Moto-Uno
Moto-Uno
And if you want to play for cheap,why not try a Mockva-5.Attend
to any light leaks and your off to the races with one easy to carry
big medium format negative and it fit's in my motorcycle jacket pocket.They come up on ebay all the time.Cheap is fun!!!
Regards,Peter
to any light leaks and your off to the races with one easy to carry
big medium format negative and it fit's in my motorcycle jacket pocket.They come up on ebay all the time.Cheap is fun!!!
Regards,Peter
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
Well, then you might be even more displeased about handling the Press. Even the first generation RB67 was a considerable improvement on its handling - the Press release is a separately attached cable release, the shutter is manually cocked, and unless you use the (rare and expensive) Type III backs it has no double or blank exposure prevention at all.
andreios
Well-known
Hmmm.. I don't think it was the "user interface" that left me unimpressed on the RB67, it was more the question of "handling" in the literal sense - how the beastly thing felt in my hands - it was quite OK on a tripod with a cable release but if I attempted a hand-held shot, it felt VERY uncomfortable to ME.
Cable release and cocking the shutter are absolulety OK with me - I am used to that from large format and double exposure prevention? Well, I do admit that might be missed..
nanntonaku
Established
the mamiya press handles, in the literal sense, like a big rangefinder/SLR.
i got one after shooting tlr's and it was a nice change to get back to. I actually dont like the grip as, like many people, i'm more comfortable holding the camera with my right, and focusing with my left,...
the "S" of the backs become quite a comfortable grip. your average back wont have a shutter release, but the type III back does,... only problem is that they're expensive on their own and often dont come with the cable. if they do come with the cable they're even more expensive,... more expensive than the bloody camera if you go by ebay numbers.
i dont have the special cable, but i dont mind as i find that my index finger is normally near the shutter release when holding anyway,... and more importantly, there's virtually no shake triggering the shutter this way. from the grip i'd often feel myself push a bit too hard shaking the whole camera. mind you though, its still not much of a shake.
i've had handheld 1/8 lowlight shots come out nice and sharp.
also, it can be as complicated or as simple as you want the system to be,... i got a kit because i was going after the 100mm f2.8 and wound up with a ****load of stuff,.... but since i'm in love with the polaroid back + f2.8 combo, i'm getting rid of the extra super 23 body, extra universal body, extra lenses, type3 backs and about 4 groundglass backs.
the universal, 100mm, polaroid back and a couple packs of fp-100 breaks down nicely and fits my messenger/record bag just right. i basically just shoot street, and while it is heavy, its not that bad. I would imagine that if you're used to lugging around your large format this'll be a nice "compact" for you
i got one after shooting tlr's and it was a nice change to get back to. I actually dont like the grip as, like many people, i'm more comfortable holding the camera with my right, and focusing with my left,...
the "S" of the backs become quite a comfortable grip. your average back wont have a shutter release, but the type III back does,... only problem is that they're expensive on their own and often dont come with the cable. if they do come with the cable they're even more expensive,... more expensive than the bloody camera if you go by ebay numbers.
i dont have the special cable, but i dont mind as i find that my index finger is normally near the shutter release when holding anyway,... and more importantly, there's virtually no shake triggering the shutter this way. from the grip i'd often feel myself push a bit too hard shaking the whole camera. mind you though, its still not much of a shake.
i've had handheld 1/8 lowlight shots come out nice and sharp.
also, it can be as complicated or as simple as you want the system to be,... i got a kit because i was going after the 100mm f2.8 and wound up with a ****load of stuff,.... but since i'm in love with the polaroid back + f2.8 combo, i'm getting rid of the extra super 23 body, extra universal body, extra lenses, type3 backs and about 4 groundglass backs.
the universal, 100mm, polaroid back and a couple packs of fp-100 breaks down nicely and fits my messenger/record bag just right. i basically just shoot street, and while it is heavy, its not that bad. I would imagine that if you're used to lugging around your large format this'll be a nice "compact" for you
Paddy C
Unused film collector
I bought into the P67 system after coming to the same realization. It is a great camera and the lenses are fantastic. All at crazy good prices.
However, it is heavy and I know for sure that I would not want to have to drag it around for an extended period of time. Also, I believe that mirror vibration is an issue and that sometimes gets you into a fight with film speed/aperture/shutter speed (the old triumvirate). One that can only be solved with a tripod. The 6x7 format is just wonderful. Best format ever.
I think it depends on what you personally become fond of and prefer to use. Before I "adopted" a used P6x7 in 1976 I tried out an RB67. As someone mentioned above I thought the RB was fine on a tripod, a good studio camera, but clumsy to carry and shoot hand-held. Coming from 35mm Pentax SLRs I found the P6x7 immediately familiar and likeable. Biggest difference in operation was the film loading.
I later bought a second used 6x7 and more recently a pair of 67II bodies, so I'm pretty well invested in that system and still favor it.
Some have commented that the P67 is big and heavy, but I don't see it quite that way... For me the camera is easy and comfortable to carry for extended times. I carry over the left shoulder with the wide strap adjusted short enough so that the lens falls into the crook of my elbow, with the strap attached to the body's two left-side lugs so that it hangs vertically. This is discreet and the camera is prevented from swinging about, yet can be brought up to eye level quickly with the left hand. A camera around my neck and bouncing off my front is quite uncomfortable and irritating.
The P67II is said to have better mirror damping, but I have not noted any consistent loss of sharpness with the 6x7 caused by mirror or shutter bounce at common hand-holding speeds. My first 6x7 has no mirror lockup, and indeed I've never used that feature in my later ones either. Yet the occasional 30x40" enlargements are fine.
I also have a Fuji GW670III but have just not been able to get fond of it. It feels crude somehow. And I get uneven frame spacing with 220 film, apparently common.
If you're able to have at least brief use of any of your candidate cameras, that might be a valuable way to decide.
I later bought a second used 6x7 and more recently a pair of 67II bodies, so I'm pretty well invested in that system and still favor it.
Some have commented that the P67 is big and heavy, but I don't see it quite that way... For me the camera is easy and comfortable to carry for extended times. I carry over the left shoulder with the wide strap adjusted short enough so that the lens falls into the crook of my elbow, with the strap attached to the body's two left-side lugs so that it hangs vertically. This is discreet and the camera is prevented from swinging about, yet can be brought up to eye level quickly with the left hand. A camera around my neck and bouncing off my front is quite uncomfortable and irritating.
The P67II is said to have better mirror damping, but I have not noted any consistent loss of sharpness with the 6x7 caused by mirror or shutter bounce at common hand-holding speeds. My first 6x7 has no mirror lockup, and indeed I've never used that feature in my later ones either. Yet the occasional 30x40" enlargements are fine.
I also have a Fuji GW670III but have just not been able to get fond of it. It feels crude somehow. And I get uneven frame spacing with 220 film, apparently common.
If you're able to have at least brief use of any of your candidate cameras, that might be a valuable way to decide.
Frontman
Well-known
I have never had a problem with mirror vibration when shooting the Pentax 67. It is a good camera, and is incredibly easy to use. I particularly like the quality of the lenses, the 105/2.4 being my standard choice, or the 75mm f/4.5. A Pentax 67 with a lens weighs about the same as a Mamiya Press camera. Here are a few of the ones I shoot,
nanntonaku
Established
damn, that's a nice collection of glass!
andreios
Well-known
This might be the best answer maybe..
Thank you.I am slowly verging towards the Pentax beast - despite it certainly not being a featherweight camera, it might fit the bill nicely - with a 105mm and one wider lens (and a tripod, of course) it may be a system I could live with...
I came to the point where i think that using medium format without tripod is too risky a business - for serious shooting I nowadays use to put even the rolleicord on a tripod - it enables me to use slower film and smaller apertures - it may be a pain "in the field" but it is usually rewarded later in the darkroom, when the image on the paper just sings...
Denverdad
Established
The Pentax 6x7 system is what I use for pretty much the same type of photography you are talking about, so I can offer a couple comments.
First of all, the combination of versatility, ease of use, and affordability is really it's main strength. I don't know if there is anything else out there with such a wide selection of lens focal lengths available, almost all of which are very highly regarded (including two zooms by the way - something pretty rare among medium format systems), as well as teleconverters, extension tubes, a reverse mounting ring, various finders, etc. The Mamiya RB/RZ is its main competitor in this regard, and definitely worth looking into also.
Yes the system is rather heavy. But if you are ok with a 2-lens kit consisting of a normal and a wide (wish I were!), then it is really not so bad. And, there really isn't a lot else out there that is significantly lower in weight/bulk anyway, except for the rangefinders (Mamiya 7 being a great choice, if you can afford it). But it is also more difficult to use ND grads with a rangefinder or to use them for macro/closeup work, so you need to think about whether having that flexibility is important to you.
Most users of the system (myself included) will tell you that the mirror vibration "problem" is just another one of those over-repeated and way overblown internet things. If you are talking about tripod-mounted operation then you can plan to use mirror lock-up (MLU), in which case the vibration concern basically becomes moot. You will have no issue at all with this. But do note that if you get the older "6x7" or "67" version as opposed to the more modern "67ii", you should make sure to get one with MLU (early ones did not have this feature).
So what are the downsides? Well, after using my system for several years now, the main thing I really miss from my 35mm system is the ability to change film mid-roll. That would be the nice thing about having a system with interchangeable backs. Of course, that would mean more weight too - so there's no free lunch. If you tend to burn through film relatively quickly, or else tend to always use the same type of film, this won't bother you at all. A second thing is that the Pentax is not as easy to use in vertical orientation as some other systems. With most ball-heads you can just lay the whole assembly over on its side, but I have found a Kirk L-bracket to be a more convenient solution. I must admit that I have some concern that the L-bracket has more flex in it when mounted in the vertical configuration, although I haven't been able to confirm any loss in sharpness due to that. So maybe that is not an issue either.
Finally, don't stress over the decision too much. Just buy it and try it. If it doesn't work out, you can easily sell it for about what you paid for it and then go try something else!
Good luck.
First of all, the combination of versatility, ease of use, and affordability is really it's main strength. I don't know if there is anything else out there with such a wide selection of lens focal lengths available, almost all of which are very highly regarded (including two zooms by the way - something pretty rare among medium format systems), as well as teleconverters, extension tubes, a reverse mounting ring, various finders, etc. The Mamiya RB/RZ is its main competitor in this regard, and definitely worth looking into also.
Yes the system is rather heavy. But if you are ok with a 2-lens kit consisting of a normal and a wide (wish I were!), then it is really not so bad. And, there really isn't a lot else out there that is significantly lower in weight/bulk anyway, except for the rangefinders (Mamiya 7 being a great choice, if you can afford it). But it is also more difficult to use ND grads with a rangefinder or to use them for macro/closeup work, so you need to think about whether having that flexibility is important to you.
Most users of the system (myself included) will tell you that the mirror vibration "problem" is just another one of those over-repeated and way overblown internet things. If you are talking about tripod-mounted operation then you can plan to use mirror lock-up (MLU), in which case the vibration concern basically becomes moot. You will have no issue at all with this. But do note that if you get the older "6x7" or "67" version as opposed to the more modern "67ii", you should make sure to get one with MLU (early ones did not have this feature).
So what are the downsides? Well, after using my system for several years now, the main thing I really miss from my 35mm system is the ability to change film mid-roll. That would be the nice thing about having a system with interchangeable backs. Of course, that would mean more weight too - so there's no free lunch. If you tend to burn through film relatively quickly, or else tend to always use the same type of film, this won't bother you at all. A second thing is that the Pentax is not as easy to use in vertical orientation as some other systems. With most ball-heads you can just lay the whole assembly over on its side, but I have found a Kirk L-bracket to be a more convenient solution. I must admit that I have some concern that the L-bracket has more flex in it when mounted in the vertical configuration, although I haven't been able to confirm any loss in sharpness due to that. So maybe that is not an issue either.
Finally, don't stress over the decision too much. Just buy it and try it. If it doesn't work out, you can easily sell it for about what you paid for it and then go try something else!
Good luck.
andreios
Well-known
Denverdad, thank you very much indeed for sharing your experiences. I am starting to hunt for a basic Pentax kit.
Frontman
Well-known
A good Pentax kit should include the 105/2.4 lens. I also like the 75/4.5, but with it's small maximum aperture you get a somewhat dim image in the viewfinder on cloudy days or when shooting indoors. The 90/2.8 is also a great lens, and a leaf shutter version is available which allows vibration free shooting.
You can get either a TTL metered model, or a plain-prism model with no meter. The TTL is convenient, though I like the cleaner style of the plain prism. The optional wood grip is rather superfluous, I have one, but I don't use it. A wide neck strap will tame the weight.
You can check out the "Pentax 67 Gas" thread in he SLR forum for sample pics.
You can get either a TTL metered model, or a plain-prism model with no meter. The TTL is convenient, though I like the cleaner style of the plain prism. The optional wood grip is rather superfluous, I have one, but I don't use it. A wide neck strap will tame the weight.
You can check out the "Pentax 67 Gas" thread in he SLR forum for sample pics.
andreios
Well-known
Thank you Frontman. I am well aware of that accursed thread since it beginning..
As for prism - I really don't think I need TTL, I am fine with my spotmeter in hand. So plain prism would be OK with me.. Or - what about the waist level finder? I presume it does have some sort of magnifier for fine focusing? It was just a thought - but could it perhaps save some weight (if weight saving was critical) to leave the prism at home and use just the WLF?
As for prism - I really don't think I need TTL, I am fine with my spotmeter in hand. So plain prism would be OK with me.. Or - what about the waist level finder? I presume it does have some sort of magnifier for fine focusing? It was just a thought - but could it perhaps save some weight (if weight saving was critical) to leave the prism at home and use just the WLF?
Certainly just personal opinion here, but in my view the only benefit to the 6x7 waist level finder is showing the entire frame. Think vertical orientation photo... how to hold the camera? And consider that, in contrast to most other MF SLRs, RB/RZ, all TLRs, etc, the P67 is shaped for convenient eye-level handling. I suggest leaving the WLF for special purposes like low-angle macro shots.