Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home

Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-24-2012, 12:58 PM   #16
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,869
I had a Mamiya 645 for a few years. I just didn't use it enough. The good thing was I pretty much got what I paid for it when I sold it. Like the above post... for me, the disadvantages far out weighed the advantages. Although I did some shots with my dad, for the cover of a book he wrote, that I will always treasure, and I still have his old twin lens reflex, I really think I'd be happier with a 645-d basically a K-5 on steroids.

09-24-2012, 01:01 PM   #17
Site Supporter
JimJohnson's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Lake Superior - Michigan
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,271
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
That is why many TLRs have a "sport finder" built into the focus hood. It is a simple framing device (no optics), but it allows the camera to be aimed at eye-level with focus done by zone.
Yeah, composition is somewhat by zone too.

I'll point out that I never got rid of, nor intend to get rid of my Yashica TLR. I have a delightful Kodak 35mm match-image focusing rangefinder in my collection too. I can still get film for those gems. What I can't get film for are my wonderful old 616 size folding roll film cameras. One has a cover on the back that you can open and write notes. It disturbs the emulsion so the writing shows in the processed negative and print ... I'm sure many of us have seen examples of these prints. They are often photos of people wearing somewhat out of date clothing.

Last edited by JimJohnson; 09-24-2012 at 01:08 PM.
09-24-2012, 01:07 PM   #18
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 27,483
QuoteOriginally posted by JimJohnson Quote
Yeah, composition is somewhat by zone too.
Sort of like using most rangefinder cameras or the wire-frame finder on a Graflex. Compose generously and crop to suit

09-28-2012, 12:30 PM   #19
Site Supporter
tlong423's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Kansas City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 183
QuoteOriginally posted by chris* Quote
i wanted to go with a mamiya 645 1000s with the 120 back i believe and the waist level finder. ive been trying to do my homework and that seems like a good setup from what ive read
I used to shoot with a Mamiya 645 1000s. I eventually sold it and later got a Pentax 645. In my opinion, the Pentax lenses are quite noticeably better than the Mamiya. The Pentax 645's metering is a little weird, being an early 80s design that sought to boast the use of push buttons and digital displays. I later acquired a Pentax 645n and passed off the 645 to my wife, and she loves the thing. We share lenses (it's very romantic in a Pentaxian way)

If you were to develop your own film and print it, I would recommend switching to 645 in a heartbeat as you would see an incredible difference in resolution alone. However, given that you are sending your stuff off to a lab, you may as well stick with your 35mm glass and either send your K1000 to Eric for a CLA or find a new body. Have you ever thought of the Pentax P3n? They can be had on eBay for like $10, and they hold up quite well.

09-29-2012, 07:27 AM   #20
Veteran Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Western Missouri
Posts: 429
My thought on medium format is there is no better time than now to try it. Our options for professional development and scanning of MF film will only decrease from here. I guess I see MF as an approach of spending a lot more time before pressing the shutter release, taking fewer but better shots. Sounds pretty good in that respect.

I used the Pentax K version 24/2.8 for several years as my wide angle lens. Excellent image quality and not so wide as to make taking any shot with it a challenge. Great for landscapes on 35mm film and great for a mild walk-about wide on Pentax DSLR. I also used a Vivitar 28/2.8 (I've forgotten the version) from the mid-'80s for several years. Sharp, clear with what I thought were nice colors. Maybe a little distortion but nothing serious. No complaints.

My main thought though is that due to cost I'd suggest sticking with 35mm film. When I had access to a full darkroom setup I was often floored by the quality of the 8x10 prints I could get with photos shot on Plus-X using my simple M50/2 lens. Perhaps shooting MF for its added resolution is a belt-and-suspenders approach, which is certainly fine. There are many good reasons to shoot MF including, not to be understated, the better viewfinders. As for resolution, I know I tend to fall into the trap of viewing zoomed-in portions of digital images on my computer monitor thinking the images aren't sharp enough when I've never printed any photo larger than 11x14. I think for traditional photography including printing 35mm film is a very capable format.

  • 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!
35mm lenses, ebay, format, k1000, lens, light, medium, meter
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
medium format lenses resolution chart spacevoid8 Pentax Medium Format 6 06-02-2011 05:51 AM
35mm vs Medium Format maverickh Pentax Film SLR Discussion 16 03-21-2011 03:43 PM

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:45 AM. | See also:, 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?
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]