[baronkatz]

Hello All,

I'm a Hasselblad 500 series shooter with a 501C and an 80mm CF 2.8 who is here to start shooting the Pentax 67. I am going to get a 67 or 67II with a Pentax 105 2.4. The reason for this is mainly because I can't afford a 200 series Hassy with a 110/F2 lens. In reality though I just love the Bokeh that this camera/lens combo produces. Nearly every photo I've seen from the SMC Pentax 67 lenses have looked amazing, especially for portraits. I love the contrast and color - even the vintage lenses have a modern look to them. They are unlike any other Japanese lenses I have seen and to me resemble more of the Zeiss Jena lenses in look, or maybe even some of the west german Zeiss and Schneider stuff... Seeing these images have really changed my view on Japanese lenses in general. I've been using Voigtlander ones for my Leica and have never been as happy with them as the Leica or Zeiss lenses for M mount. However, these Pentax lenses are something to behold and are dirt cheap for some reason.

Anyway just thought I would introduce myself. I'm still looking for a combo so if anyone has one and might be interested in trading for some drum scanning let me know!

Thanks for building this great community!

[tuco]

Welcome.

I have a 67 and the 105/2.4. It is a nice lens. I like it for its selective focus too. I also have a GSW690III and a 500C/M. Each one has its role in what I like to use them for. I shoot sheet film too now and then. I also have Zeiss and Voigtländer glass for my M-mount. I think the Nokton 50/1.5 is a fine lens.

[Kerrowdown]

Welcome to the forum, good luck in finding the kit you seek.

[baronkatz]

Welcome.

I have a 67 and the 105/2.4. It is a nice lens. I like it for its selective focus too. I also have a GSW690III and a 500C/M. Each one has its role in what I like to use them for. I shoot sheet film too now and then. I also have Zeiss and Voigtländer glass for my M-mount. I think the Nokton 50/1.5 is a fine lens.

I have the 50 1.1 Nokton I am borrowing from a friend and the 40 1.4, along with a 15mm 4.5. I actually prefer my 57mm f1.4 Minolta Rokinon lens to both of those. It's a bit softer but gives amazing bokeh and results. I already have a Summicron D/R 50mm for my Leica M3... Not sure if I want to upgrade. I really love rangefinders and was thinking of getting a medium format RF but all the lenses are too slow and the results to my eyes don't look as stunning as the Pentax 67 shots I have seen. I just love the contrast and Bokeh the Pentax lenses give, again more similar to Zeiss than any Japanese glass I have seen...

[tuco]

... I really love rangefinders and was thinking of getting a medium format RF but all the lenses are too slow and the results to my eyes don't look as stunning as the Pentax 67 shots I have seen.

Yes, the 105/2.4 is pretty unique in that regard. A really good lens is the M* 300mm ED IF. But pretty touchy to shoot without using a big tripod and a monopod for the cantilevered camera body due to the shutter curtain inertia on a Pentax 67. But I highly recommend it.

I'm not sure what kind of pictures you've been looking at but one thing I picked up from a guy over on the large format forum was using the 105/2.4 with the #1 extension tube for head shots. It emulates the shallow DOF and shooting style often done by people using large format cameras.

Here are a couple of examples of what I mean. These were shot at f2.8 and and I use a waist level finder on my Pentax 67 because, like the 500C/M, it has a magnifying glass for critical focus and shows the needed 100% view for the following type of head shots:

105.2.4 + #1 extension tube example 1
105.2.4 + #1 extension tube example 2

[baronkatz]

Here are a couple of examples of what I mean. These were shot at f2.8 and and I use a waist level finder on my Pentax 67 because, like the 500C/M, it has a magnifying glass for critical focus and shows the needed 100% view for the following type of head shots:

105.2.4 + #1 extension tube example 1
105.2.4 + #1 extension tube example 2

Wow those look incredibly sharp! Did you do a lot of post sharpening (IE Unsharp Mask in Photoshop)? I'm guessing the scanner hardware/software must have had some sharpening too. Can't imagine what it would look like from my drum scannier

[tuco]

Wow those look incredibly sharp! Did you do a lot of post sharpening (IE Unsharp Mask in Photoshop)? I'm guessing the scanner hardware/software must have had some sharpening too. Can't imagine what it would look like from my drum scannier

Thanks. No. I scan with all that stuff turned off. I scan for grabbing as much density off the negative as the scanner will do. It looks flat and dull. I adjust the contrast curve to taste in Lightroom. I will export from LR to Photoshop to use the content aware healing tool to clean dust but it is back to LR for any cropping, toning, add/remove vignette and sharpening.

These head shots are not sharpened much at all and you don't really want to. Most everything is out of focus and they will scale down to other sizes that flickr does to them much better when the image is not sharpened much.