MF film to MF digital?

codger · 09-19-2012, 06:05 PM

Hello, Forum readers: I have a six lens kit with my 67ii body. I'm working through my last nine ProPack boxes of Provia this season and am looking ahead to a transition to digital capture. A big question for me is, how viable are my lenses if I decide to go to the 645D? I have the 45, 55, 90, 135, 200 and 300 late model lenses. Which, if any, would pair up with the 645D body and produce high quality results? I understand the focal lengths I mentioned will have different "effective" focal lengths or equivalencies with the sensor. Also, I know I'd be focusing manually, but I'm not clear on how the exposure readings will work out. Do any of you want to clarify (or discourage me) about planning on using my existing lenses? Thanks for the input. I'm looking forward to learning a lot from this community.

From PentaxForums.com: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/welcomes-introductions/199555-film-user-c...#ixzz26y2E9HTA

**Ed Hurst** · 09-19-2012, 06:31 PM

I too have made this transition and have found the 67 lenses to hold up surprisingly well with the 645D. The 55mm lens (latest version) does superbly well (in fact at long focusing distances, arguably better than the new 55mm 645 DFA lens). I am quite happy with the 90 (nonLS) and 135 lenses too. The 200 is only ok (though I felt that when using it on my 67ii's as well). I have the 300 67 f4 EDIF - and this is consistently superb. Can't speak for the other 300 67 lens or indeed for the 45, which I don't own.

Basically, use the lenses I mention with confidence on the 645D. The 75mm f2.8AL, the 105mm f2.4 the 55-100 zoom, the 165 f2.8 are all excellent as well.

**Ed Hurst** · 09-19-2012, 06:35 PM

As for exposure, my technique is generally manual exposure anyway, and that works fine with 67 lenses. You can also use the aperture priority mode. Shutter priority is of course impossible since that would involve the camera adjusting the lens's aperture, which it can't do with the 67 lenses.

codger · 09-19-2012, 06:55 PM

Okay, Ed. Thanks for the detailed reply. This raises another question. I know the lens mounts (67 and 645) are not the same dimensions, so that means there'll be a step-down adapter. How does this work for the auto diaphragm function -- focusing and composing wide open, then stopping down at the instant of exposure? So far, this all sounds encouraging. If my current lenses will give me really good results this might be a better path to follow than shopping a D800E and 3-5 Zeiss lenses, in pursuit of MF image quality.

**Ed Hurst** · 09-19-2012, 07:28 PM

If you use Pentax's own adaptor - which is readily found at the well-known online auction site - then auto-diapgragm operation, together with composing wide open, auto-stopping down at the instant of exposure, etc. - is all taken care of. It works very well.

Get yourself one or two of those adaptors, and you will find it works pretty seamlessly.

**Ed Hurst** · 09-19-2012, 07:29 PM

By the way, which version do you have of that 300mm lens? Is it the latest non-EDIF version or the EDIF version itself? Makes a big difference...

672 · 09-20-2012, 12:33 AM

The thing about using 67 lenses on a 645D that i miss is in camera spot metering. You dont have that luxury when adapting 67 lenses to the 645D. Having said that, i totally overbought in the lens department when i got my 645D and the ones that i am looking at re-selling are the 645 lenses...........

**Ed Hurst** · 09-20-2012, 01:56 AM

I don't quite understand that point. I think I can use spot metering on my 645D using 67 lenses. It's just the camera can't control the aperture setting. Or am I missing something?

codger · 09-20-2012, 09:56 AM

Ed, focusing my 300 extends the barrel length. LJ

desertscape · 09-20-2012, 01:48 PM

I have never been impressed with the original 300mm on my 6x7. I also have the 300 EDIF and can recommend that for the 645D. I will not recommend the original version; so so contrast, longitudinal chromatic aberration and no lens mount.

**Ed Hurst** · 09-20-2012, 03:05 PM

I have never owned the non-EDIF 300, but everything I have read and seen of it suggests that it will not be a very good match for the 645D (even the latest non-EDIF). I daresay if you stop it down, process carefully, etc. you may get reasonable results, but I think it could be a lot of effort for modest returns. The EDIF version, on the other hand, produces stunning results - as good as any I have seen.

codger · 09-20-2012, 03:35 PM

Okay, mentors: I appreciate the assessment. Meanwhile, I'll toss a math question both of you have probably already worked out during your own transitions. What FX equivalency do I have, lens by lens, if I use my current 67 glass on the 645D system? My kit contains the 45, 55, 90, 135 and 200 (plus the 300). I know if I did a "conversion" from 67 down to FX those focal lengths would essentially be halved. What happens going just down to 645? Thanks.

**Ed Hurst** · 09-20-2012, 04:42 PM

FX is Nikon speak for full frame - right?

Pentikonian · 09-20-2012, 05:38 PM

Originally posted by Ed Hurst

FX is Nikon speak for full frame - right?

Yes - Nikon FX = full-frame 35mm-sized sensor.

**Ed Hurst** · 09-20-2012, 06:01 PM

Well, hard to answer precisely since the aspect ratio of 67 and the 645D is different. Are you comparing the vertical or horizontal dimensions, or the overall area (this is also an issue when comparing 67 to 35mm by the way). The 645D sensor is larger than 35mm full frame, but smaller than 645 full frame. I think the number you are seeking is between 1.6 and 1.7, but to be honest, I tend to think of the focal lengths as being like 35mm 'plus a little bit'. So standard would be between 55 and 60. Etc. But that's just me!

09-19-2012, 06:05 PM	#1
codger New Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: Colorado Posts: 18	MF film to MF digital? Hello, Forum readers: I have a six lens kit with my 67ii body. I'm working through my last nine ProPack boxes of Provia this season and am looking ahead to a transition to digital capture. A big question for me is, how viable are my lenses if I decide to go to the 645D? I have the 45, 55, 90, 135, 200 and 300 late model lenses. Which, if any, would pair up with the 645D body and produce high quality results? I understand the focal lengths I mentioned will have different "effective" focal lengths or equivalencies with the sensor. Also, I know I'd be focusing manually, but I'm not clear on how the exposure readings will work out. Do any of you want to clarify (or discourage me) about planning on using my existing lenses? Thanks for the input. I'm looking forward to learning a lot from this community. From PentaxForums.com: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/welcomes-introductions/199555-film-user-c...#ixzz26y2E9HTA

09-19-2012, 06:55 PM	#4
codger New Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: Colorado Posts: 18 Original Poster	adapter questiohn Okay, Ed. Thanks for the detailed reply. This raises another question. I know the lens mounts (67 and 645) are not the same dimensions, so that means there'll be a step-down adapter. How does this work for the auto diaphragm function -- focusing and composing wide open, then stopping down at the instant of exposure? So far, this all sounds encouraging. If my current lenses will give me really good results this might be a better path to follow than shopping a D800E and 3-5 Zeiss lenses, in pursuit of MF image quality.

09-20-2012, 09:56 AM	#9
codger New Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: Colorado Posts: 18 Original Poster	non EDIF Ed, focusing my 300 extends the barrel length. LJ

09-20-2012, 03:35 PM	#12
codger New Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: Colorado Posts: 18 Original Poster	count out the 300mm Okay, mentors: I appreciate the assessment. Meanwhile, I'll toss a math question both of you have probably already worked out during your own transitions. What FX equivalency do I have, lens by lens, if I use my current 67 glass on the 645D system? My kit contains the 45, 55, 90, 135 and 200 (plus the 300). I know if I did a "conversion" from 67 down to FX those focal lengths would essentially be halved. What happens going just down to 645? Thanks.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Film Vs Digital	dndcdr	Photographic Technique	4	10-14-2011 10:22 PM
Moving from film to digital - help!	Jool	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	14	03-30-2011 04:13 AM
Film shooting vs digital	climit	Photographic Technique	16	01-13-2011 05:58 AM
Long exposure-film vs digital	lavascript	Photographic Technique	3	01-05-2011 04:01 PM
Moving from Film to Digital	kMc	Pentax DSLR Discussion	9	11-06-2010 04:52 AM

09-19-2012, 06:31 PM	#2
Ed Hurst Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Posts: 1,657	I too have made this transition and have found the 67 lenses to hold up surprisingly well with the 645D. The 55mm lens (latest version) does superbly well (in fact at long focusing distances, arguably better than the new 55mm 645 DFA lens). I am quite happy with the 90 (nonLS) and 135 lenses too. The 200 is only ok (though I felt that when using it on my 67ii's as well). I have the 300 67 f4 EDIF - and this is consistently superb. Can't speak for the other 300 67 lens or indeed for the 45, which I don't own. Basically, use the lenses I mention with confidence on the 645D. The 75mm f2.8AL, the 105mm f2.4 the 55-100 zoom, the 165 f2.8 are all excellent as well.

09-19-2012, 06:35 PM	#3
Ed Hurst Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Posts: 1,657	As for exposure, my technique is generally manual exposure anyway, and that works fine with 67 lenses. You can also use the aperture priority mode. Shutter priority is of course impossible since that would involve the camera adjusting the lens's aperture, which it can't do with the 67 lenses.

09-19-2012, 07:28 PM	#5
Ed Hurst Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Posts: 1,657	If you use Pentax's own adaptor - which is readily found at the well-known online auction site - then auto-diapgragm operation, together with composing wide open, auto-stopping down at the instant of exposure, etc. - is all taken care of. It works very well. Get yourself one or two of those adaptors, and you will find it works pretty seamlessly.

09-19-2012, 07:29 PM	#6
Ed Hurst Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Posts: 1,657	By the way, which version do you have of that 300mm lens? Is it the latest non-EDIF version or the EDIF version itself? Makes a big difference...

09-20-2012, 12:33 AM	#7
672 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: santa monica Photos: Gallery Posts: 486	The thing about using 67 lenses on a 645D that i miss is in camera spot metering. You dont have that luxury when adapting 67 lenses to the 645D. Having said that, i totally overbought in the lens department when i got my 645D and the ones that i am looking at re-selling are the 645 lenses...........

09-20-2012, 01:56 AM	#8
Ed Hurst Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Posts: 1,657	I don't quite understand that point. I think I can use spot metering on my 645D using 67 lenses. It's just the camera can't control the aperture setting. Or am I missing something?

09-20-2012, 01:48 PM	#10
desertscape Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Arizona Posts: 1,272	I have never been impressed with the original 300mm on my 6x7. I also have the 300 EDIF and can recommend that for the 645D. I will not recommend the original version; so so contrast, longitudinal chromatic aberration and no lens mount.

09-20-2012, 03:05 PM	#11
Ed Hurst Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Posts: 1,657	I have never owned the non-EDIF 300, but everything I have read and seen of it suggests that it will not be a very good match for the 645D (even the latest non-EDIF). I daresay if you stop it down, process carefully, etc. you may get reasonable results, but I think it could be a lot of effort for modest returns. The EDIF version, on the other hand, produces stunning results - as good as any I have seen.

09-20-2012, 04:42 PM	#13
Ed Hurst Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Posts: 1,657	FX is Nikon speak for full frame - right?

09-20-2012, 05:38 PM	#14
Pentikonian Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Arizona Posts: 780	Originally posted by Ed Hurst FX is Nikon speak for full frame - right? Yes - Nikon FX = full-frame 35mm-sized sensor.

09-20-2012, 06:01 PM	#15
Ed Hurst Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Posts: 1,657	Well, hard to answer precisely since the aspect ratio of 67 and the 645D is different. Are you comparing the vertical or horizontal dimensions, or the overall area (this is also an issue when comparing 67 to 35mm by the way). The 645D sensor is larger than 35mm full frame, but smaller than 645 full frame. I think the number you are seeking is between 1.6 and 1.7, but to be honest, I tend to think of the focal lengths as being like 35mm 'plus a little bit'. So standard would be between 55 and 60. Etc. But that's just me!