Pentax 645N vs. 67

netrex · 09-22-2009, 04:18 AM - **1 Like**

Are there any big differences except bodysize and area exposed on the film and of course field of view on similar focal lengths.

tuco · 09-22-2009, 07:10 AM

One is like shooting a K1000 loaded with a roll of 24 exposures and the other a ME Super loaded with a roll of 36 exposures. ;-)

**yurihuta** · 09-22-2009, 07:25 AM

I think it depends on which Pentax 67 (6x7, 67, 67II) you choose. The 645N has a much brighter viewfinder than the original 645. The 645N has a much brighter viewfinder than my Pentax 6x7, although I don't know about the 67 or 67II versions. I think I read that the 67II has a much brighter viewfinder than its predecessors and that with the newest AE finder, it shares many of the features the 645N metering system has.

In terms of handling, the 645N is much easier for me to handle and use than the 6x7. The 645N is not much bigger (if at all) than a Canon DSLR with grip. It is a little deeper, but it fits my hand better than my DSLR does. The Pentax 67II has a redesigned grip, but I have not yet handled one.

The 645N takes "AA" size batteries, whereas the 6x7 takes a PX27, and the new 67II takes cr123a type lithium battery.

netrex · 09-22-2009, 07:44 AM

Thank you for the informative reply. I'm leaning towards the 645N, and it sounds like a good choice.

tuco · 09-22-2009, 09:17 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by netrex

Thank you for the informative reply. I'm leaning towards the 645N, and it sounds like a good choice.

You really haven't discussed the type of shooting you plan on doing. I, for example, would find the 645 less than satisfactory for the type of shooting I do most the time given the alternative of 67. But I shoot several cameras so I have a choice. I really don't need automagic features too often, I like a waist level finder I can put on the 67, I prefer to meter my own scene and if I'm doing 120 roll, I want a good-size image projected on it. But those are my criteria. If you're transitioning from the automagic small format, the 645 camera is a popular choice.

netrex · 09-22-2009, 10:31 AM

I have the K10D and the Z-1p, and I don't need automatic modes like TV and AV, I pretty much only use manual exposure, and I do measure the various light levels in a scene before I take the picture etc., so I think I'll be able to use it well enough technically.

I plan on using it for landscape, some macro where I don't need the biggest magnification and test some portrait with it, but mainly it's landscape, then macro.

**yurihuta** · 09-22-2009, 12:22 PM

Sebastião Salgado uses a Pentax 645 system.

African Connections - Outdoor Photographer | OutdoorPhotographer.com

surfotog · 09-22-2009, 12:29 PM

Will you be shooting color or B&W? How big do you plan to print? When making bigger prints there is no substitute for sheer size. The bigger the neg, the better the print.
I have the older 67, and a 67II. The finder on the 67II is much brighter, focusing is not an issue.
If you plan to print 20x24" and bigger, I'd strongly suggest looking into the 67.

**rparmar** · 09-22-2009, 03:30 PM

The 6x7 basically requires MLU whereas you can shoot the 645 from the hip, as it were. That made my mind up, since I do not always carry a tripod. As said above, the 645 is not much different than a full-frame digital with grip. I find it quite ok to hold, surprisingly.

I am new to medium format. You might wish to follow my ongoing series of blog articles:

Thinking Outside The Frame: Sensor Sizes Explained
Which Medium Film Format?
Medium Format Priorities And The Mamiya RZ 67
Comparing Medium Format Lenses

netrex · 09-22-2009, 04:23 PM

Originally posted by surfotog

Will you be shooting color or B&W? How big do you plan to print? When making bigger prints there is no substitute for sheer size. The bigger the neg, the better the print.
I have the older 67, and a 67II. The finder on the 67II is much brighter, focusing is not an issue.
If you plan to print 20x24" and bigger, I'd strongly suggest looking into the 67.

I plan to print bigger than that. The two sets I have found that is a 645N and a 67. How is the 67 (not 6x7 or 67II) compared to the 645N? I don't mean the size of the exposure of course, but usability if one doesn't need automatics. I do plan to use it as a studio/portrait/wedding etc. camera a bit as well.

Originally posted by rparmar

The 6x7 basically requires MLU whereas you can shoot the 645 from the hip, as it were. That made my mind up, since I do not always carry a tripod. As said above, the 645 is not much different than a full-frame digital with grip. I find it quite ok to hold, surprisingly.

I am new to medium format. You might wish to follow my ongoing series of blog articles:

Thinking Outside The Frame: Sensor Sizes Explained
Which Medium Film Format?
Medium Format Priorities And The Mamiya RZ 67
Comparing Medium Format Lenses

I'd like to shoot hand held as well as on a tripod, but I do mostly use a tripod. I got the K10D and the Z-1p for hand held if it is needed.

**yurihuta** · 09-22-2009, 06:16 PM

If you plan to shoot bigger, use a tripod (mostly) and you want to shoot studio/portrait/wedding I would strongly suggest the 67II. Brighter viewfinder will help with when you have focus and compose quickly (some wedding scenarios).

Keep in mind if you do get an older 67 it may need to have the foam replaced as well as a general CLA (clean, lubricate and adjustments), which will cost a few hundred (in the USA at least). Why not instead place that money towards a 67II. You mentioned that you like to operate in manual mode, so you can skip the AE finder and go for the less expensive non metered finder. Just some thoughts.

Another option is to get the 645N and get the 67 lens to 645 body adapter and start off with some 6x7 lenses, eventually getting a 6x7 body. You will already have 6x7 lenses and you will have two formats to work with.

Originally posted by netrex

I plan to print bigger than that. The two sets I have found that is a 645N and a 67. How is the 67 (not 6x7 or 67II) compared to the 645N? I don't mean the size of the exposure of course, but usability if one doesn't need automatics. I do plan to use it as a studio/portrait/wedding etc. camera a bit as well.

I'd like to shoot hand held as well as on a tripod, but I do mostly use a tripod. I got the K10D and the Z-1p for hand held if it is needed.

surfotog · 09-22-2009, 08:09 PM

Netrex,
I can't help you with the comparison of the 645 to the 67, I have never used the 645. Contrary to what many claim, the 67 can be handheld, and you can get tack sharp results. But for landscape work, a heavy tripod is the best way to go. If you're planning to print bigger than 20x24", you'll see much better prints from a 6x7 negative. Real estate counts when shooting film, and if you look at a 645 and 6x7 chrome side by side on a light table, the size difference is obvious. It really makes a huge difference when printing big.
I agree with Yurihata about the 67II. If you don't need the AE finder, get a body and a waist level finder or rigid magnifying finder. Both are a lot cheaper than the AE finder, and they give you 100% view. The 67II is much better ergonomically, and the focus screens are much brighter.
Hope this helps.

D W · 09-23-2009, 08:51 AM

Size matters.
If you do not need automations, given similar optical performance then the negative size wins out every time.

netrex · 09-23-2009, 01:33 PM

Thank you all for the replies. I want the big size of the 67 of course, so I'm pondering about what to do and what I can afford.

How big is the actual exposed area of the film for both 67 and 645? Is it exactly 6x7 cm and 4.5x6 cm, or less?

surfotog · 09-23-2009, 04:55 PM

Actual image size for Pentax 67 according to Pentax... 55 x 70
Image size for 645 ( as I remember)...41.5 x 56

None of the cameras listed as 6x6 or 6x7 or 6x4.5 are actually that size. 56mm is the maximum usable width of 120/220 film.

09-22-2009, 04:18 AM - 1 Like	#1
netrex Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Alta Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 279	Pentax 645N vs. 67 Are there any big differences except bodysize and area exposed on the film and of course field of view on similar focal lengths.

09-22-2009, 07:10 AM	#2
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,024	One is like shooting a K1000 loaded with a roll of 24 exposures and the other a ME Super loaded with a roll of 36 exposures. ;-) Last edited by tuco; 09-22-2009 at 07:26 AM.

09-22-2009, 09:17 AM - 1 Like	#5
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,024	Originally posted by netrex Thank you for the informative reply. I'm leaning towards the 645N, and it sounds like a good choice. You really haven't discussed the type of shooting you plan on doing. I, for example, would find the 645 less than satisfactory for the type of shooting I do most the time given the alternative of 67. But I shoot several cameras so I have a choice. I really don't need automagic features too often, I like a waist level finder I can put on the 67, I prefer to meter my own scene and if I'm doing 120 roll, I want a good-size image projected on it. But those are my criteria. If you're transitioning from the automagic small format, the 645 camera is a popular choice. Last edited by tuco; 09-22-2009 at 09:28 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax 645N	Ole	Pentax Medium Format	2	04-05-2011 04:17 PM
pentax 645n flash	alanc	Flashes, Lighting, and Studio	5	03-29-2010 10:43 PM
Pentax 645N Brain Dead?	iCrop	Pentax Medium Format	1	10-12-2009 05:40 PM
Pentax 645N in da house	rparmar	Post Your Photos!	18	10-04-2009 04:57 PM

09-22-2009, 07:25 AM	#3
yurihuta Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Washington DC, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 632	I think it depends on which Pentax 67 (6x7, 67, 67II) you choose. The 645N has a much brighter viewfinder than the original 645. The 645N has a much brighter viewfinder than my Pentax 6x7, although I don't know about the 67 or 67II versions. I think I read that the 67II has a much brighter viewfinder than its predecessors and that with the newest AE finder, it shares many of the features the 645N metering system has. In terms of handling, the 645N is much easier for me to handle and use than the 6x7. The 645N is not much bigger (if at all) than a Canon DSLR with grip. It is a little deeper, but it fits my hand better than my DSLR does. The Pentax 67II has a redesigned grip, but I have not yet handled one. The 645N takes "AA" size batteries, whereas the 6x7 takes a PX27, and the new 67II takes cr123a type lithium battery.

09-22-2009, 07:44 AM	#4
netrex Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Alta Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 279 Original Poster	Thank you for the informative reply. I'm leaning towards the 645N, and it sounds like a good choice.

09-22-2009, 10:31 AM	#6
netrex Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Alta Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 279 Original Poster	I have the K10D and the Z-1p, and I don't need automatic modes like TV and AV, I pretty much only use manual exposure, and I do measure the various light levels in a scene before I take the picture etc., so I think I'll be able to use it well enough technically. I plan on using it for landscape, some macro where I don't need the biggest magnification and test some portrait with it, but mainly it's landscape, then macro.

09-22-2009, 12:22 PM	#7
yurihuta Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Washington DC, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 632	Sebastião Salgado uses a Pentax 645 system. African Connections - Outdoor Photographer \| OutdoorPhotographer.com

09-22-2009, 12:29 PM	#8
surfotog Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Honolulu Posts: 150	Will you be shooting color or B&W? How big do you plan to print? When making bigger prints there is no substitute for sheer size. The bigger the neg, the better the print. I have the older 67, and a 67II. The finder on the 67II is much brighter, focusing is not an issue. If you plan to print 20x24" and bigger, I'd strongly suggest looking into the 67.

09-22-2009, 03:30 PM	#9
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,819	The 6x7 basically requires MLU whereas you can shoot the 645 from the hip, as it were. That made my mind up, since I do not always carry a tripod. As said above, the 645 is not much different than a full-frame digital with grip. I find it quite ok to hold, surprisingly. I am new to medium format. You might wish to follow my ongoing series of blog articles: Thinking Outside The Frame: Sensor Sizes Explained Which Medium Film Format? Medium Format Priorities And The Mamiya RZ 67 Comparing Medium Format Lenses

09-22-2009, 04:23 PM	#10
netrex Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Alta Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 279 Original Poster	Originally posted by surfotog Will you be shooting color or B&W? How big do you plan to print? When making bigger prints there is no substitute for sheer size. The bigger the neg, the better the print. I have the older 67, and a 67II. The finder on the 67II is much brighter, focusing is not an issue. If you plan to print 20x24" and bigger, I'd strongly suggest looking into the 67. I plan to print bigger than that. The two sets I have found that is a 645N and a 67. How is the 67 (not 6x7 or 67II) compared to the 645N? I don't mean the size of the exposure of course, but usability if one doesn't need automatics. I do plan to use it as a studio/portrait/wedding etc. camera a bit as well. Originally posted by rparmar The 6x7 basically requires MLU whereas you can shoot the 645 from the hip, as it were. That made my mind up, since I do not always carry a tripod. As said above, the 645 is not much different than a full-frame digital with grip. I find it quite ok to hold, surprisingly. I am new to medium format. You might wish to follow my ongoing series of blog articles: Thinking Outside The Frame: Sensor Sizes Explained Which Medium Film Format? Medium Format Priorities And The Mamiya RZ 67 Comparing Medium Format Lenses I'd like to shoot hand held as well as on a tripod, but I do mostly use a tripod. I got the K10D and the Z-1p for hand held if it is needed.

09-22-2009, 06:16 PM	#11
yurihuta Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Washington DC, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 632	If you plan to shoot bigger, use a tripod (mostly) and you want to shoot studio/portrait/wedding I would strongly suggest the 67II. Brighter viewfinder will help with when you have focus and compose quickly (some wedding scenarios). Keep in mind if you do get an older 67 it may need to have the foam replaced as well as a general CLA (clean, lubricate and adjustments), which will cost a few hundred (in the USA at least). Why not instead place that money towards a 67II. You mentioned that you like to operate in manual mode, so you can skip the AE finder and go for the less expensive non metered finder. Just some thoughts. Another option is to get the 645N and get the 67 lens to 645 body adapter and start off with some 6x7 lenses, eventually getting a 6x7 body. You will already have 6x7 lenses and you will have two formats to work with. Originally posted by netrex I plan to print bigger than that. The two sets I have found that is a 645N and a 67. How is the 67 (not 6x7 or 67II) compared to the 645N? I don't mean the size of the exposure of course, but usability if one doesn't need automatics. I do plan to use it as a studio/portrait/wedding etc. camera a bit as well. I'd like to shoot hand held as well as on a tripod, but I do mostly use a tripod. I got the K10D and the Z-1p for hand held if it is needed.

09-22-2009, 08:09 PM	#12
surfotog Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Honolulu Posts: 150	Netrex, I can't help you with the comparison of the 645 to the 67, I have never used the 645. Contrary to what many claim, the 67 can be handheld, and you can get tack sharp results. But for landscape work, a heavy tripod is the best way to go. If you're planning to print bigger than 20x24", you'll see much better prints from a 6x7 negative. Real estate counts when shooting film, and if you look at a 645 and 6x7 chrome side by side on a light table, the size difference is obvious. It really makes a huge difference when printing big. I agree with Yurihata about the 67II. If you don't need the AE finder, get a body and a waist level finder or rigid magnifying finder. Both are a lot cheaper than the AE finder, and they give you 100% view. The 67II is much better ergonomically, and the focus screens are much brighter. Hope this helps.

09-23-2009, 08:51 AM	#13
D W Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Hogtown, ON, Canada Posts: 329	Size matters. If you do not need automations, given similar optical performance then the negative size wins out every time.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-23-2009, 01:33 PM	#14
netrex Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Alta Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 279 Original Poster	Thank you all for the replies. I want the big size of the 67 of course, so I'm pondering about what to do and what I can afford. How big is the actual exposed area of the film for both 67 and 645? Is it exactly 6x7 cm and 4.5x6 cm, or less?

09-23-2009, 04:55 PM	#15
surfotog Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Honolulu Posts: 150	Actual image size for Pentax 67 according to Pentax... 55 x 70 Image size for 645 ( as I remember)...41.5 x 56 None of the cameras listed as 6x6 or 6x7 or 6x4.5 are actually that size. 56mm is the maximum usable width of 120/220 film.