How To Get Close Up Portraits With The Pentax 67
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 вер 2024
- In this video I discuss how I have gotten on with a new piece of equipment, this equipment is the Pentax 67 extension tubes which allow for a much closer focusing range. In this video I discuss how I am not that happy with the extension tubes but while I was editing, I have actually changed my mind, some of the images have grown on me and I am happier with them. I will do further tests with the set up to see how I feel so you can expect another video in the future about this equipment.
Instagram:
/ taranspictures
Music:
Massobeats - Lucid
• massobeats - lucid (ro...
Massobeats - Lotus
• massobeats - lotus (ro...
Maybe try the tubes with the 165mm or 200mm lenses?
I've gotten rid of my Pentax since posting this but it would have been cool to try the 165
Pentax 67 rocks! 📸 It's a beast of a medium format camera with killer build quality and amazing image vibes. The 6x7 negative size brings serious detail, perfect for landscapes and portraits. Yeah, it's a bit hefty, but that just adds to the charm. Embracing the analog vibes in a digital world, Pentax 67 is a timeless classic for those who dig real craftsmanship in photography! 👊 #Pentax67Forever
😂😂😂
@@taranspictures Hey, why the laughs? Pentax 67 is a legit classic, not a joke! 🙄 Its build and image quality are no laughing matter. Maybe you haven't experienced the magic it brings to photography. Respect the analog vibes! #Pentax67Love 📷✨
As a Pentax 6x7 owner that got it with the 105 and had the exact same issue with the minimum focusing distance, I got the extension tubes and it was fine, but ultimately a hassle having to take off the lens, put on the extension tube then mount it all again. I found the best solution was to get the 90mm 2.8. It’s got a min focus distance of 0.65cm I believe, it’s lighter, I prefer the 90mm focal length and I prefer the way it renders photos. So to anyone considering an extension tube, I’d suggest just getting the 90mm lens.
I have seen some photos from the 90mm and they do look really good
The shot at 3:52 is really nice and almost gives RB67 vibes. It's a shame you can't get along with the 6x7. Had similar experiences with just not being satisfied with the images I was getting back, I think you either end up loving or hating the 6x7! I just can't seem to let the camera go though. Lovely video as always.
Yeah everyone has said you either love it or hate it and I think I'm bordering disliking it, some of the images in this video have grown on me including the one you mentioned but I'll have to do more tests to see how I really feel
It's not said, but I assume his dissatisfaction with the 105mm focused close-up is the general softness of the images. Technically, the 105mm can be focused to head and shoulder portraits without seriously degrading its natural sharpness. While there might be other explanations for such image softness, like camera motion during a slower exposure when handheld, or vibration from mirror slap during slow exposures, I suspect the problem lies elsewhere. I think he is mounting the 105mm with a couple of extension tubes, then racking the lens to close-focus and shooting the exposure at either 2.4 or close to it. At such wide open aperture, the depth of field (zone of acceptably sharp focus) is about 1/4 inch deep. Also, he may be missing focus to complicate the matter further. He needs to learn more about how lenses basically work. It's physics, and all lenses work the same at that level, so buying an RB67 isn't going to change his problem, just make it more expensive. (See my reply comment below for better choices in lenses for portrait work on a Pentax 67.) Otherwise, the Pentax 67 system isn't the best choice if used primarily for portraits and other photography which can require a combination of daylight and flash lighting. Its focal plane shutter severally limits that usage.
I just didn't really like the look of the 105 close super close up, it's an amazing lens but I wasn't a fan of it when paired with the extension tubes, it was also such a pain in the arse when I wanted to get a full body shot and then a close up. The RB67 did solve my issue that I had and I absolutely loved that camera but sadly I was sold one that had some issues so it broke but I managed to get a refund
I think that people tend to forget that the p 67's 105mm is basically an 50mm lens ( in 35mm equivalent). It is simply not meant to be for close up portraits. I mean, sure you can do it, but the 165mm 2.8 would be a better choice (although its minimum focus distance is also 0.9m).
Many lenses that are 50mm or 50mm equivalents can focus closer than the Pentax can
@@taranspictures It's not a question of mechanical capacity of the lens mount to focus closer. Relatively fast lenses, like your 105mm, have other design requirements which mean that close focus performance is not a major concern. In the case of the 67 system, there are at least three lenses, all of which are more optically capable at close focus than the 105mm: the 135mm, which is specifically designed for close focus and has a mount which allows that with no tubes or other adjustments; the 165mm (either lens), and the 100mm macro lens, which will focus down to several inches if need be. The 135mm and the 165mm 2.8 are two of the least expensive lenses in the 67 system, commonly selling used for less than $150. The 100mm Macro is one of the most expensive and would be overkill if used just for portrait work,