[karlfoto]

Hi Forum

Am new here. I have checked the past threads, most discuss the angle of view rather than sharpness. So which is sharper the latest 45(1989 version) or 55mm lens (in the case of the 55, is there a big difference between the two latest variants 1979 & 1986 )?

Thanks

---

Last edited by karlfoto; 12-23-2011 at 02:08 PM. Reason: added the different lens versions

[Yamanobori]

645 lenses? 67 lenses? What camera do you want to use them on?

[rob1234]

Which is the sharper 67 lens 45 or 55mm?

What camera do you want to use them on?

Er - 67 presumably!?

[phonoline]

I have had great results with both lenses. The 55m is supposed to be sharper - but while it is indeed very sharp, I have not seen much of a difference between both lenses, at least in sharpness. As far as abberations etc. are concerned, check the lens data base.

Both lenses perform very well on the 645D, btw.

[Yamanobori]

Er - 67 presumably!?

Ah. Sorry, reeding is knot my stron poynt.

[nightfly]

I use the latest SMC 45mm and 55mm with excellent results. The 55 does seem a touch sharper, but the 45 is no slouch. I would not hesitate to recommend having both as you are not duplicating capabilities. The 45 offers excellent depth of field at medium to small apertures and is the widest rectilinear lens in the line-up. Sometimes it is the only lens that works for those tight shots. The 45 is more prone to flare however.

[karlfoto]

Hi Guys

Sorry Yamanbori I edited the subject to include the 67 after you brought it to my attention that it could well have been 645.

Thanx for the answers so far. I am going to throw a curve ball in now. As I still have not purchased a 67 kit yet I am also considering a Bronica GS1 with a 50mm PG lens. Anyone on the forum who has used both companies lenses care to comment on the sharpness between these 3 wide angles?

[civiletti]

They are close. I believe the 45mm is sharper than the older 55mm, but not as sharp as the newer 55mm.

[Silent Street]

The SMC 55mm f4 benefits from modern design, and is consumately sharp and contrasty, even at f4. The 45mm is a good performer, obviously, but I could not find one in my hurry-up to land a minty 67 and a first lens for it. The 55 is also a heavy and bulky brute (715gm IIRC: I've packed it away for Christmas/New Year travels!), especially for users with small hands. It's focus is smooth and very precise. I will be comparing a friend's older 45mm with my 55mm on identical scenes and hopefully with the same film (possibly Ilford SFX200 with a IR720 filter).

• 55mm f4 (Pentax forum)
• 45mm f4 (Pentax forum)

Obviously the weight is a big decider of the two.

[Sundowner]

I have checked the past threads, most discuss the angle of view rather than sharpness.

Warning: Uneducated Response Incoming

How about I throw another curve and ask you about neither, and instead ask: "What are you going to be using the lens to do, specifically?"

45mm and 55mm are really close, in my opinion...and unless one or the other is appreciably (read: "I can tell, when looking at reasonable enlargements") sharper, the driving factors for me would be ergonomics, quality and price.

With that said, I'd still like to know which one is sharper.

[Silent Street]

The 55mm is used in a landscape context, as with all my cameras. My initial angling was for the 45mm, but as previously mentioned I couldn't find one in minty condition to match the 67, so the 55 was "the one". I agree there is little to separate the 45mm from the 55mm, save for weight and maybe handling. Another thing that swayed me is the 55mm has a 77mm filter diameter, so I am able to use all of my filters from my Canon kit.

Enlarge negs/trannies from 55 and 45mm optics to say 60cm in height, then compare. You'll need to be critically attentive to mirror-induced vibration (use MLU, then hold down on tripod during exposure).

All things considered, the sharpest lens is not necessarily the best when used clumsily.

[desertscape]

The latest 55mm is slightly better but can only be seen at the edge of the field. My top 11 list of sharpest to sharp is-
75 Takumar
55mm Latest
55-100 zoom
300 EDIF
400 EDIF
200 Pentax
100 Macro
400 Takumar
90-180 zoom
45mm
55mm second version

[phonoline]

well, that would not be my ranking. I tried those up to the 55 - 100 zoom which is awful wide open and produces ghosts, the macro is absolutely superb in sharpness as are the 55 and the 45.

[karlfoto]

Hi Sundowner

I will be using it for scenic and landscape work. I used to own a 67ii and a 45, 55 and 135mm lenses, sold it, and two years later regret the decision. I had the 55 second version, and always thought that the 45 was as sharp. I did not realise that the latest 55 was sharper than the 45mm. I was able to scratch up some of my old records of purchase and thus was able to check which trannies i had shot on the 55 and 45 respectively and noted no real difference. My question was asked because i had of sharpness issues with the 45, but then there are differences between batches of lenses and the person who mentioned it may have got a bad one.

Silent street when are you planning on doing this test, is it soon?

Also thanks for all your answers.

[karlfoto]

An additional question, would using leaf shutter lenses make a big difference in comparison to the shutter curtain of the pentax 67ii if mlu was used ito getting the image pin sharp?