Author: | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: October, 2018 Location: Quebec City, Quebec Posts: 6,479 1 user found this helpful | Review Date: August 27, 2020 | Recommended | Price: $210.00
| Rating: 10 |
Pros: | Useful focal range, very sharp, excellent @ f/11 and f/16, inexpensive. | Cons: | Better avoid f/5.6 and f/45. | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: 645Z
| | 55 mm @ f/16 80 mm @ f/16 110 mm @ f/16 This zoom lens had the worst score of any Pentax 645 optical offerings (7.00). I was puzzled by this fact and I ordered one when I found a dirt-cheap copy on eBay from Japan. It was in excellent mechanical condition with no fungus, no haze but didn't have the sunshade, which is the exact same PH-RBB82 hood my FA 33-55 mm f/4.5 came with. Having bad reviews keeps prices low, I guess. I tried it tripod-mounted on a 645Z at my favorite photo location above. I am posting 3 pictures taken at 55 mm, 80 mm and 110 mm focal lengths and 1/125 sec @ f/16 (ISO 200). Colors are usual Pentax rendering, contrast is very good and sharpness looks uniform over the whole photogram. PC magazine, using Imatest technique, determined it could resolve 4030 lines at 80 mm FL and f/11 with a 645Z. The very best Pentax 645 lenses (such as the DFA 35 mm f/3.5 or the DFA 90 mm f/2.8) could resolve 4400 lines at their optimum aperture, both of these premium lenses costing 10 to 20 times what I paid for the FA 55-110 mm zoom. After thorough testing, I think I will finally give it a score of 10, when the lens is used appropriately (middle apertures, solid support, precise focus, good light). This focal range is very useful (equivalent to a 45-90 mm in FF), the lens is light and easy to use. As I usually do, I avoid shooting at f/5.6 because no medium-format lens is at its best wide-open and f/45 begins to show signs of diffraction. Its best aperture openings are f/11 and f/16. This lens is surprisingly flare and ghost resistant and provides beautiful, sharp and contrasty landscape pictures. The vertical image below was taken at 110 mm @ f/11. I added three medium-distance pictures showing details of shiny Freightliner trailer tractors. Bad lens, really ? 110 mm @ f/11 98 mm @ f/13 55 mm @ f/13 And three images of the shoals of the St Lawrence at low tide. 55 mm @ f/13 98 mm @ f/13 110 mm @ f/14 Finally my neighbor's newly repainted fence. 55 mm @ f/11 110 mm @ f/11 @ f/5.6 @ f/45 All in all, a very good lens. You can leave home for a one-day expedition with only this lens and be confident you can achieve almost any photo project with it. | | | | | Forum Member Registered: July, 2017 Posts: 51 | Review Date: August 23, 2017 | Recommended | Price: $399.00
| Rating: 7 |
Pros: | Relatively light and compact | Cons: | Feels cheap it's so light, 82 mm filters are expensive | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 7
Value: 7
| | This is based on one sample on one 645z body. Comments refer to the central area of the lens only, as for my images I don't much care if the corners go soft. I also don't concern myself much with distortion, as it's so easy to correct. Most all of my images are in good light at base ISO.
First, my general opinion of this somewhat maligned lens is positive, but with reservations depending on use.
Here's the thing: Why would I wish to carry such a heavy/bulky camera in the first place unless the objective is to obtain the very best image quality? A Nikon D850 isn't very far behind, so how much sense does it make to tote a MF camera and then use a lens that is less than the very best available? From an image quality standpoint alone it might possibly make more sense to buy the new Nikon D850 and avoid leaving some IQ on the table.
And this lens is certainly not the best available. In my personal view, you're leaving enough on the table with this lens that you might want to consider a different system if the goal is the best possible image quality.
Having said that, it's also my personal opinion that carrying my MF camera is a perfectly good choice because ..... well ... I just want to. I have other systems and better lenses for this body. Maybe I just want something to stick on the front as a walk around lens. Maybe my neck hurts and I don't want to carry my 80 - 160. Maybe I want to carry the damn thing to Europe for a month and don't want to bother with more/bulkier/heaver. Maybe you can think of other reasons, but don't kid yourself. This is not the best lens available for this camera.
However, the significant savings in weight and bulk over some of the other zooms might make it worthwhile. As I don't primarily use my 645z on a tripod this is an important factor for me. My first impression was something like "Wow this thing is cheap." Further examination discloses an external appearance pretty much the same as all the other 645 FA lenses, so I suppose I felt that way simply because it's so much lighter than my 45 - 85 and my 80 - 160.
While contrast seems a bit lower than my other lenses, the center sharpness doesn't seem to suffer much too much. Wide open is not usable at any focal length for my purposes. Stopping down to f8 makes an enormous difference. My current opinion is that f11 may be optimum for this lens, but that is subject to further review. Anything over f11 is not useful. In any case, f8 is certainly good for my purposes.
No AF Fine Tuning was required on my sample on my body. YMMV.
| | | | Junior Member Registered: November, 2009 Posts: 29 2 users found this helpful | Review Date: August 9, 2011 | Not Recommended | Price: $1,200.00
| Rating: 7 |
Pros: | small and convenient | Cons: | not sharp until f8-f11; req large 82mm filters | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 7
| | I'd hoped this lens, which seems to have a similar optical layout to the greatly respected P67 55-100 lens, would be as sharp. Wide open, the lens is very soft in the outer 1/3 of the frame. Not until stopped down to f8 is most of the frame sharp and contrasty. By f11, the whole frame is sharp. This is decidedly not the same quality as the P67 55-100. The 55-110 zoom also uses an 82mm filter, larger than most other P645 lenses.
Since a small zoom is nice to use hand-held, using small f-stops is not convenient, but better on a tripod. And if a tripod is required, one might as well use a sharper lens like a prime, such as the 75mm FA or the truly wonderful P67 55/4 (latest version), which equals this zoom at f11 when the 55/4 is used at f5.6.
I ended up selling this zoom: it is not a miniature P67 55-100. Instead, on the P645D in this range, Pentax primes are better.
| | |