As an afterthought, here are the figures for the Mamiya 7II: Dimensions: 159 x 112 x 66 Weight: 920 grams, 1210 ~including~ 80mm normal lens
Note: None of the weights include batteries, which, in the case of the 67 and the Nikon can add quite a few more grams. The LX and the Mamiya use smaller and fewer batteries. Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > The 67 is about three times the size and weight of an LX, and, > surprisingly, only a fair amount larger than the Nikon F5: > > Dimensions in millimeters: > > LX 145 x 90 x 50 > 67II 185 x 151 x 106 > Nikon F5 158 x 149 x 79 > > Weight in grams: > > LX 565 > 67II 1660 > F5 1210 > > It's amazing to me that the Nikon is so big and heavy. Seems to defeat > the purpose of a discreet, 35mm camera. However, it does include a > motor drive. How much bigger/heavier would the 67 be with a motor drive > or winder? > > Aaron said: > > > Heh. I'm serious, though. Put a Pentax 67 next to an F5. Compare > > physical size. Compare weight. Hell, my old Mamiya C330 twin lens > > weighed more than my 67 and was significantly more awkward to hand-hold. > > And Fred sed: > > > >Why an F5? Why not an LX, say, or an MX? > > > >Well, have you forgotten JCO's "Pentax Family" photo > > >(http://www.gate.net/~hifisapi/pentaxfamily.jpg), where the > > >Spotmatic is dwarfed by the 6x7 (and the Spotmatic is not one of the > > >"smallest and lightest of 35mm cameras"), just as the 110 is dwarfed > > >by the Spotmatic? -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ You can't have everything. Where would you put it? - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
