Hi All,

I'm looking for a suitable medium format camera for travel photography (well not quite travel but it describes my needs best). Basically the camera has to be able to look after itself without bags/cases in much the same way that an LX would. Whilst the make model don't necessarily need to be Pentax, the 6x7 seems the only logical choice. The Plan would be to get a three lens setup (roughly 135 equivalents of 28mm, 50mm & 100mm).

I'm currently using a Mamiya 645 and this doesn't seem up to the job (and feels too boxy to really work).

Those who have used a 6x7, is it suitable for 'throwing over your shoulder' for a day out and putting it into un-padded bags etc.?

I know it's heavy, but I'm more concerned about bulk (mostly depth front to back).

Regards,

John.

My first Pentax was a used Super-A & A 50/2 lens, but I had a K mount body (Miranda MS-2 Super - yes an ME Super clone) and some independent K lenses at the time. I bought the Miranda purely as it was the only one of my 'budget' choices that had a recognised mount. Other candidates were a Praktica BCA or various Zenits and possibly a used OM10 (but I wanted a new camera).

I've stuck with Pentax because there's always been an upgrade path at the right moment. First AF was an SFXn (despite not having any AF lenses) because it took all my old ones. Then a Z-1 when it first came out, after several years I lost interest until buying a K-5 (which I see as a digital version of the Z-1) last year.

I use an old UniLoc 1700 and it mostly lives in the boot of the car (bouncing around with all the other junk in there). I wouldn't want a carbon fibre thingy (just like I don't want it on my bike either). Most tripods have rubber feet anyway, which should achieve the same effect as a minute difference in 'shock absorption' from the material the rest is made of.

As for Smeggy's comment about the camera vibrating the earth - must be of interest to 67 users

John.

Hi Welcome to the forum.

Are the batteries in the right way round (I usually get it wrong)? They should be inserted (+) side down. Also, the manual I have suggests the may only light in 'Auto' mode - but I suspect you've tried that.

Regards,

John.

I've had some more old 120 roll films back, this time Kodak Porta 160NC & Kodak T400CN (C41 B&W), both shot in 2003 and processed/scanned by Peak Imaging. I had to boost the contrast of the T400CN scans, but surprised to get as much I did out of it.

This time shot on a Mamiya 645:link

John.

I've had my Z-1 since new (the 'p' only adds a masked-off landscape format option IIRC). I've not used it recently, but it handles just like a K-5 does as far as the 'photo' side of the camera goes. Although it was never advertised as 'sealed' mine has been out in the rain and covered in dust without any problems. The only thing to watch it cracking around the battery door (mine cracked whilst being stored or at the next battery change - not quite sure).

I still think it was the best specified film body and the best handling. It only has a centre-point AF sensor, but it's fairly quick (faster with primes than zooms). I bought my K-5 because it felt and operated the same as the Z-1. The only real drawback is the reliance on 2CR5 batteries (which at the time were much more expensive than they are now).

The best bits are the HyperProgram & HyperManual exposure modes and its ability to mix auto-bracketing with exposure compensation (set the bracket points and then move all three up/down as desired). It will also mix HyperManual with exposure lock (hit the 'IF' button to set the program line then hit exp. lock and it holds the EV value, spin either dial to move the Tv/Av combination either way).

Top line figures are still impressive: 1/8000th shutter, 1/250th flash sync, 3fps. and very good finder/LCD info.

Although it has the PowerZoom contacts, SDM only lenses won't AF (never tried it though ).

EDIT - I prefer it with the 'gripstrap', not a vertical grip as such but adds a bit of bulk to the camera if you prefer things that way.

John.

The MX-1 doesn't have the name on the camera either, not that the GRs ever did. As a GR1s owner I was interested in the new GR, it looks very similar (not sure about the sizes though - although they seem to b close going off the dimensions). Having a film & digital versions looking very similar (i.e. with no manufacturer name on the front) would be very appealing.

In the end I went for an MX-1, I realised I'd want the whole kit (GR, 21/28 finder, 21 adapter etc...) as I really wished I'd bought the GR1s filter adapter at the time. The total price is then very high, although in hindsight after the MX-1 I may re-think the finder.

As I found with the GR1s, unless you are into wide lenses, a fixed 28mm can get a bit samey after a while.

John.

For people who never used film, the whole 'Lomography' thing might be a good thing, then again they may start to think all film photography is part of it.

I smirk whenever we get a new starter at work, the obligatory mug shot goes into the powerpoint presentation complete with 'Polaroid' frame around it. Strange, how with all the options available they still revert back to iconic old technology.

Most of the 'professional' courses I've seen in the past seemed more tuned to providing a one-stop-shop wedding/portrait portfolio from staged weddings/models etc. than providing a meaningful qualification. Whilst building a suitable portfolio is important, I'd rather go about this independently.

There is also a distinction between showing you're a great photographer (RPS distinction etc.) and showing you can run a photography business and won't 'no-show' on the big day (or go bankrupt before it).

I suspect the only the UK qualifications that would be recognised internationally would be an RPS distinction or a BIPP qualification, see here: link

Regards,

John.

Hi Deryn,

These pairs show the best and worst on a couple of rolls, the majority were fine apart from fogging of the very edges of the frames (roll film is only protected by light-proof backing paper wrapped round the spool after exposure). If you don't wrap it tightly enough, light can leak round the edges. I was expecting much worse, possibly nothing at all.

The expired film I shot last week (at it's rated speed) was like new - it was still foil wrapped just before loading it.

These were using 'professional' film which is recommended to be kept cool and processed promptly to get the best, consistent results.

John.