[Sig M9]

Anyone tested the Pentax 67 300mm F/4 EDIF on the 645D?
I have one and would love to know.

Thanks!

[kuau]

Pål,
My friend, yes it is true canon has not produced a decent wa lens, only nikon 14-24, or the manual focus zeiss lenses are any good.
My last word to you is Leica, They have got it figured out quite well and I know if they wanted to Pentax that is could figure it out to.
Steven

I like to repeat myself. The problem with lenses on digital is pixel peeping. If you study a piece of film under a microscope you would have been dissatisfied with the same lenses.

Another issue due to pixelpeeping, is that people expect lenses to be perfect at all focusing distances. At the corners; in the center with no distortion or fringing. Try to find a Canon wide angle with sharp corners - for those who think that only Pentax lenses are designed with compromises.

[kuau]

Thomas, your right, I got his 45mm A lens mixed up in his reviews. All I know is that according to diglloyd, the best 55 he has tested was a the 67 version with the adaptor which I have a used adaptor on order from Japan, and I purchased a demo 67 45mm from Adorama with a 30 day return policy, If the 45 performs well on the 645D then I will probably just stick with that, and sell my 45-85mm FA.
I also just got in my Pentax 645 Magnifier, which attaches perfectly to my 645. Should help with manual focus. I got mine for 85.00 with case from keh.
Though you can get a used 67 55mm pretty cheap.

Steven

Steven:

Where did you hear that? diglloyd has not yet tested a 645 55mm A. My experience with the lens has been very good and here is what 16:9 had to say:
"The SMC-A 55mm f2.8 is a cracking manual focus Pentax 645 lens that outperforms the Hasselblad 50mm CF. "
This is on a Canon body, i.e., digital

[Smolk]

Apart from the stated dissatisfaction with wa lenses, Pentax will have to fill up the range between the still to materialise 25mm and the standard 55mm. So will the FA 35mm be reissued with a new coating, or a new optical design?
It will be interesting to see the quality of any new lenses, very interesting.

[Dougg]

I expect all new issue lenses will be weather sealed. I was going to start by adding that I see quite a gap between 75 and 120mm too... but then it seems likely that there will be a whole new digital-purposed weather-tight lineup replacing the existing lenses. How much will they rely on zooms?

[Smolk]

I expect all new issue lenses will be weather sealed. I was going to start by adding that I see quite a gap between 75 and 120mm too... but then it seems likely that there will be a whole new digital-purposed weather-tight lineup replacing the existing lenses. How much will they rely on zooms?

A weather-sealed digital update of the 67 2.4/105mm for 645D would fit that bill....

[Dougg]

That would be sweet... I like the look of the 105/2.4 on my 645NII.

[dgpaterson2000]

As soon as Pentax got serious about issuing the 645D (a year or so ago), I bought a range of lens off the 'Bay. If I decided to go for the camera when it became available here, I would have the lenses very cheaply. If not, I would probably be able to re-sell the lenses at a profit.

I decided to get the camera.

[RonHendriks1966]

A lens pricelist from the Netherlands. The 645D is in stock.

Middenformaat lenzen | Objectieven | Foto Konijnenberg

[Smolk]

Enige reden waarom de 45-85mm er niet in voorkomt?

[RonHendriks1966]

Enige reden waarom de 45-85mm er niet in voorkomt?

no idea, mayby not in production, or the list is just not yet complete.

[GeneV]

I like to repeat myself. The problem with lenses on digital is pixel peeping. If you study a piece of film under a microscope you would have been dissatisfied with the same lenses.

Another issue due to pixelpeeping, is that people expect lenses to be perfect at all focusing distances. At the corners; in the center with no distortion or fringing. Try to find a Canon wide angle with sharp corners - for those who think that only Pentax lenses are designed with compromises.

Some of that pixel peeping is, in turn, a function of the price of the 645d. I bought my well-used 645 years ago when they were dirt cheap and the hottest thing in medium format was the Holga (not my thing). A body, 55mm, 75mm and 150mm A lenses plus 3 backs cost less than $300 and adding a 45mm 2.8 upped the cost by less than $100. With my expectations, I thought the camera and lenses were stellar. Every time I use the camera, I wonder why I don't use it more. Had I dropped $10k on the body, I'd probably have been examining every pixel and grumbling as well.

[kwebbfam]

Just bought a Pentax 645N on ebay, but the lens prices are outrageous. Used prices going for almost or more than new prices previously.

[axcross]

Just bought a Pentax 645N on ebay, but the lens prices are outrageous. Used prices going for almost or more than new prices previously.

The same thought came to me as well. I just scored a new 645N and after acquiring the 67 to 645 adapter(as I have quite a number of 67 lens) I went looking for 645 AF (FA) lenses.

From what I've seen during the last couple of weeks(I wasn't on the market before that), I'll stick with what I already have for a while. Can't afford spending so much on lenses right now as I've just finished accumulating the 67 kit.
Also, there's the asian new year holiday going on now, so some stuff should pop up when it's over.

[lbenac]

Maybe I should sell some of my 645 lenses to a desperate 645D owner and make a killing (well if there is any funds left after somebody bought one).
Or I could trade my 645 system for a 67II system

Cheers,

Luc