On 10/03/06 16:31, "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I went for the 6x7. I figured if I was going to shoot medium > format, I'd want the substantially larger negative. I also > like the 6x7 configuration. The camera is the same shape as > a giant 35mm SLR. It feels right in my hands. I have no > problem with its size and weight, but I'm a fairly big guy > who pumps iron several times a week. Dittos, except that I'm a rather sedentary medium-size guy... Still absolutely no trouble or pain packing a 6x7 over my shoulder as a "walk-around" rig, with a wide strap of course. It's lighter than it looks. ;-) I still have and use the non-MLU 6x7 I bought in 1976. Four bodies now that prices are so attractive, the latter two are 67II models but I've never used the mirror lockup feature; I suppose my photos must suffer as a result in some as-yet unnoticed way. But then my longest lens is a 300 that I seldom use; mostly the 90 and wider. The size and "ker-clack" sound do draw some attention. Certainly not what one would choose for shots during a string-quartet performance, or live theatre... I do like the built-in grip on the 67II body, helping to maintain a secure hold on the rig. Never have gotten fond of the Pentax left-side accessory handgrip, but "inoyoon" on eBay occasionally offers hand-made wood+aluminum grips that clip to the right side strap lugs, and these are a great addition, even featuring a bubble level on top. A bit of a drawback is 10 exposures on a roll of 120 vs 16 for the 645. I have RF cams in 645 and prefer 220 roll-film for both to get 20/21 and 32 exposures. The early 6x7 had 21 exposures on 220, then my late 6x7 just prior to the 67 name change does only 20, and then the 67II is back to 21 but with narrower frame spacing. I can't offer a blow-by-blow comparo between the 6x7 and the 645 as I've never even held a P645, but I'm very fond of the 6x7/67/67II. Mi Doug -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
