I can confirm that this correction is correct... I bought a 67 Zoom 55-100/4.5 in June 2022 for $250, mint condition. It has replaced my 55mm, 75mm and (almost) my 105mm for regular use in clear daylight. With a close range of 60cm, it works as a macro as well. The problem is weight; 1.2 kilos!! Phew! The consolation is that I bring one lens instead of three (at least). Image quality? - you ask... Fantastic! Enough said. How did they manage to make something like that?
His comments on the various Pentax 67 lenses are right on point. The 105mm is one of the original lenses from later 1960s, slightly updated once to replace thorium glass with newer glass formula, optical performance not changed. The 90mm 2.8 of that era was a leaf-shutter lens, and optically about the same as the 105mm. That was later replaced with a non-LS, redesigned 90mm 2.8 (probably what he has there), which is much superior. Until hyped by social media. the 105mm could be has all day for $125-150. Today, the same lens is $700-900, and not worth it. That late model 75mm 2.8 is a wickedly high tech design and super expensive. The old 75mm 4.5 is 1.3 stops slower, about as sharp, which is say very sharp, and has significantly less optical distortion. The new version costs 10x the old version. The prices on 67 lenses seem to be based on availability, not performance.
I am always shocked when I shoot my 135mm Macro and how amazingly good it is. They sell for around $150. Which is totally ridiculous, but I'm not complaining.
Thanks for your input. I'm glad to find someone who actually has some historical knowledge on the system. So cool to here your thoughts on the 200mm, 135mm Macro, and the 90mm.
Good overview. About 2 years ago I bought one with 8 lenses from the 35 fish to the 400 ED IF. Also have a Blad and Flexbody with 9 lenses. The Flexbody was important to when I seriously used these before digital. I love the retro feel of these film cameras, but use digital most of the time for practical reasons.
Thank you for these in depth videos. I find them really relaxing. I’ve ordered a supposedly “broken” 6x7 MLU from a modern camera store that probably does not know it needs a battery, or film to properly operate. Paid less than 350 USD for it including a 150mm lens. It’s waiting for me to be picked up after my holiday. If it indeed is broken, I’ll send her off to get overhauled anyways. Can’t wait to shoot!
I got the 160/2.8 for portraits, because it has that nice depth of field, and the look is quite a bit like the 85 mm that i love on 35 mm, although i also liked the Canon 135/2.5, again, for that nice 'isolation' of the subject, andm to an extent, the greater 'stand-off' lets (amateur) subjects feel less 'intimidated'
Great take on the Pentax 67 system from an old pro - Thank you for your insight - I have the Pentax 67 ii and I treasure it deebly - try the 165 mm - also a Great portrait lens with outstanding bouke - just my 5 cent - greatings from DK
And 6x8 plus 6x9 and 6x12 panoramic. I have a Pentax 67 and a Pentax 6x7 with a 55mm f4 rubber grip lens on one and a 75mm f4.5 on the other. 6x7 is the Goldilocks size. Just right. The more you praise them, the more the price goes up. A good investment. I use a 4x5 MPP Micropress with a Schneider 135mm 4.7 lens. The Micropress is the British version of the Graflex Speed Graphic. I use Fomapan 200 black and white film £1 per sheet. I develop in an open dish in complete darkness in my cupboard darkroom. I use Rodinal at 1 to 25 for 5 minutes. Blows the 6x7 negs away. I have an offer for the 6x7 with the 55 lens of £850.I bought it for £250.
Another great tutorial video. I have had a 6x7 for some time and just starting to run film through it. This camera is a beast and can be a bit daunting. But the results are incredible and crisp. I am looking to get a 70 to105 fixed focal lens to round out my lens selection. I have 135 and 200 Takumar. Takumar lens are great and I am waiting for a good deal to come along. This is a 2 year old video and I believe that these lens are begining to go up since this was filmed. They are getting harder to find. Thanks again, be safe....
The 90mm is one of my favorites and the newest 55mm is awesome and can be had for $250 in mint condition. But like all quality things that are not produced anymore the price will only go up as time goes by. 👍
As a side note Ed, since youre on the west coast, do you have a good recommendation for a 67 repair guy/shop? It was an ugly fail.... @@EdwardMartinsPhotography
It's a great camera. The 200mm is a great lens for sure! I have no idea why they are so cheap. Probably because there is no digital camera you can stick them on easily.
Like many of the most popular P67 lenses, the 200mm is an older design, not full of latest glass and optical formula shifting cams which drive up production expense. Also, it was sold for more than 30 years, so there are many of them out there in the market. It's classical supply and demand economics. Currently, the aberration is the 105mm priced north of $700, which is ridiculous, being driven by social media hype. But fear not. If you want to shell out the big bucks for lenses, look into the 35mm, late 55mm, 75mm 2.8, 100mm macro, 300mm, 400mm and 800mm EDIF telephotos. If you want to assemble a system on the cheap: 75mm 4.5, 90mm 2.8, 135mm, 165mm, 200mm, older 300mm (non-EDIF).
Sure thing, glad I could help. The one thing I should have emphasized in that video is that like most medium format film cameras and especially 6x7 cameras, they are heavy. A 4x5 large format kit can actually be put together for 2/3rds the weight. If your OK with that, then by all means, the Pentax is a wonderful camera!
@@EdwardMartinsPhotography I have a 4x5 and absolutely love shooting it--but like you said, it is not always the best choice. After researching, I purchased a Pentax 67 in great shape--with a 90mm lens. Your video helped me choose the lens and gave me confidence. The beast will arrive in the mail tomorrow! I already have my b&w film and my development chemicals, so I am counting the moments until I get that camera loaded and outside! Could you please suggest a good tripod system? Again the tripod I have for my 4x5 is super heavy...so I would like to have one just for hiking with the 67. Thanks so much for your help! Karen
@@karenkarenaaneiro7828 Interestingly, the 67 really needs a sturdy tripod. Almost more so than the 4x5. A relatively inexpensive yet sturdy and somewhat lightweight option would be the iFootage models. I think I have a video about one of them. They run about $300 USD for the legs.
@@EdwardMartinsPhotography Thank you so much for your recommendation! I have been concerned about the need for a sturdy tripod for 67 shooting. I appreciate it!
I think people are attracted to the 105 because of its imperfections. In a time where digital photography has pushed the computer designed “perfect” lens and clinical image to an extreme. The reason to shoot film as a first timer has been driven predominantly by the fact that It has a character that is outside of that clinical sphere. That is why you hear young photographers speak highly about getting the “film look” with the character of a lens even in digital. It’s also what is driving up the prices of lenses once seen as inferior. Where as for us old folks film photography seems more about preference or nostalgia
I think a few youtubers who were new to film photography got cheap 105's and were blown away that film was superior to digital and thought it was the lens. 🙂 I also think it's got nothing to do with clinical or imperfections. I think aesthetically digital is vapid and film is superior. I've been shooting almost 99% digital for the past 15 years up until about 2 years ago. The more I shoot film, the less I want to shoot digital. Yes it's a really big hassle, but it's sanity in an increasingly insane world. So for me it's preference, and becoming more so over time. Which can only mean they'll stop making film soon... 🙂
@@EdwardMartinsPhotography I hope to god they don’t. Film is the only thing I shoot these days. I realized that it’s the process that I missed the most. The magic of the darkroom and a camera that feels like a tool and not some computer that keeps me second guessing the way I want to shoot with graphs and charts analyzing my performance in real time. Now the joy of watching, studying and composing subject is once again my primary concern and the camera is just an extension of that process.
@@matthewdaniels623 I think they will still make it, but I think it's going to get expensive as time goes by. 8x10 B&W is $7 a shot. 4x5 is $2.50. I'm glad I have a Pentax 67, that might be all I can afford to use in 10 years. That's still $.80 a shot.
That remote battery holder...mine is serial number 7.... only joking, but i did by one with my P67, because i lived in Canada and Finland, and... in winter...
It will cost you a couple dollars each time you take a picture. Images are so-so. I bought mine new in the '90's. I sold it a few years ago. Today I shoot with a Nikon D805. I can't say I miss the Pentax 67 at all. In fact I got better images with the Pentax K1000.
@@elminero49 I disagree, I enjoy the process of 120 and 35 compared to the instant gratification we get now with the digital Cameras. And the Pentax k1000 are now where near the same images as the 67
@@purpllehayz1 I got my best film images with a Pentax K1000. A camera is as good as the lens on it and I had a really good aftermarket lens on my K1000. I loved my K1000 so much that I decided to go one step farther and get a Pentax 67 and 5 different lens. I spent $1,000s on this at B&H. ...and results of the upgrade: I got better images with the K1000. I would say if you want to go medium format film get a Hasselblad. Even a Yashica twin lens will yield a better images than a Pentax 67. No matter what camera you get, good luck with it.
@@elminero49Quality? 1sr it is not the camera which determines the quality of an image. Any camera is just a black box depends on who is behind the camera. 2. The lens is the most important part for image quality. 3. Then exposure 4. And most importantly, the person behind the camera..😂😂 5. Of course, there is more parameters that determines the image quality (film behind used, development, printing, conditions during the shot, etc.., etc..), cannot cite them all here ..but you got the picture.. I own two Pentax 6x7 with MLU, most the 67 SMC lenses (45mm to 200mm), including the 55-100 F4 zoom lens. They are all fanatic lenses..ones of the best lenses on the market..Metering wise,, I use a Pentax Spotmeter V (calibrated by Quality Light-Metric, Inc. in Hollywood, California), and in some situations I use the Gossen Lina-pro SBC or the Sekonic L-398 incidents lightmeters.I am more than very pleased with the images I am getting (b&w, velvia, provia).
Yeah, the 105mm lens was the cheap kit lens. The Gen X Hipsters see f2.4 and go CRAZY over the out of focus effect. Go Figure. And up went the price on this Kit lens. The 6x7 was seen as the entry Medium Format system to get when moving on from 35mm SLR's. Just the same SLR design. I bought mine new during the 1980's for $400. Cheaper than a new Hasselblad A12 back that sold for $600!!!! The Fashion Photographers would buy 4-6 6x7 bodies because of the economy. You also had far less wear and tear on multiple bodies, rather than on a single use Hasselblad or Rollie SLR body. All the SMC lenses have Fantastic CONTRAST for B&W film use. B&W Fashion Photography during the 80's, 90's and early 2000's became all the rage thanks to the Pentax 6x7 camera.
For sure, Terrance Donovan and Bob Carlos Clark are two British fashion photographers that used the 67 system to great effect. (Actually Bob was Irish and just worked in London.)
Interesting video about film. I've just inherited my grandmother's RollieCord... I'd like to use it soon- it's 6x6 I think. On a side note, what camera was doing the video on this shoot? You seem to be wearing the moiré shirt from hell. 🙂
I have a question about the PENTAX 67 Edward . I have the 105, 55 and 75 all SMC pentax. For some reason, with the 105 and the 75, when I stop down the aperture in manual mode, it also stops down the lens. So if my lens is at 22, I can't even see what I'm trying to get in focus because it's too dark. The only lens that doesn't stop down is the 55 - I can see a bright screen at all apertures. Do you know why this happens to the 105 and 75 but not the 55? i have to focus wide open and then fix my fstop its pretty annoying. Do you have this issue or is my copy defective? the viewfinder is only bright in all apertures if i ahve the lens in automatic mode once i switch to anything lower than f11 i basically cant see anything in the viewfinder its wayyy too dark.
My first guess is that the depth of field aperture stop down lever is in the locked position on those lenses. That would make them behave that way. It's a push in and slide mechanism. And it's on the side of the lenses near where the aperture rings are. It's a fairly big lever and hard to miss. And as always, don't force anything. It should release easily. let me know if that works. 🙂
@@EdwardMartinsPhotography the only lever I see is the "AUTO" & "MAN" - So when the lever is on "auto" does that mean that the camera would be placed in aperture priority and automatically select your shutter speeed for you? when i have the lever on the "AUTO" option the viewfinder stays bright but when i switch over to "MAN" is when it gets dim
@@eatenbyopium Actually those markings are a throw back to the 1960's. "Auto" is referring to auto aperture, i.e. the lens aperture is open fully for focusing and composing and automatically closes down to the marked/set aperture to take the photograph. Before auto apertures, photographers had to focus and compose wide open and then stop down to take the photo manually, i.e. the "Man" setting on the lever. So in other words, set the lever to auto and the lens will work the way you want it to. (And no it won't be aperture priority, which is not an option on these cameras except for the Mark II variants.) You can however consider this lever to be a depth of field preview lever if you can actually see anything through the viewfinder when the lens is stopped down...
@@EdwardMartinsPhotography you’re a legend THANK YOU SO MUCH I’ve been torturing myself lol thank you thank you thank you!! Obviously you can tell I just bought the camera
Pentax stopped production in 2006 when they went out of business. ebay Japan sellers have a nice collection of used models some in almost new condition. That's how I got mine.
Sharpness is dependant on more than just format size, many people claim 67pentaxes suffer from shutter and mirror shake blurring the image with hand held shots .
I never shot my 67's handheld so I wouldn't know. The shutter and mirror slap can be an issue, but on the other hand there's 60+ years of professional photos taken with the system so if a photographer can't get sharp images with a 67, it's on them.
Agreed you have to understand how to avoid the problems , unfortunately the camera was promoted as like a 35 mm slr only bigger ,features like the TTL meter & later the shutter priority mode on the 67 II reinforced that misconception . It's 1/1000 sec top speed made it (in 1969) suitable for stopping action unlike most previous medium format cameras ,indeed in the UK amongst railway photographers it became 'The' camera to use because of this .
