After having tried both (90/105) I can totally agree. Everyone's talking about the 105mm, but honestly it's just about the fact that that's the only 2.4 in any medium format system. The 90mm is just a bit slower. And the characteristics are not that far from 2.4. Also has way better minimum focus. I got the one with the leaf shutter and i'm basically set. The 165mm is also very nice. I also like the 55mm, but the 1st version uses that annoyingly large filter size. I tried out a 45mm once, but found it almost unuseable as the field of view through the finder is just 96ish-% or even smaller. So it gets harder to see the full image when you go with that focal length. The horribly dim screen also adds to that. No right hand grip (or even grip at all) is very annoying. I'd recommend getting a 3D printed (right hand) one. The original wooden grip is just good for carrying the camera and the hype. If you want to actually use it while shooting, you should also get the focusing grips for the lenses. If there was just a version that sits betwen 67 and 67II: 1. Either swappable screen or a brighter one with splitsreen/microprism 2. Center weighted metering Still 10/10
Thank you for this very complete and balanced review. This camera has been far too (unjustly) hyped these last few years. Sure, the 67 lenses are superb, and I've made stunning photographs with them. But the 67 has far too many uncomfortable quirks for it to be my work-horse. That's amazing, because when this camera came out, several decades of experience with 35 mm SLR's had already shown what NOT to do in an SLR.
@@linusfotograf See Alex's review. He resumes them very well. VERY noisy, battery dependance with a mirror lockup draining it in record time, 1/30 flash sync, bad viewfinder almost impossible to exchange, bad placement of the mirror lockup, no double exposures possible etc. etc. I remember noticing when the Pentax 67 came out, how all these problems were already resolved in other cameras.
Shoutout to the 45mm which is a fantastic lens with tons of versatility. It’s plenty sharp even wide open, has lots of usable light at f/4, and a really good minimum focus distance. And on top of all that, it excels at giving you a fairly easy to use hasselblad xpan look if you use 35mm adapters(with a 35mm mask). The FOV is actually really close to it. You just need to use a darkbag and add a 120 backing paper each time you load a new roll but it allows you to get some really fantastic results and it’s a helluva lot cheaper than an xpan.
The 90mm is fantastic on the big Pentax but doesn’t get mentioned often. A fair bit cheaper than the 105 and way cheaper than the 75mm 2.8. It’s also equivalent to a 46mm on a 35mm camera, close enough to that ‘sweet spot’ 40mm focal length.
I have the 55mm f/4 (last version), the 90mm LS, the 105mm and the 200mm (last version), and I think that selection covers my needs. I was thinking of getting the 75mm f/4.5 because of how sharp I hear it is, but I might give up on that after you said it's quite close to the 105mm, haha. I've lost more than a few frames because of that MLU button, hate it! But the standard microprism is quite useful for me to focus in most situations, so I guess that's subjective. My camera has one big problem though, which is that the meter/aperture coupling became very inaccurate after a broken chain repair, so I have to use it in an even slower fashion, with stopdown metering. Since I like to check focus just before triggering the shutter, that's kind of cumbersome to me. But it's an excellent camera and fortunately there are tons of them around, so I know I can always get another body to use with those beautiful lenses.
Very jealous of your 55! Microprisms are very personal - I can't quite define it but the "coarseness" makes a huge difference to me if that makes any sense at all. Sorry to hear about the chain, that's really annoying. As you say at least it can be used in some sense!
Nice review. I would also add one important point, that the older models are not very reliable mechanically. Me personally would not touch anything with the serial starting below 419****. Best are the late models with the modern bold letter 67 with serial 421**** and up.
I have a question about the PENTAX 67 Alex. 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.
Sounds like your 105 and 75 are working as intended. With the switch set to manual you maintain full control all the time. The aperture's Auto mode keeps the aperture wide open until the moment the photo is taken, precisely so you can focus wide open with a brighter finder. Why are you using the manual mode?
really good review, totally in line with your lens recommendations. but surprised you dislike the standard microprism. I really like it, I have yet to miss focus once with it.
Yeah, I have zero idea how to quantify it so it's hard to explain. The Hasselblad combined split/microprism screen I had was okay, not amazing. I really struggled with the P67 screen. My Rick Oleson screen has been incredible though. I admit that even with glasses my eyesight isn't totally perfect but some (not all) friends also struggled to nail focus at wider apertures so it isn't just me. And thank you. :)
Well no camera is perfect, and I can find plenty to say about even my favourite cameras. Some negatives of the RZ: - It's absolutely gargantuan in weight and size; about 3 kg as a standard kit ( a good 40% more than the Pentax), and is the size of a "7x7" camera to allow for 6x7 in both orientations. You can of course use it handheld, but it's a studio camera at heart. - 1/400th as the max speed can be a pain if you want to use some of the sexier RZ lenses like the 110 f/2.8 at wider apertures. - People online overblow the failure rate of electronic cameras but the RZ has some components that can't be repaired when they fail, and some people like Willem have had several bodies (I think 3) fail in the same way. There are plenty of pros like the backwards compatibility with RB lenses, general versatility, quality of the stock focusing screen etc. but don't let the "bad" things I've said about the Pentax 67 immediately write it off for you, either! It's all about balancing what's important to you and compromising where you're willing to.
What made you sell it? I have both the Rb67 and Pentax 67. I often wonder if I should sell one but I used them for two different purposes. Even though the Pentax 67 is big, it’s my go to for outdoor photography
I only shoot so much, and shoot multiple formats, AND I really hate having gear sit around for months on end without being used. It sometimes seems like I shoot a ridiculous amount but I normally shoot maybe 2-3 rolls a month (including trips/photowalks, excluding "test" rolls) so it isn't insane. The RB was an excessively large and feature-rich introduction for my needs at the time. The extra I spent on an RB should have been spent on a better tripod, for example. It's also huge, basically a 7x7 camera. I have some spinal issues and general chronic pains that make me more aware of my kit's weight. Since getting the 4x5 I'm even more aware of what I might use medium format for, and I do change films quite a bit especially on trips, so something smaller than the RB but with interchangeable mags was important for me. 6x6 makes the most sense there.
@@Shaka1277 I get that, I don’t shoot that many rolls as well, getting better you decided what you actually like and will actually make you go make photos. How is 4x5 I always been intrigued by it?
Exactly! If the gear makes you want to go out and use it, and doesn't get in your way, then that's about as much as you can ask for. I love the 4x5. It's a ton of effort to use and that's exactly why I enjoy it. The resolution isn't actually super important for me, just the experience. Auto aperture stop down? TTL metering? What are those?
@@Shaka1277 I just found out myself by chance. Can’t post pictures here. There is a guy on Flickr that noticed that a while ago. I tested an old finder with the Asahi Pentax and one with Pentax only logo on the front, both are emitting. I hope the TTL finders are fine.
Looks like the TTL finders are also hot. Nothing dangerous, but it is perceived as a problem as Kamerastore and all Japanese resellers I contacted to find a radiation free one don’t want to even talk about it.
Hi, I'm looking to own one of this, but still looking for reviews from ppl who owned or owning this. If i mainly do landscape/travel/street photography do you think this is a good choice?
For landscapes the large negatives and high quality lenses make it a nice recommendation. Travel and street are harder to justify given the size, weight, and sheer loudness. I wouldn't personally use it as a travel/street camera but it's a personal choice!
@@Shaka1277 appreciate the comment, really like this beast and how masculine it looks. I am completely okay with the noise. But for travel and weight wise, do you think if I get a waist level + a right grip + a good strap could somewhat offset the weight for longer carry time?
For landscape/travel/street photography, it's very doable. Felt like a normal 35mm SLR but much bigger. Personally, I couldn't say the same thing about Mamiya RB/RZ. It's not ergonomic for handheld shooting... unless you add a prism finder and hand grip, which makes the setup even bigger.
![BOWKYLION - วิงวอน (ex-change) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/cLdnZWDaO-w/mqdefault.jpg)
![[MV] A leap of faith...ความเชื่อใจครั้งสุดท้าย (From "Petrichor the series")](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/U1piZH2CNXA/mqdefault.jpg)
After having tried both (90/105) I can totally agree. Everyone's talking about the 105mm, but honestly it's just about the fact that that's the only 2.4 in any medium format system. The 90mm is just a bit slower. And the characteristics are not that far from 2.4. Also has way better minimum focus.
I got the one with the leaf shutter and i'm basically set. The 165mm is also very nice. I also like the 55mm, but the 1st version uses that annoyingly large filter size.
I tried out a 45mm once, but found it almost unuseable as the field of view through the finder is just 96ish-% or even smaller. So it gets harder to see the full image when you go with that focal length. The horribly dim screen also adds to that.
No right hand grip (or even grip at all) is very annoying. I'd recommend getting a 3D printed (right hand) one. The original wooden grip is just good for carrying the camera and the hype. If you want to actually use it while shooting, you should also get the focusing grips for the lenses.
If there was just a version that sits betwen 67 and 67II:
1. Either swappable screen or a brighter one with splitsreen/microprism
2. Center weighted metering
Still 10/10
Blender Mentioned 🗣🗣🗣🗣🗣🗣🗣
Thank you for this very complete and balanced review. This camera has been far too (unjustly) hyped these last few years. Sure, the 67 lenses are superb, and I've made stunning photographs with them. But the 67 has far too many uncomfortable quirks for it to be my work-horse. That's amazing, because when this camera came out, several decades of experience with 35 mm SLR's had already shown what NOT to do in an SLR.
What are those things?
@@linusfotograf See Alex's review. He resumes them very well. VERY noisy, battery dependance with a mirror lockup draining it in record time, 1/30 flash sync, bad viewfinder almost impossible to exchange, bad placement of the mirror lockup, no double exposures possible etc. etc.
I remember noticing when the Pentax 67 came out, how all these problems were already resolved in other cameras.
Shoutout to the 45mm which is a fantastic lens with tons of versatility. It’s plenty sharp even wide open, has lots of usable light at f/4, and a really good minimum focus distance.
And on top of all that, it excels at giving you a fairly easy to use hasselblad xpan look if you use 35mm adapters(with a 35mm mask). The FOV is actually really close to it. You just need to use a darkbag and add a 120 backing paper each time you load a new roll but it allows you to get some really fantastic results and it’s a helluva lot cheaper than an xpan.
That lens is how I fell in love with the XPan look, and it was a non-zero part of why I bought it. Really solid.
The 90mm is fantastic on the big Pentax but doesn’t get mentioned often. A fair bit cheaper than the 105 and way cheaper than the 75mm 2.8. It’s also equivalent to a 46mm on a 35mm camera, close enough to that ‘sweet spot’ 40mm focal length.
I have the 55mm f/4 (last version), the 90mm LS, the 105mm and the 200mm (last version), and I think that selection covers my needs. I was thinking of getting the 75mm f/4.5 because of how sharp I hear it is, but I might give up on that after you said it's quite close to the 105mm, haha.
I've lost more than a few frames because of that MLU button, hate it! But the standard microprism is quite useful for me to focus in most situations, so I guess that's subjective.
My camera has one big problem though, which is that the meter/aperture coupling became very inaccurate after a broken chain repair, so I have to use it in an even slower fashion, with stopdown metering. Since I like to check focus just before triggering the shutter, that's kind of cumbersome to me. But it's an excellent camera and fortunately there are tons of them around, so I know I can always get another body to use with those beautiful lenses.
Very jealous of your 55! Microprisms are very personal - I can't quite define it but the "coarseness" makes a huge difference to me if that makes any sense at all. Sorry to hear about the chain, that's really annoying. As you say at least it can be used in some sense!
I've got a 55mm-100mm f/4.5. It's the only one I need right now and F32 is super useful.
Nice review. I would also add one important point, that the older models are not very reliable mechanically. Me personally would not touch anything with the serial starting below 419****. Best are the late models with the modern bold letter 67 with serial 421**** and up.
i snapped the chain for the light meter, i had no idea about the order of operations when swapping lenses
If you're in the UK there's a repair guy who can sort that for you
1:41 I'm always surprised seeing photos from this lens. They sometimes remind me of 4x5. Honestly such a unique piece of glass.
I have a question about the PENTAX 67 Alex. 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.
Sounds like your 105 and 75 are working as intended. With the switch set to manual you maintain full control all the time. The aperture's Auto mode keeps the aperture wide open until the moment the photo is taken, precisely so you can focus wide open with a brighter finder. Why are you using the manual mode?
@@Shaka1277 i had misinformation that the auto mode set the camera into aperture priority. just got the camera 2 days ago. thank you.
Great video. Thank you
really good review, totally in line with your lens recommendations.
but surprised you dislike the standard microprism. I really like it, I have yet to miss focus once with it.
Yeah, I have zero idea how to quantify it so it's hard to explain. The Hasselblad combined split/microprism screen I had was okay, not amazing. I really struggled with the P67 screen. My Rick Oleson screen has been incredible though. I admit that even with glasses my eyesight isn't totally perfect but some (not all) friends also struggled to nail focus at wider apertures so it isn't just me. And thank you. :)
Im trying to decide between a Pentax67 or a RZ67. This video is pushing me towards the rz
Well no camera is perfect, and I can find plenty to say about even my favourite cameras. Some negatives of the RZ:
- It's absolutely gargantuan in weight and size; about 3 kg as a standard kit ( a good 40% more than the Pentax), and is the size of a "7x7" camera to allow for 6x7 in both orientations. You can of course use it handheld, but it's a studio camera at heart.
- 1/400th as the max speed can be a pain if you want to use some of the sexier RZ lenses like the 110 f/2.8 at wider apertures.
- People online overblow the failure rate of electronic cameras but the RZ has some components that can't be repaired when they fail, and some people like Willem have had several bodies (I think 3) fail in the same way.
There are plenty of pros like the backwards compatibility with RB lenses, general versatility, quality of the stock focusing screen etc. but don't let the "bad" things I've said about the Pentax 67 immediately write it off for you, either! It's all about balancing what's important to you and compromising where you're willing to.
What made you sell it? I have both the Rb67 and Pentax 67. I often wonder if I should sell one but I used them for two different purposes. Even though the Pentax 67 is big, it’s my go to for outdoor photography
I only shoot so much, and shoot multiple formats, AND I really hate having gear sit around for months on end without being used. It sometimes seems like I shoot a ridiculous amount but I normally shoot maybe 2-3 rolls a month (including trips/photowalks, excluding "test" rolls) so it isn't insane.
The RB was an excessively large and feature-rich introduction for my needs at the time. The extra I spent on an RB should have been spent on a better tripod, for example. It's also huge, basically a 7x7 camera. I have some spinal issues and general chronic pains that make me more aware of my kit's weight. Since getting the 4x5 I'm even more aware of what I might use medium format for, and I do change films quite a bit especially on trips, so something smaller than the RB but with interchangeable mags was important for me. 6x6 makes the most sense there.
@@Shaka1277 I get that, I don’t shoot that many rolls as well, getting better you decided what you actually like and will actually make you go make photos. How is 4x5 I always been intrigued by it?
Exactly! If the gear makes you want to go out and use it, and doesn't get in your way, then that's about as much as you can ask for.
I love the 4x5. It's a ton of effort to use and that's exactly why I enjoy it. The resolution isn't actually super important for me, just the experience. Auto aperture stop down? TTL metering? What are those?
No one mentions that the non-TTL viewfinders for the 6x7 and 67 contain thorium lenses and are thus radioactive. 2.3 microSievert/h in my case.
Huh, that's wild. I've never used the non-TTL one so never knew that!
@@Shaka1277 I just found out myself by chance. Can’t post pictures here. There is a guy on Flickr that noticed that a while ago. I tested an old finder with the Asahi Pentax and one with Pentax only logo on the front, both are emitting. I hope the TTL finders are fine.
I don't have easy access to the equipment to test but I'm curious too.
Looks like the TTL finders are also hot. Nothing dangerous, but it is perceived as a problem as Kamerastore and all Japanese resellers I contacted to find a radiation free one don’t want to even talk about it.
Hi, I'm looking to own one of this, but still looking for reviews from ppl who owned or owning this. If i mainly do landscape/travel/street photography do you think this is a good choice?
For landscapes the large negatives and high quality lenses make it a nice recommendation. Travel and street are harder to justify given the size, weight, and sheer loudness. I wouldn't personally use it as a travel/street camera but it's a personal choice!
@@Shaka1277 appreciate the comment, really like this beast and how masculine it looks. I am completely okay with the noise. But for travel and weight wise, do you think if I get a waist level + a right grip + a good strap could somewhat offset the weight for longer carry time?
For landscape/travel/street photography, it's very doable. Felt like a normal 35mm SLR but much bigger. Personally, I couldn't say the same thing about Mamiya RB/RZ. It's not ergonomic for handheld shooting... unless you add a prism finder and hand grip, which makes the setup even bigger.
I wish you had gone through the prices a lot more thorough
I mean they vary wildly from region to region and month to month. US Christmas prices and EU today prices wouldn't be comparable.
@@Shaka1277 ah. I see. I am very fairly an amateur when it comes to film stuff. Always curious about the prices of analog cameras
1000mm lenses don't apply to normal people...:)