Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,708   Posts: 1,548,563   Online: 1131
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    netherlands
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    371

    pentax 67 vs. pentax 645 vs. mayima 645

    Hi there.
    I am on the verge of buying a medium format camera. I've been orientating a bit lately and the in the thread title mentioned camera's are the ones I've narowed it down to.
    My budget is not to big - I am a student -. My question. Are the three comparable to eachother? For example the pentax 67 vs. 654? Which of those two should be more expensive? I kinda like the idea of not having a perfect square negative...

    one other thing... in smallformat I tend to use quite a lot tele lenses. Is that still possible with medium, or is that unaffordable?

    Every input would be great. Thanks in advance
    Greetings SAM

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    726
    The Pentax 67 produces bigger negs: 6 x 7 cm as opposed to 6 x 4.5 cm, so the quality is better and grain lower as the negs need less enlargement to produce a print of a given size. On the other hand the camera is bigger and heavier and you use more film per picture. You can get both used, but neither are exactly cheap. You can get long focal length lenses. They too are not cheap, but can be got used. Remember, though that with medium format you need longer lenses to get the same magnification. For example a standard lens for 6 x 7 is already 90mm so a 250mm is only the same as a 135mm on 35mm.

    David.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Italia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,680
    I've got the Pentax 645. It and the mamiya 645 have the option of adding Soviet P6 lenses with just an adapter. That can cut your lens cost if you are willing to give up auto aperture.

    OTOH if budget is an issue I'd suggest considering the Bronica 645. The ETRSI can be had for less money then a similar Pentax setup. Lenses seem cheaper. It'll be newer then the Pentax. OTOH the Pentax comes with the motordrive and metering system built in. Those can be added to the Bronica but they cost money. OTOH the Bronica comes with swapable backs. Various finders. Leaf shutter lenses. All depends on what you like/want.

    6x7 is so close to square I consider it square.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    netherlands
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    371
    thanks for the answers!
    Do I get it right that a pentax 645 should be cheaper than a pentax 67?
    by the way size does not really matter to me, I always walk around with a tripod and a bag.
    I will look for that bronica, but I do like build in light-measuring....

  5. #5
    narsuitus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    553
    In my case, since I was already shooting small format, I went with the 6x7 and 6x9 format because I did not notice a significant difference in image quality between 35mm and 6x4.5mm. However, if I were starting from scratch, a 645 SLR would meet all my needs.

  6. #6
    Paul Sorensen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Saint Paul, MN
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,895
    Images
    26
    My primary camera is a Mamiya 645 Super and I love it. The newer Mamiya 645s (the Super nad Pro series) have interchangable backs and the lenses are super cheap. Telephoto is not a really strong suit of medium format, mostly because the lenses get huge and expensive. I had a 210mm for the 645 and it was a very nice lens. It sells at KEH for well less than $150 in excellend condition, so the prices have become very affordable. The Pentax 6X7 is also affordable right now, but it will likely cost somewhat more. It also weighs a lot more and is more difficult to hand hold. I don't know all that much about the Pentax 645, so I will leave that discussion to others.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    netherlands
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    371
    Hmmmm, the term 6x9 has come across....
    Seems even nicer to me. Has an even more anti-square nature than 645.
    in fact: smallformat has the same ratio as 6x45: 1,34.
    6x7 has a more sqaure ratio: 1,16 and 6x9 has 1,7.
    but are there affordable cams inn the 6x9 format?

    Thanks GaMe

  8. #8
    Charles Webb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Colorfull, Canon City Colorado
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,723
    I like and make 8x10 prints, the 6x7 is designed specifically for that purpose.
    If you don't like the 8x10 format, go with 6x9 or 6.45. I am perfectly happy with my Pentax 67's!


    Charlie.......

  9. #9
    Dave Parker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,049
    I would not consider the 645 format square at all, it is one of the most popular for the wedding crowd as it is not square and gives almost 3 times the surface area of the 35mm which helps in the enlargement department. 645 is one of my favorite formats and I have shot all of the medium format sizes.

    Dave

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    netherlands
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    371
    I am serieusly thinknig of indeed the pentax 645.
    One other cam I keep running into whensearching for 645 cams is the mayima 645. Can anyone comment about that one, and it's differences with the pentax? I've read paul's comment, but like the hear something about the differences.
    And about 6x9. what cam is common in that area, cause if I search I only get the real cheap prewar boxes.
    Thanks for replying! Greetings SAM

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin