[eyeguy]

There is much discussion about the legacy Pentax lenses on the 645D but does anyone have any thoughts on the use of Hasselblad/Schneider/Rodenstock or other lenses on this camera?
Joseph

[VoltMan]

Joseph,

There are several adapters for Hasselblad lenses out there. I've ordered one myself and will be trying it out at some point. In general CF, CFE, CFi Hasselblad lenses work well on just about any medium format design (e.g. Mamiya/Phase and Contax) as they're of retrofocus design as well as have a focus helicoid built in. Naturally you're limited to stop down metering, manual focus, and need to lock open the leaf shutter if so fitted. Some of the Hasselblad lenses won't work either, notably the ones made for 1600/1000 cameras and a few of the wide bodies from what I've been told (never tried), as well as all of the newer H1/HD lenses.

For most Schneider/Rodenstock lenses (assuming you're talking the main line and not the ones designed specifically for something like the Mamiya/Phase One 645DF) - these are designed for use on view cameras and are short focus lenses. The upshot from that is most of the wide angle lenses that are desirable for use on an MF body lack sufficient back focus distance to be used on the 645D or other SLR medium format bodies (due to mirror interference). For longer focal lengths they could work but then you still need a means to focus, e.g. a focus rail with bellows. For this there are several (expensive) adapters out there from Cambo, Toyo, Horseman, and Silvestri. Take a look at the Cambo product sheet here: http://www.cambo.com/Html/products_photo/Linkedfiles/english/download/Item38...t%20X2-Pro.pdf. These adapters are still quite useful but do have some limitations (e.g. can't focus infinity on all of the normal prime range). Good applications would be micro/macro work, product photography, and anything that requires minor movements for perspective and depth control in a studio. Currently none of them offer a mount for the Pentax 645D, and if they did there are limits to what the 645D can do *if* it has microlenses on the sensor (v. likely) as that severely limits the amount of movements you can make. Additionally you'll have to bear the costs of the lenses themselves, which average about $3000 for the "digital" designs. In the end at this point its not probably going to be economically practical or effective for many applications using the 645D from my viewpoint.

Note Pentax also offers a 67 lens to 645 adapter that will work on the 645D, which also retains some of the aperture control allowing aperture priority exposure. I'm betting that's the best/most economical bet to get MF glass on the 645D.

I've also seen adapters from fotodiox for Bronica (ETR mount I think) and Leica Visoflex. The Bronica is reasonable as you can probably get cheaper but v. high quality lenses. I don't see the practicality in the Visoflex adapter though.

Hope this helps ...

There is much discussion about the legacy Pentax lenses on the 645D but does anyone have any thoughts on the use of Hasselblad/Schneider/Rodenstock or other lenses on this camera?
Joseph

[eyeguy]

Than you for your great reply.
My question was motivated by the variable reports on the current crop of Pentax lenses. It seems that in many cases they are not up to the MF challenge and that its a bit hit and miss wether you get a good one.

It will interesting to see if the Hasselblad lenses fair any better.

Joseph

[VoltMan]

I'm a Darwinist - "adapt or die" ...

I'd bet a month's salary that any one of the existing Hasselblad V series lenses in wide to medium tele outperform anything you can get now or in the next 10 years from Pentax even though they are analog designs. They're that far ahead of Pentax.

EDIT: Let me clarify the above as in the context of digital (e.g. 645D) ...

If you get the adapter I recommend looking for the brass and steel one - Adorama seems to have it (but on backorder) 04P645HB Adorama Brass Hasselblad Lens to Pentax 645 Body Mount Adapter - this is the same one they sell in Japan. I believe the fotodiox are aluminum which I doubt is as sturdy.

My intentions are to use Pentax FA/D FA when I need autofocus (which is why I bought the camera - the AF rocks!), and use Hasselblad when I can do manual focus (like landscapes). I also want to experiment with the P67 lenses via the adapter (which gives aperture priority on the 645D) - the P67s medium format tele range can't be beat simply because no one else offers the longer faster lenses the P67 has with debatable exception to some rare Nikon lenses.

[...]It will interesting to see if the Hasselblad lenses fair any better.

---

Last edited by VoltMan; 01-20-2011 at 02:37 PM.

[eyeguy]

OH dear, I see more money being spent.
I would guess that the CFi lenses are the ones to go for?

Joseph

[eyeguy]

By the way, I ordered the adapter you recommended

Joseph

[VoltMan]

I would guess that the CFi lenses are the ones to go for?

CF/CFi/CFE - depends on the focal length but in general for your purposes CF T* should fit the bill nicely and you don't need CFi/CFE. CFi has an improved shutter spring (which you don't need), focus scales, and focus ring (not really a requirement). CFE is pretty much CFi with electronics (which you don't need). Focusing is a bit more coarse on some CF vs. CFi/CFE from what I understand but given the cost difference its not a factor to me. The important bit is to get a T* lens (Zeiss coating which reduces flare). I've been told (but not tried) that you can use a C series lens as well by just locking the shutter open - I want to try that as from where we sit in perspective C T* lenses are pretty much par with the others in terms of optical performance and since we don't require the other features are very good value. You may also find CB lenses - those are basically lower priced C series kit lenses. Take a look at KEH to get a good idea on pricing.

What focal length are you looking at ? Or better yet what Pentax lens are you suspecting you'll need to seek a better replacement for ? The lens I want (and don't have) is the 40mm/4. If you look at the price difference between C and CFE for this lens you'll see why I want to use C series if possible.

One good thing to note about Hasselblad lenses - if you buy used kit in good condition it will hold its value quite well over the years.

BTW - my adapter is still on order from a shop here as well. Did you order from Adorama ?

Hope the floods in Oz are getting better ...

[tuco]

...
You may also find CB lenses - those are basically lower priced C series kit lenses. Take a look at KEH to get a good idea on pricing.
...

The "budget" CB versions come in a CFi housing. They are newer than CF T* lenses and have at least T* coating. And in the case of my 60mm CB lens, it's reportedly optically the same as a 60mm CFi only lacking some housing features from what I could find out (not so with the 80mm CB, missing an element). I've been very pleased with that lens.

[desertscape]

Originally posted by VoltMan
I'd bet a month's salary that any one of the existing Hasselblad V series lenses in wide to medium tele outperform anything you can get now or in the next 10 years from Pentax even though they are analog designs. They're that far ahead of Pentax.

That's quite a bold statement VoltMan. I wouldn't make that bet if I were you. The V series lenses like the CFe 40 and CFi 60 have to compete with the likes of the 55mm f/4 (latest) and 75mm f/4.5 on the Pentax 67. The best Zeiss coatings have to compete against the 7 layer SMC coating on the Pentax. The P645 lenses have a great reputation as well. Can the 350 SA top the 400mm EDIF from Pentax for their 67? Their color correction is bound to be similar. I would say that the V series glass is competative with Pentax MF glass. A study of the cross sections of the Zeiss lenses and P645/P67 lenses shows advanced designs with enough degrees of freedom for the designer to correct the 7 major aberrations + solve some of the combined aberrations like spherochromatism.

[terroll]

Interesting article ......

Pentax 645 FA 35mm Review

[Thomas]

I'd bet a month's salary that any one of the existing Hasselblad V series lenses in wide to medium tele outperform anything you can get now or in the next 10 years from Pentax even though they are analog designs. They're that far ahead of Pentax.

Desertscape beat me to it, but before you place that bet you might want to read Lloyd Chamber's comments about a 25-year-old Pentax 120mm A on a 645D and compare to what he says about the HC 100 f/2.2 on a H4D-50.

[VoltMan]

The "budget" CB versions come in a CFi housing. They are newer than CF T* lenses and have at least T* coating. And in the case of my 60mm CB lens, it's reportedly optically the same as a 60mm CFi only lacking some housing features from what I could find out (not so with the 80mm CB, missing an element). I've been very pleased with that lens.

Thanks Tuco for the correction and info - they're pretty cheap here on the used market - I'll have to take a look at the 60!

[VoltMan]

I'll qualify something - I'm talking in reference to digital btw (as per the subject line of the original post)

Yep its a bold statement but one that's backed up by my personal experiences with Hasselblad lenses on digital medium format backs (Phase P65+ mostly). Note I wouldn't make that statement about other systems of the likes of a Contax, Rollei, Sinar, Leica, nor later Phase/Mamiya lenses. And I think the 67 lenses show some promise as quality lenses for digital as well, probably about the same potential as Mamiya RZ lenses (which are superb). But truth be told is there isn't much at all experience or example wise (by anyone) for digital applications to be found to even make a semi-educated guess. On the other hand there's a wealth of collective Hasselblad V experience on medium format digital to go on, coupled with the constant improvement of the V lenses by Hasselblad. Time will tell - but then again that's why its a gamble statement of course!

For the longer teles I think there is promise in the 67 lenses - and I think I stated that in one of my posts. So much so in fact I've bought the 400 EDIF you've mentioned below to give it a try.

As a side note - if the Pentax medium format lenses are so good on digital - why don't people post reviews about them in the review database as a start ?

That's quite a bold statement VoltMan [...] Can the 350 SA top the 400mm EDIF from Pentax for their 67? Their color correction is bound to be similar...

[VoltMan]

Hmmm ... ok - don't have experience with H4 other than testing it out on a rental for AF performance with an 80 but the HC 100 2.2 is a v. fast AF lens meant specifically for low light and v. shallow depth of field - actually a spectacular accomplishment on their part and something not offered by any other MFDB maker. Comparing it to a 120/4 manual focus macro in my opinion is pointless as its quite a special lens for special applications.

So it begs me to ask - how can one perform lens comparisons when the bodies won't even accept the lens, and why didn't he test the Pentax lens against its direct Hasselblad equivalent, the HC 120/4 Makro (which is even AF) ?

[...] you might want to read Lloyd Chamber's comments about a 25-year-old Pentax 120mm A on a 645D and compare to what he says about the HC 100 f/2.2 on a H4D-50.

[kuau]

I agree with Voltman,
personally my experience with the 645D so far with FA lens is 75mm and up is good all around, shooting at f11 of course, wide open who knows, not what I purchased my 645D for,
Anything wider then 75mm, this is where I hope/believe that using the pentax 67-645 Adaptor and Pentax 67 lenses, like the 55, and 45mm lenses should yield good results corner to corner as long as you are good at manual focus.
We will see, I am just waiting for my stupid 67-645 adaptor from Japan.

Steven