GFX50R vs Pentax 67

Over the course of doing photography, I've had the opportunity to own some wonderful analogue film cameras, and in my opinion, modern cameras rarely measure up to the experience of using them. However, with the rising price of film cameras and the additional cost and 'faff' of developing and digitising negatives, is there a digital alternative?  

Over a series of blogs, I'll take a look at whether it’s possible for a FUJI GFX 50R to scratch the itch for shooting some of my favourite analogue cameras, including the Pentax 67ii, and Hasselblad Xpan.

For the first very unscientific experiment, I opted to pair the GFX 50R with a Mitakon 64mm F1.4 lens. It's a manual focus lens only and roughly matches the same focal length as the classic Pentax 67ii and 105mm f2.4 combo.

*Disclaimer. If you're looking for data-driven, scientific side and side comparisons, you're definitely not going to find any. This is a light-hearted, self-indulgent experiment that I did to entertain myself whilst working in between some longer-term photography projects.  

---

GFX vs Pentax 67 and 105mm f2.4 

The 105mm lens is one of the main reasons that people get a Pentax 67. It is a wonderful lens with loads of character, and on a large 67 negative gives a roughly 50mm field of view, so is very natural looking and a dream to use for portraits. The f2.4 aperture also means that you're working with a super shallow depth of field which is all part of the character of the lens.

There are a ton of reviews and resources already published about the Pentax 67 system, but this overview from Japan Camera Hunter is a good starting point - Camera Geekery: Pentax 67

Below are a few portraits of a local musician, and my daughters, taken with the Pentax 67 and 105 f2.4 combo (Ilford Delta 3200 and Delta 400 films)

One of the benefits of using the GFX is that Fuji added a wide variety of ratios, meaning that you can compose using the 6x7 framing, which is what I set it to for these images. I know it's always possible to crop in post-processing, but I do find that being able to compose in the correct ratio 'in the field' makes a massive difference. I wish more camera manufacturers added more than the standard 2:3, 16:9, and 4:5 ratios.

What's missing?

The mirror slap! There is nothing quite like the sonic boom of the mirror slap on Pentax 67 camera. There is no doubt whether you took a picture or not!  

The bicep workout. The Pentax often earns the nickname of ‘The Beast’ by anyone that uses one. It’s a hefty package, even without the additional wooden grip. The GFX on the other hand is far more manageable.

An optical viewfinder. For all the benefits that modern electronic viewfinders bring, it’s hard to beat looking through an excellent optical viewfinder to really immerse yourself in the scene.

Conclusion

Can a modern digital camera ever offer the same experience as using one of the giants? Of course not. That’s not to say it isn’t a nice experience though. I’ve never been one for smaller, lighter cameras and at the end of the day, it’s the pictures that matter, and that’s where it comes into its own. I can use this combo as an everyday camera for taking pictures of family and friends without any of the extra costs of shooting film, whilst still managing to retain a unique look in the images.

For now, it’s definitely scratching the itch, but ask me again in 6 months…

---