grilla wrote:
i am a hobbyist that has used a 6 x 9 fuji rangefinder for years. i want to
switch to the pentax 6 x 7 so that i can use multiple lenses. what am i
getting with the 67II that i am not getting in the 67 (and i dont mean just
a newer camera)? in your opinion is the 67II worth the difference?

I think the 67II is an evolution, but a fairly big one all the same.
It's a much nicer camera, in my opinion.
The viewfinder readout, with the auto-exposure 'head', is quite nice,
even if you shot manually.
I haven't tested it but I think the mirror slap is noticeably reduced in
the mkII. The ergonomics of the II are better than the original, and you
can even hand-hold it at a push at it has a nice grip.
The ttl metering is much improved over the old model, although that may
not matter if you use hand meters anyway. I quite like it for close-up
work, perhaps when using tubes, or sometimes just for simplicity. I
never had the old mdoel with the ttl head but it was pretty basic by all
accounts, whereas the new one is nice.

It's difficult to single out any big thing, but in general the mkII is a
better, more 'sorted' camera. As someone else said, I'm not sure the
results would be noticeably better as the lenses are the same. Reduced
mirror slap might have an effect though.
Whether the newer one is worth the price difference is really a personal
thing. Here in the UK the difference is quite large - double, roughly.
My choice would be the 67II. In fact, it was, as I did have a 67 and a
67II, but when I decided to reduce my camera inventory a bit it was the
older body that went.

John