New to P67 need advice on lenses

Swift1 · 09-01-2011, 07:48 PM

My kit consists of the 45/4, 90/2.8 LS, and the later version 200/4
The 45 and 90 came as kit with 67 from craigslist so I didn't really choose them so to say. Everything I've read says the 55/4 is superb but I wouldn't trade my 45 for one any day. If you like the 15 ltd on APS I would go for the 45/4.
I have often thought of trading my 90/2.8 LS for the non LS 90/2.8 but only because it's lighter.
As to the 165/2.8 vs the 200/4, after considering both for awhile, I decided I wanted the extra reach so I went with the 200.

DougLee · 09-02-2011, 08:22 AM

I appriciate your comments Swift1, as much as the 55mm impresses me, I don't think I want this to be as wide as I can go and for now I can't afford to get both, so I think the 45mm is in. On the Tele end, I know the newer 200mm is supposed to be excellent but I worry about the max apperiture of f/4 making the viewfinder too dim when in shade or indoors. Do you have any thoughts on viewfinder brightness when your 90mm is mounted vs your 200mm? Goddo31, perhapy you have an opinion on this as well?

Desertscape, your photos with the 50-100 make an excellent case for this lens and I have read may great things about it. My main concern is size and weight, I first came to pentax becuase of their DA and FA primes that were small with great IQ. Knowing myself, I think the weight of the zoom and the weight of the 67 would mean that it got left home too often when I go out walking. I will likely get a fanny pack that can accomodate one or two 67 primes and have one the camera over my sholder.

Fun times await me!

Once again, I really appriciate eveyones comments and suggestions!

Doug

Swift1 · 09-02-2011, 11:50 AM

Originally posted by DougLee

I appriciate your comments Swift1, as much as the 55mm impresses me, I don't think I want this to be as wide as I can go and for now I can't afford to get both, so I think the 45mm is in. On the Tele end, I know the newer 200mm is supposed to be excellent but I worry about the max apperiture of f/4 making the viewfinder too dim when in shade or indoors. Do you have any thoughts on viewfinder brightness when your 90mm is mounted vs your 200mm?

I have only ever used the 200/4 mounted on a tripod and using the Waist Level Finder so I can't really comment on viewfinder brightness. You could always set your 90/2.8 to f/4 and set the Auto/Manual switch to manual and play around with focusing. The DoF will be different than a 200 but that will give you an idea of the brightness.
If it were me and I was planning on mostly shooting handheld, I would probably go with the 165/2.8 as the extra stop and slightly shorter focal length would help with handheld shooting.

DougLee · 09-02-2011, 12:28 PM

That's pretty much what I am thinking at this point. I may come back to the 200mm in the future. I am also thinking of getting the waist level viewfinder for tripod work. Nice to have options!

goddo31 · 09-02-2011, 07:11 PM

The waist level finder is highly recommended by me and is great for handhold shots as well as tripod.
It has an inbuilt loupe so its a bit easier to critically focus on the stock screen, IMO compared to the metered prism.
no real issues with focusing an f/4 lens, but it is noticeably darker than the f/2.4 of the 105mm.

Travisvt82 · 09-03-2011, 11:33 AM

Very helpful, I had the same questions

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
645D and P67 lenses?	Rorschach	Pentax Medium Format	8	04-08-2011 08:58 PM
P645 lenses on P67	Joburger	Pentax Medium Format	3	04-05-2011 02:08 PM
The best P67 glass VS Zeiss	desertscape	Pentax Medium Format	3	08-17-2010 04:28 PM
Reversing ring for P67	alfa	Pentax Medium Format	3	04-02-2010 06:06 PM
P67 lenses on K10/K20	Don Boyd	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	02-15-2008 12:22 AM

09-01-2011, 07:48 PM	#16
Swift1 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Oregon Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,079	My kit consists of the 45/4, 90/2.8 LS, and the later version 200/4 The 45 and 90 came as kit with 67 from craigslist so I didn't really choose them so to say. Everything I've read says the 55/4 is superb but I wouldn't trade my 45 for one any day. If you like the 15 ltd on APS I would go for the 45/4. I have often thought of trading my 90/2.8 LS for the non LS 90/2.8 but only because it's lighter. As to the 165/2.8 vs the 200/4, after considering both for awhile, I decided I wanted the extra reach so I went with the 200.

09-02-2011, 08:22 AM	#17
DougLee Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Bar Harbor, Maine Posts: 110 Original Poster	I appriciate your comments Swift1, as much as the 55mm impresses me, I don't think I want this to be as wide as I can go and for now I can't afford to get both, so I think the 45mm is in. On the Tele end, I know the newer 200mm is supposed to be excellent but I worry about the max apperiture of f/4 making the viewfinder too dim when in shade or indoors. Do you have any thoughts on viewfinder brightness when your 90mm is mounted vs your 200mm? Goddo31, perhapy you have an opinion on this as well? Desertscape, your photos with the 50-100 make an excellent case for this lens and I have read may great things about it. My main concern is size and weight, I first came to pentax becuase of their DA and FA primes that were small with great IQ. Knowing myself, I think the weight of the zoom and the weight of the 67 would mean that it got left home too often when I go out walking. I will likely get a fanny pack that can accomodate one or two 67 primes and have one the camera over my sholder. Fun times await me! Once again, I really appriciate eveyones comments and suggestions! Doug

09-02-2011, 11:50 AM	#18
Swift1 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Oregon Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,079	Originally posted by DougLee I appriciate your comments Swift1, as much as the 55mm impresses me, I don't think I want this to be as wide as I can go and for now I can't afford to get both, so I think the 45mm is in. On the Tele end, I know the newer 200mm is supposed to be excellent but I worry about the max apperiture of f/4 making the viewfinder too dim when in shade or indoors. Do you have any thoughts on viewfinder brightness when your 90mm is mounted vs your 200mm? I have only ever used the 200/4 mounted on a tripod and using the Waist Level Finder so I can't really comment on viewfinder brightness. You could always set your 90/2.8 to f/4 and set the Auto/Manual switch to manual and play around with focusing. The DoF will be different than a 200 but that will give you an idea of the brightness. If it were me and I was planning on mostly shooting handheld, I would probably go with the 165/2.8 as the extra stop and slightly shorter focal length would help with handheld shooting.

09-02-2011, 12:28 PM	#19
DougLee Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Bar Harbor, Maine Posts: 110 Original Poster	That's pretty much what I am thinking at this point. I may come back to the 200mm in the future. I am also thinking of getting the waist level viewfinder for tripod work. Nice to have options!

09-02-2011, 07:11 PM	#20
goddo31 Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Perth, Western Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,576	The waist level finder is highly recommended by me and is great for handhold shots as well as tripod. It has an inbuilt loupe so its a bit easier to critically focus on the stock screen, IMO compared to the metered prism. no real issues with focusing an f/4 lens, but it is noticeably darker than the f/2.4 of the 105mm.

09-03-2011, 11:33 AM	#21
Travisvt82 New Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: NYC Posts: 6	Very helpful, I had the same questions