On 8/28/07, Scott Loveless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > William Robb wrote: > > > > I can't speak to the 67 body, I've held one, but not used one. I have used > > the 6x7 for about 20 years though, and can speak to it. > > You will want an MLU body, non MLU bodies were only available for the first > > couple of years of production, the MLU bodies had some internal > > improvements. > > Later 6x7 bodies had improved film transport reliability. > > Original T-Max film was hell on 6x7 film transport. Check frame spacing for > > evenness, if the frame spacing is uneven, the film transport needs work. Get > > it adjusted before the frames start overlapping. > > If you get the meter prism, don't ever mount the meter prism with a lens on > > the body. Remove the lens, then install the prism. The meter control in the > > body is a very fine and delicate chain, and it can be broken if you mount > > the prism with the chain held out of position. > > The meter is quite red sensitive, keep that in mind if you are using filters > > with B&W film. > > All the lenses are very good, The SMC lenses should be better than the older > > Taks, but the Taks are, for the most part, superb. The Tak 75/4.5 is > > somewhat flare prone, but otherwise is very sharp and contrasty, The 45 is a > > gem, as is the 90 leaf, the 135 macro, both 165mm lenses (the 2.8 and the > > f/4LS), and the 200 tak and 300mm lenses are very good indeed, as well. > > All eight of the lenses I own for the 6x7 are superb. If you saw Cesar > > shooting 6x7 at GFM, odds are, you saw one or more of my lenses. > > > > William Robb > > > > > > > Thanks, Bill. Intended use is general photography (how vague is that?) > and the occasional portrait. More often than not I either have a 50mm > lens on a 35mm body, or my zoom gets set at something close to 50. I > guess I'm just comfortable with that focal length. As such, I was > looking primarily at normal lenses. I could probably get by with a > 150mm or 165mm lens to start, which would be fine for the portraiture > thing. I'll only have enough cash for one lens, so the 105 is looking > rather attractive. > > TMAX isn't an issue for me as I prefer more traditional film. Besides, > it eats fixer. > > On the flip side, a 645 with two or three lenses and a spare magazine > will cost about the same. I'm just not sure I can live with sisterhood.
Why buy a nice steak and only eat half of it. Get the 6x7.:-) Try and sneak a stealth shot in a quiet church. You get some amazing looks.LOL Dave > > -- > Scott Loveless > http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/ > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
