Hope you will have a lot of enjoyment out of your 67!
Here is a shot on the day I bought my second one (used), with the 45mm lens that also came with it...
tomalophicon
Well-known
What a film. Use it while we still can!
mathias.samuelson
Member
I love this thread, keep them coming please.
Paddy C
Unused film collector
I use the Epson 700. I don't have anything on hand right now to post, but I've been happy with it and have developed a workflow that is fairly easy and reliable.
What I've found is that setting the V700 at 3200dpi gives you quite a large file. Do your corrections. Apply some capture sharpening. Resize. Apply appropriate output sharpening. I'm by no means experts so do ask for other opinions, but an 8 x 10 should be no sweat. And you should be able to go a fair bit bigger if you have everything set up well.
jbielikowski
Jan Bielikowski
Thanks Doug! You really make me tempted to buy 45/4, do you have more to share from this lens?
jcrutcher
Veteran
Ok you all have gotten me excited. I've dusted off my 6X7 which I haven't used in 25 years. Once I get a battery and film I'll give it a go. I would be grateful for any advice you can give, I've been shooting Leica RF and Canon DSLR for the past 5 years. I believe the lens I have is a 150mm F2.8, is that the same as a 75mm in 35mm terms? It also has the TTL light meter gizmo on top.
Thanks!
Jim
Thanks!
Jim
jcrutcher
Veteran
Denverdad
Established
Well it depends on how much wider you want to go, of course. But to me the obvious choice would be the 105mm f/2.4. It is the "normal" focal length lens for 6x7 and the kit lens that I think most of these cameras came with originally. It is the brightest lens in the lineup, so it is easy to focus and great for shallow DOF shots. It is generally considered a very high quality lens, and because it is so ubiquitous it can typically be purchased relatively inexpensively. So how can you go wrong!
Now if by "wider" you mean to say that you have your heart set on a true wide angle lens, the 45mm and 55mm lenses are both well regarded. But of course you might feel like you were missing a focal length in the middle, if you get one of these before the 105mm. In the end, you will just have to get both a normal lens and and at least one of the wides to complement the short tele you already have. This is the Pentax 67 GAS thread, after all!
Jeff
jcrutcher
Veteran
Thank you Jeff. I shoot a lot with a 35mm on a Leica M however most of that is street, city type photo's. With the non-stealth of the 6X7 i doubt that I would be using it the same way. So that said I would lean towards a 105 for my next lens. Thank you for your excellent suggestions.
Jim
Jim
I'll just put in a good word for the 75mm f/2.8 Aspheric... It was one of the latest lenses to be introduced so it's not as easy to find as others. But the quality is exquisite; there is just something particularly nice about the image quality. I tried it on a P645NII just for a comparison with the 645's native 75mm f/2.8, and the P67 lens was superior in my opinion. It does have a bit of barrel distortion, but it focuses very close, is quite compact, and is a great wide-normal walk-about lens (36mm equivalent view).
(Below on a P67II with Fuji NPZ800 rated at 500, f/4)
American Gothic?
(Below on a P67II with Fuji NPZ800 rated at 500, f/4)
American Gothic?
Attachments
Paddy C
Unused film collector
I'll second that. If, like me, you are more comfortable with a 35mm (on a 35mm body), then the 75mm will feel right. The close focusing ability is really phenomenal (and sort of unbelievable if you've been using other 67 lenses).
jbielikowski
Jan Bielikowski
Thanks for asking!
So after your recommendation I was lucky enough to find nice SMC Pentax 6x7 45/4 in local store for circa 250$ and now I'm happy as hell. Gonna test it tommorow, thanks!
That was quick, Jan! I got mine as part of a package deal in 2003 from a local eBay seller, for about what you paid. At that time, suggested retail was $1550, B&H listed it for $929.95, and a local store had a used one for $500. A quick look at KEH shows they're holding value pretty well.
With an 89-deg angle of view, it's equivalent to about 22mm in 24x36 format. Also features a rear filter clip that accepts a gelatin filter, less expensive than 82mm front filters.
Hope you get some fine photos with your new lens!
With an 89-deg angle of view, it's equivalent to about 22mm in 24x36 format. Also features a rear filter clip that accepts a gelatin filter, less expensive than 82mm front filters.
Hope you get some fine photos with your new lens!
jan normandale
Film is the other way
mob81
Well-known
Picture from my iPhone until I develop the slide Films I shot that day of the sunset
Pentax 67 by Mohammed Basamh, on Flickr
Pentax 67 by Mohammed Basamh, on Flickr
jbielikowski
Jan Bielikowski
45/4
Last edited:
j.scooter
Veteran
^^^
Really nice shot, really conveys a feeling of being alone.
Wonderful subject separation and 3D feel from a lens this wide. The colors look good too, I would like to see what it would do on a less overcast day.
Really nice shot, really conveys a feeling of being alone.
Wonderful subject separation and 3D feel from a lens this wide. The colors look good too, I would like to see what it would do on a less overcast day.
dogberryjr
[Pithy phrase]
Looks pretty muddy around that winter barbie, LeicaM3!
I grabbed the shot and looked at the histogram, since it looks pretty dark. And the histogram showed no image data above about 160 up to the top at 255. Nothing above middle grey, in other words. Depending on what your goal is for this image, you may wish to give it a broader "normal" tonal range.
I twiddled it a bit to move the white point down to match the top of the data (shoved the 255 pointer down to 160) and here's the result scaled down... Of course it's your image, so I will remove this at your request, just let me know.
I grabbed the shot and looked at the histogram, since it looks pretty dark. And the histogram showed no image data above about 160 up to the top at 255. Nothing above middle grey, in other words. Depending on what your goal is for this image, you may wish to give it a broader "normal" tonal range.
I twiddled it a bit to move the white point down to match the top of the data (shoved the 255 pointer down to 160) and here's the result scaled down... Of course it's your image, so I will remove this at your request, just let me know.
