----- Original Message ----- From: gfen Subject: Oh, 645! revisited: 645x67.
I went from 645 (Bronica ETRs) to 6x7 (Pentax), and also use 4x5. Honestly, I don't think you will see any real quality difference between the two formats until you hit 16x20 (or a very cropped 8x10). The 6x7 is heavy, no doubt about it, but the weight has some advantages. The camera is eminently hand holdable. That extra mass has a lot of inertia to keep it steady. Anyone who says you can't hand hold a Pentax 6x7 hasn't actually tried, IMO. The point that P�l made about the future of the 6x7 is interesting, and very credible, but it doesn't worry me over much. The Spotmatic crowd has been in the same position for over a quarter century, and they still seem able to get equipment. I am sure P�l is correct that the Pentax 6x7 will never get digital capture. The camera doesn't lend itself to those sorts of modifications, and I doubt very much if Pentax would redesign it to take a digital back and keep the lens mount. Most likely, it will be a film only format, while the 645 may get digital backs and the like at some point. What I didn't like about the 645 format was all in the darkroom. The negative goes into the mask sideways, and I just didn't like that. For others, it is probably not an issue, or it may even be a good thing. For portraiture, the vertical orientation might be very nice. Depth of field is something to consider in any medium format system. Again, though, I am not sure how big a deal it would be when comparing the two systems. If I recall, the standard lens for the 645 is 75mm, and for the 6x7 it is 105mm. There will be DOF issues with both. I suspect you will need to stop down one more stop with the 6x7 to get equialent DOF. Depth of field was something I had problems with on my recent photo vacation. The 6x7 was not capable of securing sufficient DOF in situations that would have been routine with the 4x5. I don't think 645 would have been any better in the shooting environment I was in. If high flash sync is important, Pentax is not where you want to be. Look at a system that has a range of leaf shutter lenses. I am pretty sure that Pentax only makes one LS lens for the 645 (correct me if I am wrong, I can take it), and they only made 2 for the 6x7. I was able to find a few workarounds for the 1/30 second flash sync, but none of them were really pretty, so I gave up on trying and bought a couple of reflectors. Being able to forget about the flash when shooting outdoor portraits was very liberating. Needing a ready assistant for them wasn't too difficult. Having said all this, I agree with Bruce 100% about the reasons to own one system over the other. If I was in the wedding/portaiture game for a living, I would have a 645 as my work camera, though I don't know if it would be Pentax. Not having interchangable finders is a lot to give up. William Robb > > I'm sure this is going to be an awfully weird, and stupid, message. > Please, bear with and input on the important question with me (and sorry > abou all the extraenous info, I like to babble). > > I'm torn, I like everything about my 645 except teh fact that its "only" > 645.. It feels underwhelming to see the negs, and I'm wondering if I've > talked myself into something for the conviences it offers me (autowinder, > higher flash, easier handholdability, more frames). > > I'm torn, I'm not sure if I would really see any advantage in 6x7 over > 6x45, or if I just tell myself this, so I turn to everyone to offer > insights. The flash sync problem can be overcome with a leafshutter lens, > which leans only the camera shake as an "immediate" problem. I'm definatly > a hand-hold kinda guy, as I prefer to travel light (and if I'm not going > to travel light, I can break out the 4x5). > > Keep in mind, I don't hav ethe ability to goto a store and rent for a day. > My only option is to do what I did, buy from a mail order house and "rent" > it for two weeks. My two weeks ends real soon now, and I think I need to > decide.. So, bear with me, and feel free to encourge one way or another. > > Most of my prints will be smaller. 8x10 or 11x14. I wanted an MF camera to > have nicer prints, smoother tonal range in B&W (which is what I primarily > do). I was happy with the tonality in my 6x6 negs, and figured that 645 > would be fine since I crop in the viewfinder anyway (ergo 6x6 ends up > being 645). However, somehow I'm just not blown away by my 645 shots (this > may also be because I haven't taken any truly nice pictures with it). > > Will I really see an apprechiable difference in small prints (8x10, 5x7, > even 4x5 proof sizes) if I go from 645 to 67, or am I just confusing > myself? I'm biased because I see the difference in an 8x10 made from a 4x5 > image compared to 35mm (I know, I know, its no real comparision!), and I > think I'm just neg-fixated. > > Pros: > 645: Easier to carry, easier to handhold, tolerable flash sync. > 67: Bigger neg, its what I orginally wanted. Big neg easier to accomplish > than setup of a 4x5. > > Cons: > 645: Smaller neg, seems like a second choice. > 67: Not as handholdable. Handhold flash w/o LS lens not gonna happen, > giant neg possible with a 4x5. > > I know, no one can tell me what I want, nor would I want them to (that's a > lie, I need people to tell me so I can stop being wishywashy!), however, > my biggest question, and what I need to know: Is there really a noticable > difference in the tonality of an 8x10 between 645 and 67. > > Sending the camera back won't hurt too much ($30 in roundtrip shipping), > as i bought from a large mail order house (no where to rent, etc, around > here). My only problem is if I decide the 645 wouldn't been as good, I'd > loose a 645 I was quite happy with (large eyecup, grid screen, clean and > nice). > > Perhaps this is some sort of male inadaquecy issue I should be dealing > with in therapy... > > (upon re-reading, all I can think is "Wow, I'm pathetic") > > > >
