f/3.5. And I hope my copy doesn't have the issues with debris inside that people on this forum discuss. (Is this issue just related to the "SMC Pentax 67 55mm f/4?")

-S-M-C Takumar 6X7 75mm f/4.5
Pros: Sharp! Great focal length for walking around, some landscapes, and street photography.
Cons: Slow, and in my experience, hard to focus in dim conditions.

-S-M-C Takumar 6X7 150mm f/2.8
Pros: I got this thing for a song. Coming from the DSLR world I can't believe how cheap this fantastic lens is. I haven't had a chance to use it... although my copy does have a spot on an element that I can see through the viewfinder. I will be using it almost exclusively wide open for portraits, so I am hoping the spot won't be evident. Should I be concerned about this and send it back if I can?
Cons: Its not quite as nice as the 165, they say, but accounts on the internet also say that the first iteration of the 165 f/2.8 had some serious sample variation of quality.

-SMC Pentax 67 200mm f/4
Pros: Got it in a bundle, very inexpensively as well. I actually am not sure if I will use it for portraits or otherwise. Will the 150 be enough for all portrait work?
Cons: Rather slow, but it is renowned to be a great lens. I'm toying with the idea of using a 2x converter with it for some wildlife or very long portrait shots. Any thoughts on this?

Accessories:

-I had to have the wooden handle... that look made me fall in love with this camera to begin with.
-I got a focusing assistant handle as a throw in, but I have absolutely no idea if I will want to use it or just sell it.

Filters:

I got a number as part of this bundle, but don't know what they are yet since they haven't arrived. I'm really interested in hearing what other people use in their kits and how they use them.

Well, anyway, this was a long post, but I love talking about gear. So let me know what you use and why, and maybe I can GAS for more stuff!

[Giklab]

My lineup is nonexistent, because I don't have enough money.
But I felt like starting the thread

[CreationBear]

Great thread topic--I'm at about the same point in the great "67" adventure as you, so I'll be very interested what the experts have to say. I will however put in a good word for the chimney finder if you work off of a tripod--I was able to find enough adjustment in the diopter that I can focus without my eyeglasses, which along with the native magnification makes hitting focus a lot easier.


In terms of lenses, we overlap a bit--I have the newer model versions of both the 55/4 and 200/4, but I'm starting to suspect that it will be the venerable 105/2.4 that stays on my camera most of the time...the bright viewfinder especially with the chimney finder is a joy. I'm probably most ambivalent about the 200/4 even though I've yet to see any developed frames from it--the thing is just so big and bulky that I have trouble finding space for it. I might pick up a 165 (either 2.8 or 4 LS) just to have a relatively compact 3-lens kit and only take the 200/4 out for special occasions.


Otherwise, in terms of "oddball" choices, I picked up a Ries wooden tripod--the short height actually works well while using the chimney finder--and the thing definitely is solid!

[Silent Street]

Viewfinder: First generation TTL Pros: The metering through the lens is great, particularly since I do not have a light meter (yet). But boy does it take getting use to flicking the switch to meter and slowing to make sure I'm properly exposed before a shot. I'm trying to use this camera as close to a point-and-shoot style as I can... but that may not be possible. Cons: I suppose there is some advantage of the newer version, maybe accuracy and longevity, but I'm not sure of how big of a deal it is.

It being the weekend here in Australia I'm close to departing for a trip away, but the above comments caught my eye and would benefit I think from some feedback.

Get yourself a handheld meter, then go on an intensive crash-course in mastering it. This is important. The P67 meter, while capable, is quite rudimentary, with a 5-stop range (2.5 over, 2.5 under, from the centre-point). If you are using slide film, it can be difficult to know how much the needle is giving up or down and slide film will not be particularly forgiving of say + or – 0.5 to 1 stop. A handheld meter — incident/multispot combination (I use the Sekonic L758D; it is undeniably expensive but has never failed nor fooled me in the best or worst of shooting circumstances) or incident only can sort this out for you to the native P67 half-stops. But especially the P67 meter only tracks to 1 second duration. There will be times when your shots may need anything from 10 seconds to 1 minute or more, which is where a separate meter is effective to take over, including reciprocity values (known or guesstimates).

Accuracy, longevity
The 1989+ model P67s are the best I think to invest in for any length of time and get more than reasonable longer-term use. I do not think, personally, many of these later cameras entered into, and received, brutal professional service like the forerunning Pentax 6x7 from the 1960s, which were absolutely hammered. There was a shift away from MF for a few years from 1990 as digital started making an appearance (analogue crashed completely 10 years later from 2000). But the cameras are still now 'antique' and require care, and for new users, a vague TTL meter and inaccurate shutter speeds are indications of age.

It's important to remember though that the cameras have a few idiosyncracies to be aware of, including the method of removing and replacing the prism with the lens off in order to avoid stressing / breakage of the meter coupling chain — this being the most common thing to catch new users out. Repair can be a DIY job if you are accustomed to precision, otherwise Eric the Pentax repair man is the safest go-to. Other things are to store the camera with the shutter speed dial on B or X, and not leave the shutter cocked idle for too long. Both things can result in derangement of shutter speeds and the solenoid.

Something to think about...
Your images may appear sharp when you look at the negative,.and in "postcard" size when printed, but when printed large (how about 1.2m across??), the effect of mirror slap and shutter inertia are particularly, irritatingly visible as blur. So, either shoot at +1/250 with fast film, or shoot with a tripod, trip MLU then fire the shutter. Guaranteed the results will be eye-watering to look at.

[desertscape]

I wanted to start a thread where people discuss their Pentax 67 model

Do you mean like this? Heavy Pentax - for 6X7 format users - PentaxForums.com
It already exists if you know where to look.

I use three 6x7 bodies ( 2 Asahi and1 Honeywell non-MLU)-- A proven system

I have used the following lenses-
35mm- Sold it after finding it not sharp enough in the corners for my customers needs.
45mm- proven landscape lens
55mm 67- excellent performance
75mm Takumar- outstanding lens but needed f/32 depth offered by the 55-100 zoom
105mm- Sharp lens but needed more DOF than it could offer.
135mm- Sharp lens but needed the f/45 found on the 90-180 zoom.
150mm- Nice lens but was not good for my landscape work, needed f/32.
165mmLS-- Outstanding lens for landscapes and macro.
200mm 67- Proven newer design. Excellent for landscapes, macro, lightning.
300mm Takumar- Subject to shutter vib. Moderately sharp. Replaced with the 300 EDIF.
300 EDIF- Outstanding color correction, no fringing seen. Sharp, pro quality lens. No f/45 stop like the Takumar
400 Takumar- Sharp lens, little CA
600 Takumar- Noticeable CA from f/4 to f/13. Pretty sharp beyond that. For birds, sunsets and lightning.
55-100 zoom-- Outstanding lens for landscapes.
90-180 zoom-- Outstanding lens for landscape and macro work. Not as sharp as the 55-100.

1.4X converter- Outstanding performance; reduces CA from your prime lens.
2X converter- Good performance- well corrected.

[stemked]

I recently sold my system; just too busy and couldn't justify two systems. But I had a nice system.

What I shot was mostly nature, and the 67 was mostly landscapes.

Body-newest one before 67 II with Pentaprism (I also had a waste-level view finder too.
55mm f4 (version 2)- Landscapes
135 macro f4 (old version)-macro shots
200mm f4 newest version-macro and portraits
2X Teleconverter (non Pentax-Kenko?)
Extension Tube set*
Kirk L plate (I got rid of the handle when I got this)
Cold weather cord

*When I used this setup I also had to use a long lens support (Bogan)
Screw in timer
Yellow and blue filters

I miss them, but I think they are getting a lot more use now.

[CreationBear]

Desertscape--I notice both you and Silent Street use the 165/4 LS. Since I've been waffling between it and the 165/2.8, I'm curious whether the 165 LS seems as robust as the earlier lens, or whether more moving parts makes it a bit more finicky.

[desertscape]

The LS seems pretty tough but which one to buy is more about how you intend to use it. I rarely use mine for its intended purpose; flash portraits. I bought mine for landscapes and macros due to its f/32 ability. If you are concerned with faster speed, the 2.8 may be the answer. If you do a lot of flash work or large DOF landscapes, then the LS is the answer.

[CreationBear]

The LS seems pretty tough

Thanks! I didn't know whether it was as complex a bit of machinery as the zooms you mention in one of your reviews. I definitely think the LS would be more practical for the kind of photos I take, but I'm still drawn to the build quality of those 70's era lenses--I think I could bounce my 105/2.4 Super Tak off a black bear's noggin and it would be no worse for wear.

[Silent Street]

The LS seems pretty tough but which one to buy is more about how you intend to use it. I rarely use mine for its intended purpose; flash portraits. I bought mine for landscapes and macros due to its f/32 ability. If you are concerned with faster speed, the 2.8 may be the answer. If you do a lot of flash work or large DOF landscapes, then the LS is the answer.

It is tough and very well made, in a touchy-feely sort of way. And it is heavy! I don't know about the 2.8 version because I'be never seen it up close and personal.
The 165 LS is excellent as a paper weight when not weighing down the rest of my kit and caboodle . But true, my use is identical to the above — to "pull in" elements of the landscape and nothing else, certainly not the HSS flash application. Be it noted that mirror lock-up cannot be used with this lens, but it can be with the 90mm LS — an engineering quirk in the165 LS can give rise to a shutter jamming situation. Pentax also recommends "exercising" the leaf shutter of both lenses now and then to release tension on the springs. "How many quirks are in the Pentax 67 system? ... How long is a piece of string?"

[CreationBear]

Be it noted that mirror lock-up cannot be used with this lens

Now that is a interesting bit of info, thanks! If I understand your subject matter, though--Australasian gum forests?--I curious as to your work around the lack of MLU...or are your shutter speeds under the canopy so low you're mostly in "Bulb" mode, anyway?

[desertscape]

I believe Silent Street is referring to the leaf shutter being affected by the MLU with the 165. I use the MLU on my 165LS but I only use the focal plane shutter.

[CreationBear]

only use the focal plane shutter.

That's good news--still a bummer that it won't take the 1.4 TC, though.

[Silent Street]

Now that is a interesting bit of info, thanks! If I understand your subject matter, though--Australasian gum forests?--I curious as to your work around the lack of MLU...or are your shutter speeds under the canopy so low you're mostly in "Bulb" mode, anyway?

Rainforests mostly, and some "Australasian gum forests" if their beauty so much tickles me (and before the loggers get to them...).
Yes, just about all imaging is with Bulb (and MLU) on the 67 with Tv timed with good ol' nurse's watch attached to the lanyard of my L758D spot meter! A lot of shots in rainforests go for anything from 10 seconds to 1 minute — way beyond what the humble 67 is capable of tracking.

---------- Post added 1st May 2017 at 09:02 AM ----------

I believe Silent Street is referring to the leaf shutter being affected by the MLU with the 165. I use the MLU on my 165LS but I only use the focal plane shutter.

That's right. Sorry! I should have made that clear in the post — no MLU with leaf shutter mode engaged.

[CreationBear]

A lot of shots in rainforests go for anything from 10 seconds to 1 minute

Ha, and I thought my "hollers" were dark! I guess you're well into reciprocity failure territory even with B&W film--a lot of "quirks" to juggle in what must be a challenging work environment. (BTW, if any of you or any of your exhibitors have a Web presence, I would definitely enjoy seeing your work.)