Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-27-2019, 01:55 AM   #16
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2017
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 543
QuoteOriginally posted by Silent Street Quote
...

... 'ticker-tape' formats.
LOL. Thanks for that.

06-27-2019, 08:28 AM   #17
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 32
Like Desertscape I find the difference between 645 film and 35mm film to be not significant enough to tempt me to 645. I shoot mostly slide film and I love the way one can appreciate a 6x7 slide even without a loupe. (I also shoot 6x9 from time to time with a press camera). I'm flirting with the idea of going even larger, if time and money permit. And I love the lens variety available for the 6x7/67 series.
06-27-2019, 05:06 PM - 1 Like   #18
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: NoVA
Posts: 416
Pentax 6x7 vs 645 systems Advantages and Disadvantages?

My answer: 645 film isn’t providing the marginal improvement over my digital cameras to be relevant, and now with the 645z I doubt I will shoot 645 film again.

But I still use my 67, though it takes a pretty good scanner to make it worth the trouble (my Nikon 9000 is good enough—barely).

The lenses for the 67 are one Pentax-made adapter away from use on the 645z.

I think Eric Hendrickson will still CLA 67’s. I’ve had him do that for two of mine. Build that into the cost consideration.

For me, their is a secondary aesthetic enjoyment—the 67 cameras are just so beautiful that they beg to be used. The 645 has the same ingenuity in its design, but it just doesn’t match those acres of slightly brassed (you know, real brass) lacquer-and-leatherette P67. I feel the same way about my Sinar P.

Rick “big camera fetishist” Denney
06-28-2019, 07:47 AM   #19
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
johnha's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Lancashire, UK
Photos: Albums
Posts: 741
I have a P67 and 645D (and also a Mamiya 645 which is similar to the original P645 - bought back in the day). From a film perspective today, the merits of 645 (more automation, powered film advance and more shots per roll) are less important than they were. I used to shoot action with the Mamiya (airshows etc) and it was ideal for that, now I'm much more careful with exposures and don't need to rush, in this way 10 exposures suit my way of working better.

I don't worry about body/lens sizes & weights as the bags all seem to weigh the same and are similar sizes (with either you have to trim your gear - unlike 35mm where you can carry stuff you know you won't need 'just because' it's already in the bag). I prefer the form factor of the P67 - the 'shallower' body makes it easier to fit it in bags meant for FF pro DSLs with a grip attached (similar in size). The 'deeper' body of 645D (for comparison is similar to P645) requires a bit more awkward to find a suitable 'compact' bag.

When I bought the D I only had P67 lenses and an adapter, this is a perfectly workable solution (giving Av & M modes), I haven't had problems with the optics of 6x7 lenses on the D, some are slightly better than others but nothing that seems significant to me, but I shoot mostly handheld and don't do proper lens tests. The OEM Pentax adapters may be expensive or hard to find though?

More recently I've bought some 645FA lenses: the 33-55 for a wider shot (the widest 67 lens is a 35mm Fish-Eye which kind of works if you're really careful) and the 45-85 for convenience - when you have an AF body, an AF lens is convenient to have. I could quite happily do with just the 67 lenses - they're also in demand as they can be mounted on many of the other medium format digital cameras with some adapters available.

As others have said, I wouldn't worry about the system being old and unsupported, but try to get the best condition camera you can - buying from a reputable dealer with warranty or support is preferable. How you'll be using it is the biggest deciding factor over format, you'll always be able to trade lenses and accessories should you change direction later. I regret not buying a 6x7 straight away back in the day - but they were well over my budget at the time.

John.

06-28-2019, 07:52 AM   #20
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Fowlmere, UK
Photos: Albums
Posts: 720
The difference between 35 and 645 is actually larger than that between 645 and 67, but one of the main attractions of 66, 67 and 69 is that you almost need no loupe to view the results on a lightbox. 645 is a bit too tiny for that.

Having a Rollei 6008 and some TLRs I know how addictive the process of working with these beasts can be. But only if you have the time to do it! Or the back to carry it all... I also use 35mm film again, and I loved it. Takes any obsession with gear away.

Last edited by Smolk; 06-29-2019 at 09:40 AM.
06-28-2019, 02:52 PM   #21
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 290
I got a Pentax 6X7 system in 1991 and always loved the results, though handling has never been easy (tripod, weight, cost). I bought a "like-new" Pentax 645N 3 years ago with a 45-85 A and a 80-160 A plus 2 film backs for less than 1000 $. The results were more than satisfying and I thought "Damn, I should have purchased this system 20 years earlier".

Last edited by RICHARD L.; 06-29-2019 at 12:51 AM.
06-28-2019, 04:18 PM - 1 Like   #22
Pentaxian
Cipher's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 440
I've had a Pentax 6x7 , a Mamiya 645 as well as modern APS-C digital cameras. I also used to use an Imacon scanner on 6x7 negs when I was still working in a photo lab. Taking into consideration what others have said about the age and reliability of older 67s, you should only go into it if you really like the "film look" you get from the larger 6x7 format. If you are going to shoot b&w you really need to know advanced development techniques.

In my opinion 645 film isn't worth the trouble for the small advantage it gives over your existing KP, you won't see any gain in resolution or tonality.

I would get customers that complained about my 200mb scans from 6x7 film as not being as detailed as a dslr. It was because the film grain limited the resolution.

If it was my choice I would stick with the KP or, if I had FF lenses already, go with a K-1 with pixel shift, it will give you better results than the 67 with film.

Good luck.

Last edited by Cipher; 06-28-2019 at 04:20 PM. Reason: typos
06-29-2019, 10:57 AM   #23
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
TerryL's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Virginia, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 719
If you are talking about strictly film, I would choose 6x7 for sure. But, I do like the old Hasselblad cameras and the square format. The Mamiya RB and RZ are fun. I shoot with a K1 MK II now, and am thinking about getting adding a Fujifilm MF digital camera, just for the fun of it. Enjoy your new MF camera.

07-01-2019, 07:46 PM   #24
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 129
Depends on what you’re using it for or what you want to shoot, if you’re a professional, I would just buy the best FF camera you can buy.

If you want to shoot film, which is great actually, but very expensive now, I would choose a 6x7, but a Mamiya RZ67, it’s an amazing camera and mostly mechanical, so it will last long, the backs don’t have foam inserts so they won’t leak with time. And it’s amazing looking down its waist level finder! I think my best pictures have been with that camera.

645 quality is not that great, but it can be a lot more friendly to use, you can even have Auto Focus with some brandas, including off course Pentax, and the lenses can be used with the 645D or Z. I’m actually considering buying a Pentax 645N, because I can use my lenses with it and get auto focus. I have a Mamiya 645 Pro TL, but hardly ever use it, there’s a loss of quality from using it comparing it agains my 645D and my Sony A7Riii, so it really makes no sense using it. Only for snapshots, and for that I need autofocus.

Also, at least here in my country, Mexico, shooting film is very expensive, it costs me around $60 USD per roll, from buying it, developing it and scanning it. That’s a lot of money for 10-16 shots.
07-01-2019, 11:44 PM   #25
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
ivanvernon's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Medina, OH
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,021
67 or 645

I think the big question is film vs digital. There's a whole group of folks who love to use 67 with black and white film that they process themselves to keep processing affordable. If I wanted to do self-processing black-and-white, I would definitely go with the 67 in order to gain the advantage of the 6x7 format and in order to use those wonderful 67 lenses in their native environment. You would lose a few shots per 120 roll, but otherwise film processing costs would be the same whether you processed your own or used a processing lab. Film takes more time, costs more per shot, and gets you more intimately involved in the acts of image creation.

With digital, on the other hand, once you have invested more heavily in equipment, photos are free unless you wish to commit some of them to paper at cost that depend upon processor and print size. The Pentax D or Z offers the largest digital format, and you have access to all the 645 as well as the 67 lenses (with an adapter). This is what I do, and I use both the 645D and 645Z as platform for a wide assortment of P67, P645, and Carl Zeiss Jena lenses. I prefer the immediate turn-around of photos with little processing other than minimal sharpening, exposure adaption, and croppng to produce final images. The immediate accessibility to images has helped me tostdsy and improve photographic techniques to arrive at a style and approach that is satisfying to me.

I admire and appreciate the work of the 67 self-processors, but simply am not prepared for the work load and fiddly nature of the required development processes. If you've got the money and time to do custom processing, that is an entirely different matter, of course, but for many 67 users a part of the game is control over their own processing. I still shoot maybe 5-10 film rolls a year, but limit it to Pentax full-frame film cameras, and local film processing at competitive rates is readily available.

Hope these comments will be useful to you in contemplating your next step. Lots of luck to you which ever route you take--and always remember that the journey itself is the meaningful part!
07-04-2019, 08:19 AM   #26
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 8,238
QuoteOriginally posted by ivanvernon Quote
... I still shoot maybe 5-10 film rolls a year, but limit it to Pentax full-frame film cameras ...
Calling a 35mm film camera FF just seems weird. A 6x6 and 8x10 cameras are full frame too. Calling it small format is a common phrase heard on a large format forum.
07-04-2019, 11:00 AM - 2 Likes   #27
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
ivanvernon's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Medina, OH
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,021
Trying not to be weird

QuoteOriginally posted by tuco Quote
Calling a 35mm film camera FF just seems weird. A 6x6 and 8x10 cameras are full frame too. Calling it small format is a common phrase heard on a large format forum.
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that's all.

I try my best to use standard terminology that is understood by photography professionals and hobbyists alike, and if we could abandon existing format nomenclature terminology we could create a new and internally consistent terminology that all could agree upon. Meanwhile, we must enure ourselves to the use of the term "full frame" in contradistinction to the term "APS-C." Alas, for the present we must soldier bravely onward looking to context as well as word etiology to decipher meaning in order to avoid enmeshing ourselves in semantical jungles along with all the other weird and frightful verbal beasts which reside there.

This comment is offered in jest and good humor and fellowship, so I will close with appropriate symbols to avoid sounding waspish and pedagogical! :>) ;>)
07-06-2019, 11:39 AM   #28
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: NoVA
Posts: 416
QuoteOriginally posted by tuco Quote
Calling a 35mm film camera FF just seems weird. A 6x6 and 8x10 cameras are full frame too. Calling it small format is a common phrase heard on a large format forum.


Not too long ago, the standard term for 35mm was “miniature”. Commercial event photographers might take their miniature on vacation instead of the 4x5 press camera with which they plied their trade. Those same folks called the 2x3” press cameras “Baby Graphics”. And the intermediate 3-1/4 x 4-1/4” version was “quarter-plate”.

In those days, 4x5 wasn’t “large format”—it was more like the default format for pros, not deserving of a special adjective. That was up until the Vietnam War, when the Nikon F established itself as the standard field journalism camera.

A Rolleiflex was a “rollfilm camera”—its own beast. The term “medium format” came into vogue with the advent of the Mamiya RB67 and maybe the earlier Press Universal. These were similar to small press cameras. They were a reaction by non-journalist pros to the emerging dominance of the Nikon F. The Pentax 6x7 and the Hasselblad each also had their own pro fan base. The ‘blad was the system alternative to the Rolleiflex, but I recall both being generally called “rollfilm cameras” before the late 60’s.

Europeans used different terms. There, the Rolleiflex was the default pro camera rather than the Graflex. And the field action camera was the Leica for reportage.

Terms come and go. Now, “full frame” means 24x36, medium format is anything bigger, and (sadly) there is no large format digital camera.

Rick “terms dominated by users of tiny sensors” Denney
07-06-2019, 05:01 PM   #29
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,539
QuoteOriginally posted by rdenney Quote
..... and (sadly) there is no large format digital camera.
LargeSense has a digital 8x10 camera product.

Last edited by photoptimist; 07-06-2019 at 05:08 PM.
07-26-2019, 10:12 AM   #30
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
johnha's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Lancashire, UK
Photos: Albums
Posts: 741
Looking at some costs associated with film (UK prices), a 120 roll of chrome (Provia/Velvia) is about £9, colour print (Ektar/Portra) about £6.50, B&W (FP4+/HP5+) about £4. Processing and low-res scanning comes in around £10 for each (various 'pro' labs). So you're £15-20 per roll - I have developed B&W myself, but it's easier and more convenient for me to get the lab to do it (particularly the scanning). In comparison, a roll of 35mm chrome film is much more expensive to buy at £13-15, I can't see myself by buying that anymore.

I'm ploughing my way through a bag of expired (probably badly stored) film of all types at the moment, once I've shot it I'll probably concentrate on mono and will hopefully be able to get my dev tank out again.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
645d, 645z, 6x7, advantages, camera, format, frame, medium format, move, pentax 6x7 vs, system, systems, systems advantages, vs 645 systems
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-5 vs MZ-S vs LX vs PZ-1p vs ist*D vs K10D vs K20D vs K-7 vs....... Steelski Pentax K-5 2 06-28-2017 04:59 PM
Pentax Medium Format Resources: 645 & 6x7 Cameras and Lenses, 645 & 6x7 Accessories Adam Pentax Medium Format 9 02-12-2017 03:38 AM
What are the advantages and dis-advantages of using a Focusing Screen? HoBykoYan Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 16 10-06-2011 12:28 PM
What are the advantages and disadvantages of a 645 lens on K-X dslr? HoBykoYan Pentax Medium Format 5 04-19-2011 08:09 AM
advantages...disadvantages of buying a "not for digital" lens? slip Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 11-16-2006 06:44 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:18 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top