[vwbus1967]

Hi

My question is this...How any of you gone over to shooting the film Pentax 645 for everything using nothing else? (no digital or 35mm or large format). I've been thinking about doing that lately and I'm wondering if there's any downsides or comments or suggestions on that or regrets.

I feel the 645 size is just about right, the camera handles well, the size of the lens range is good including the 6x7 lenses if needed. I really like the workflow using film, no more sitting in front of the computer screen for far too long and all you need is a really is lightbox and a lupe to use. Processing is no problem with using darkroom.com and the mail. If it comes down to it I could process all my own stuff if needed or it got too costly including C-41 or E6. I've done all that is the past plus I have all the processing gear already.

My thinking is I would use just 645 with lenses and have a compact digital camera for traveling or when I needed something small and light.

So all your suggestions or comments or stories are most welcome!

Thanks
John

Attaching two 645 pictures on chrome that I shot using a 645 from a time forgotten

Attached Images

   

[tuco]

I'd guess the number of people shooting a lot of film (regularly) is small by comparison. And from that small group of people you're asking only those who shoot the smallest projection on to 120 roll film and nothing else for input.

[vwbus1967]

I'd guess the number of people shooting a lot of film (regularly) is small by comparison. And from that small group of people you're asking only those who shoot the smallest projection on to 120 roll film and nothing else for input.

Everybody's input is wanted, the more the better. You don't have to be only a 120 shooter to reply!

[CDW]

I shot Pentax 67 and 645 systems for many years. Ultimately, I went through a period of shooting only 645 and 4x5 large format film. That evolved to a Fuji 617 panoramic system along with APS-c digital, then FF digital and then no film, back to Pentax 645 (cropped) digital. I no longer shoot 645 digital, just FF with a K1 and a7III. Much of this has to do with the fact I shoot much more video than in the past.

I loved shooting film but I found it did not free me from spending hours at a computer. Film is a dust magnet and prepping an image for printing after a scan took a lot of time. Some film labs were better than others in terms of the cleaness of the film when it was returned. If you process the film yourself, I predict you'll spend a lot of time cloaning out dust spots. I never found the function for spot removal in SilverFast software very effective and in my opinion a flatbed scanner, even the very expensive Epsons, don't match the Hasselblad/Imacons. Some of my best selling images continue to be those that I shot on film and scanned with an Imacon (which I now regret selling). My K1, particularly when using pixel shift on those rare occasions when it can be utilized, easily matches 645 color negative or transparency film in resolution and dynamic range.

[tuco]

Hi

My question is this...How any of you gone over to shooting the film Pentax 645 for everything using nothing else? (no digital or 35mm or large format).

Sorry, not me. I can't just shoot one camera. When I'm in a square composition mood I shoot my 500C/M. When I'm in the mood for panos, I shoot my 617. And when I want a walking around handhold film camera I often shoot my 6x9 rangefinder, etc.

[stevebrot]

Everybody's input is wanted, the more the better. You don't have to be only a 120 shooter to reply!

I considered doing so and even spent a month with a Pentax 645N on loan to try the concept out. The 645N is a lovely camera and I am indebted to its owner for the kind favor of the loan, but in the end, I decided against going that direction, the primary reason being that I felt that the medium format "advantage" is more strongly expressed with 6x6 or larger negatives, at least for my needs (almost no portrait/studio work). Note that my needs may not be the same as yours.

In the end, I settled on a small collection of 6x7 roll film holders for use with my 4x5 field camera.

As for "645 and nothing else"...(rolls eyes, twice) I have too much fun with my 35mm and larger format gear.


Steve

[abruzzi]

I think there are two halves to your question. The first half is forsaking digital for film, and the second half is shooting 645 to the exclusion of 35mm, 6x7, etc.

1: Since getting back into film, I haven't touched my digital cameras except to experiment with using them to digitize negatives. Though in reality, I can't say that I expect to go zero digital. As much as I love how film is retraining me to take my time with each and every shot, there are some times when you don't want to do that or don't have the luxury. When I pull my motorcycle over on the side of the road and fish a camera out of the tank bag to get a quick photo of the missile test overhead, speed is more important than "slow photography."

2: I opted for the 67 instead of the 645, though both were considered. None the less, medium format is a little more cumbersome. I'd I'm going on a hike, sans tripod, the SuperProgram with the 24-50 is the perfect size.

Both my answers are about balancing convenience against the process. For that reason, I wouldn't write anything out.

[tuco]

I'd add that your P645 is a good choice if you were to only have one film camera. It is system with lots of lenses and accessories to be a good all-around film camera. Often shooting say a 6x7/6x9 handhold can be a struggle getting enough DOF sometimes due to the longer focal lengths involved. But on the other hand, the Pentax version of this 645 puts you in competition with the digital versions when looking for lenses if you are looking for more.

[Alex645]

any of you gone over to shooting the film Pentax 645 for everything using nothing else? (no digital or 35mm or large format). I've been thinking about doing that lately and I'm wondering if there's any downsides or comments or suggestions on that or regrets.

John

John,
Yes and no. In the pre-digital era, when I got my 645 in the mid 80's, I completely dropped 35mm for my personal photography. However, professionally, 80% of the clients, agencies, studios, etc, wanted 35mm, so I continued with it.

I am no longer a full time pro, and when I do shoot professionally, it's all digital. However, although I still teach 35mm film photography, all my personal film work continues to be with a 645 and 645N.

I really miss 120 Kodachrome and Ilfochrome P30 prints, but my default emulsions are Kodak Ektar 100 and Ilford XP2+.

I agree with many of the earlier responses about the pros and cons. I believe I would regret completely giving up digital just as much as I would regret giving up film. The two mediums are not just different in results, but also in process and depending on the subject and my mood, I prefer to have a choice.

I tend to shoot normal to wide and make 16x20 and larger prints, so I don't miss smaller formats like APS-C or 24x36mm for film.

[desertscape]

I personally could not use just one camera at this point in my shooting career. In the early 1980's I used just one camera but I evolved from 35mm rangefinder to 35mm SLR to 6x7 to compact digital and then a bit of 4x5. These are all tools and each has their place and I still use a 35mm SLR, compact digital and my 6x7. But these tools have different benefits to different people. What works for me, may not work for you. Whether the P645 will work for you as your only camera, is a pragmatic and personal decision.

Steve @ Desertscape
Tucson

[johnha]

Hi

My question is this...How any of you gone over to shooting the film Pentax 645 for everything using nothing else? (no digital or 35mm or large format). I've been thinking about doing that lately and I'm wondering if there's any downsides or comments or suggestions on that or regrets.

I feel the 645 size is just about right, the camera handles well, the size of the lens range is good including the 6x7 lenses if needed. I really like the workflow using film, no more sitting in front of the computer screen for far too long and all you need is a really is lightbox and a lupe to use. Processing is no problem with using darkroom.com and the mail. If it comes down to it I could process all my own stuff if needed or it got too costly including C-41 or E6. I've done all that is the past plus I have all the processing gear already.

My thinking is I would use just 645 with lenses and have a compact digital camera for traveling or when I needed something small and light.

I've kind of done this, although with a P6x7 instead (I'm not shooting as much recently due to other circumstances). For holidays & travel I take a combo of an MX-1 and GR but I haven't shot my K-5 for years. I still have a lot of 35mm gear, but have only shot cameras recently to test them - I find the results un-impressive now I'm using 6x7 and shooting 36 exposures takes me a long time.

As far as formats go, I also have a Mamiya 645 Pro - the 645 format is very useful (especially for longer lenses), but the modular construction of the camera adds bulk & weight (I always end up carrying a spare film back, extra WLF and various other bits - even if I have no need - heck they live in the bag anyway!). The AF and metering options of a 645N would be a very useful in so many circumstances. As mentioned though, there's a lot of competition for used 645 FA lenses due to the D's & Z's. I have the 6x7 to 645 adapter, if a cheapish 645 film body appears, I might snap it up.

P.S. I love the Liberator photo - very unusual angle, yet immediately recognisable.

John.

[Smolk]

I usually shoot 6x6, mainly Rolleiflex 6008 i wit 2-3 lenses. But it's heavy, so sometimes I go for a 6x6 TLR (Rolleiflex 2.8C or Microflex).
More rarely, I like using a rangefinder (DeMaria LaPierre Telka III).

I have 35mm film but apart from less weight I find I'd rather use the larger format.

The only digital camera I have is my iPhone 8+, but I do plan on buying a Pentax K-1 one day. Already have the lightweight primes. That would be for convenience and weight.

[rdenney]

645 film was my standard format for pay gigs for about the last dozen and a half years. Before that, it had been 6x6. I stopped shooting much 35mm film when I realized I could do just as well with digital. And it’s been a while since I shot roll film in anything but a Pentax 67 or 612 back on my view camera. But with all the lenses I bought to go on a soon-to-arrive 645z, I could see myself shooting a few rolls in the N or NII.

I’ll still use the 67 just because I love the camera. And large format.

645 is one of those “one camera to do it all” formats, but I’ve never felt the need to stick to a single format.

Rick “who should probably sell a few cameras while film is hip again” Denney

[leekil]

I shoot digital mostly, 35mm film second, and then (even farther back) 645. If I was going to go to film only, I probably couldn't go with 645 due to the lack of the fastest aperture lenses. But if you are good with that and don't mind the extra weight, then by all means go for it, it would be great for the generally better image quality.

[Bonner04]

Some folks do travel photography like myself. My wife would have killed me if I had packed my 645Nii and 3 lenses for our trips to Africa, South America and Australia.
I took my ME Super(2 lenses) and Fuji X100 instead. Street shooting and low light/night photography with the X100 and scenic daytime shooting with film covers my needs.