Pentax 67 Lenses on the 645D?

bull drinkwater · 10-24-2013, 12:15 AM

Originally posted by uintaangler

Thanks Douglas

i bought a 67 to 645 adapter and a 67 300mm lens , in the end i found i did better sticking to the 645 line of lenses.the 67 lenses are also heavier.

Lacunapratum · 10-27-2013, 08:52 PM

Only some of the 67 lenses make sense on the 645D. Here is a list.

1. The 45mm/4 as a shift lens with the Zoerk adapter and stopped down to f/11.
2. The most recent 55mm/4, as good or better as the D FA 55mm/2.8 for the 645D. Doesn't have autofocus though.
3. The 100mm/4 macro, as good as the D FA 90mm or the FA 120mm macro lenses for the 645D. Has neither autofocus nor image stabilization, but focus is buttersmooth. Very sharp.
4. The 120mm/3.5 Soft. There is no 645 counterpart, but the lens is way too soft at 3.5 on the 645D (was o.k. on film). Has to be stopped down to at least 5.6. 1.4x extender makes it worse.
5. The 300mm/4 ED IF. Heavier than the FA 645 and no autofocus.
6. The 400mm/4 ED IF. Very heavy lens, barely hand holdable. Great bokeh and good sharpness at 4.0. Improves when stopped down. Razer thin depth of field. The FA 400mm/5.6 from film 645 days is lighter and already sharp at 5.6, but sometimes you need that extra stop.
7. The 800mm/6.7 ED IF. Monster lens, but works well on the 645D if that focal length is needed. The 645 range only goes to 600mm.

bull drinkwater · 10-28-2013, 12:52 AM

Originally posted by Lacunapratum

Only some of the 67 lenses make sense on the 645D. Here is a list.

1. The 45mm/4 as a shift lens with the Zoerk adapter and stopped down to f/11.
2. The most recent 55mm/4, as good or better as the D FA 55mm/2.8 for the 645D. Doesn't have autofocus though.
3. The 100mm/4 macro, as good as the D FA 90mm or the FA 120mm macro lenses for the 645D. Has neither autofocus nor image stabilization, but focus is buttersmooth. Very sharp.
4. The 120mm/3.5 Soft. There is no 645 counterpart, but the lens is way too soft at 3.5 on the 645D (was o.k. on film). Has to be stopped down to at least 5.6. 1.4x extender makes it worse.
5. The 300mm/4 ED IF. Heavier than the FA 645 and no autofocus.
6. The 400mm/4 ED IF. Very heavy lens, barely hand holdable. Great bokeh and good sharpness at 4.0. Improves when stopped down. Razer thin depth of field. The FA 400mm/5.6 from film 645 days is lighter and already sharp at 5.6, but sometimes you need that extra stop.
7. The 800mm/6.7 ED IF. Monster lens, but works well on the 645D if that focal length is needed. The 645 range only goes to 600mm.

i recently picked up the 200mm fa and the 400mm fa 645's, both do well for me. i also find that i get good results with either the 1.4 or the 2.0 teleconverters, even stacked. i can do ok with manual focus.

mikeSF · 10-28-2013, 08:56 AM

The 67 105mm is a great performer on the 645D. I borrowed one from blackcloudbrew and after the very first try, bought one of these lenses for myself.

a couple of pics using the 67 SMC-A 105/2.4

Last edited by mikeSF; 10-28-2013 at 09:41 AM.

desertscape · 10-28-2013, 05:28 PM

There are so many good lenses for the 67 that it would be easier to say which ones are not a good fit for the 645D. Yeah, the 105 is proven. The 800 f/4 maybe not so much.

**Fontan** · 10-29-2013, 12:42 AM

Only fisheye option for 645d I think is 35/4.5 67 fisheye.

bull drinkwater · 10-29-2013, 04:17 AM

Originally posted by Fontan

Only fisheye option for 645d I think is 35/4.5 67 fisheye.

i have a .16 screw on lens that attatches to an adapter that screws into the filter threads of the 45mm f2.8.

**Fontan** · 10-29-2013, 09:00 PM

Originally posted by bull drinkwater

i have a .16 screw on lens that attatches to an adapter that screws into the filter threads of the 45mm f2.8.

Now that sounds crazy and cool at the same time. Get good results?

I like my Fish but still learning it more or less.

bull drinkwater · 10-30-2013, 10:28 AM

Originally posted by Fontan

Now that sounds crazy and cool at the same time. Get good results?

I like my Fish but still learning it more or less.

good but not fansastic, i am not able to post here yet but i post them at the uglyhedgehog site. it's free all you need do is regester. you resize your photos to 1mb and you're all set. i use the same username.

Lacunapratum · 10-30-2013, 04:23 PM

"There are so many good lenses for the 67 that it would be easier to say which ones are not a good fit for the 645D."

Depends where you come from. All the non-ED 67 telephoto lenses don't do well on the 645D. Looking at the 200mm and 165mm, the 645 versions are clearly better. The 105 has its nice qualities, admittedly, if you like that focal length. Both the Arsat and the Pentax 35mm fisheye lenses are just acceptable, and the fisheye effect is almost lost due to the smaller frame. Also the 45mm only makes sense as a shift lens, otherwise the 645 45-85mm zoom is better. I have heard the two 67 zooms do o.k., but are un-proportionately heavy. Thus, the only lens I'd include in my list would actually be the 105 for its bokeh characteristics. Of course, if you have a bunch of 67 lenses, nothing is easier than mounting them on an adapter. However, if you bought a 645D and are on the fence about getting additional lenses, only those 67 lenses that I listed make sense, IMHO.

**Ed Hurst** · 10-30-2013, 08:02 PM

I would say that the 6x7 300mm f4EDIF and 75mm f2.8AL offer results that are at least as good as the 645 equivalents and for that reason I would seriously consider them. The 55-100 6x7 zoom is also outstanding in quality on a 645D (not necessarily better than some 645 lenses, but offering a focal length range that is different in a single lens).

Lacunapratum · 10-30-2013, 08:47 PM

Well, I did include the 300mm ED. The three ED telephoto lenses are fine, 300, 400, and 800; the non-ED 300, 400, 600, and 800 are not. Haven't tried the 1000mirror and that one might be fine as well. I am aware that also the 75mm AL is very good, and certainly, if you have one, there is no reason not to use it. But seriously: would you buy a 75mm AL over the 75mm 645 AF, which is one of the really great lenses of the 645D set-up, high quality, compact, fast, and sharp.

I want to see that person who buys a 645D just to mount those huge and heavy 67 clunkers, when the 645 range is stacked fairly well with the 25mm DA, 35mm A and FA, 55mm D FA, 75mm A and FA, 90mm D FA, 120mm macro A and FA, 150mm FA, 200mm FA, 300mm ED in 4 and 5.6, 400mm ED in 5.6, and the 600mm ED. As I said, a few of them may make sense for specific purposes, but I am fairly confident that by in large most 645D users will stick with 645 lenses.

672 · 10-30-2013, 09:51 PM

I defend the 67 75mm AL as one of the best lenses period on a 645D. Also the 105. And they are both way way way lighter and smaller than the 90mm DFA, way smaller..........

I just picked up a 45-85 now that the prices have dropped to practically free on these lenses. So , I will shoot it directly against my beloved 55-100 and let you know what i find. They both weigh about the same.

My copy of the 645 400mm 5.6 is a total dog up against the 67 400mm ed if. And since they both need at least one stop closed to be useful on the digital, the 645 becomes a very slow lens. Its hard to believe the 645 version is really ED at all. So much chromatic abberation.

bull drinkwater · 10-31-2013, 01:19 AM

Originally posted by 672

I defend the 67 75mm AL as one of the best lenses period on a 645D. Also the 105. And they are both way way way lighter and smaller than the 90mm DFA, way smaller..........

I just picked up a 45-85 now that the prices have dropped to practically free on these lenses. So , I will shoot it directly against my beloved 55-100 and let you know what i find. They both weigh about the same.

My copy of the 645 400mm 5.6 is a total dog up against the 67 400mm ed if. And since they both need at least one stop closed to be useful on the digital, the 645 becomes a very slow lens. Its hard to believe the 645 version is really ED at all. So much chromatic abberation.

i am happy for everyones success with any of the lenses that fit the 645d, i am just speaking of my results and preferences.

bull drinkwater · 10-31-2013, 01:21 AM

Originally posted by 672

I defend the 67 75mm AL as one of the best lenses period on a 645D. Also the 105. And they are both way way way lighter and smaller than the 90mm DFA, way smaller..........

I just picked up a 45-85 now that the prices have dropped to practically free on these lenses. So , I will shoot it directly against my beloved 55-100 and let you know what i find. They both weigh about the same.

My copy of the 645 400mm 5.6 is a total dog up against the 67 400mm ed if. And since they both need at least one stop closed to be useful on the digital, the 645 becomes a very slow lens. Its hard to believe the 645 version is really ED at all. So much chromatic abberation.

i picked up both the 200mm fa and the 400mm fa and found both a joy to use.

10-30-2013, 09:51 PM	#28
672 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: santa monica Photos: Gallery Posts: 486	67 lenses I defend the 67 75mm AL as one of the best lenses period on a 645D. Also the 105. And they are both way way way lighter and smaller than the 90mm DFA, way smaller.......... I just picked up a 45-85 now that the prices have dropped to practically free on these lenses. So , I will shoot it directly against my beloved 55-100 and let you know what i find. They both weigh about the same. My copy of the 645 400mm 5.6 is a total dog up against the 67 400mm ed if. And since they both need at least one stop closed to be useful on the digital, the 645 becomes a very slow lens. Its hard to believe the 645 version is really ED at all. So much chromatic abberation.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Comprehensive Testing: Results & Observations with Pentax 645 Lenses used on the 645D	DandA	Pentax Medium Format	7	03-19-2012 09:48 PM
67 lenses on 645D	Frank Armstrong	Pentax Medium Format	10	11-08-2011 07:26 AM
How good are the Pentax 300mm star lenses on a 645D?	derAngler	Pentax Medium Format	12	08-22-2011 07:26 AM
Pentax-67-35mm-F4.5-Fish on Pentax 645d	spacevoid8	Pentax Medium Format	17	05-23-2011 06:36 PM
67 vs. 645 lenses on a 645D body?	emr	Pentax Medium Format	5	07-30-2010 08:38 PM

10-24-2013, 12:15 AM	#16
bull drinkwater Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: pontiac mi. Posts: 392	Originally posted by uintaangler Thanks Douglas i bought a 67 to 645 adapter and a 67 300mm lens , in the end i found i did better sticking to the 645 line of lenses.the 67 lenses are also heavier.

10-27-2013, 08:52 PM	#17
Lacunapratum Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 164	Only some of the 67 lenses make sense on the 645D. Here is a list. 1. The 45mm/4 as a shift lens with the Zoerk adapter and stopped down to f/11. 2. The most recent 55mm/4, as good or better as the D FA 55mm/2.8 for the 645D. Doesn't have autofocus though. 3. The 100mm/4 macro, as good as the D FA 90mm or the FA 120mm macro lenses for the 645D. Has neither autofocus nor image stabilization, but focus is buttersmooth. Very sharp. 4. The 120mm/3.5 Soft. There is no 645 counterpart, but the lens is way too soft at 3.5 on the 645D (was o.k. on film). Has to be stopped down to at least 5.6. 1.4x extender makes it worse. 5. The 300mm/4 ED IF. Heavier than the FA 645 and no autofocus. 6. The 400mm/4 ED IF. Very heavy lens, barely hand holdable. Great bokeh and good sharpness at 4.0. Improves when stopped down. Razer thin depth of field. The FA 400mm/5.6 from film 645 days is lighter and already sharp at 5.6, but sometimes you need that extra stop. 7. The 800mm/6.7 ED IF. Monster lens, but works well on the 645D if that focal length is needed. The 645 range only goes to 600mm.

10-28-2013, 12:52 AM	#18
bull drinkwater Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: pontiac mi. Posts: 392	Originally posted by Lacunapratum Only some of the 67 lenses make sense on the 645D. Here is a list. 1. The 45mm/4 as a shift lens with the Zoerk adapter and stopped down to f/11. 2. The most recent 55mm/4, as good or better as the D FA 55mm/2.8 for the 645D. Doesn't have autofocus though. 3. The 100mm/4 macro, as good as the D FA 90mm or the FA 120mm macro lenses for the 645D. Has neither autofocus nor image stabilization, but focus is buttersmooth. Very sharp. 4. The 120mm/3.5 Soft. There is no 645 counterpart, but the lens is way too soft at 3.5 on the 645D (was o.k. on film). Has to be stopped down to at least 5.6. 1.4x extender makes it worse. 5. The 300mm/4 ED IF. Heavier than the FA 645 and no autofocus. 6. The 400mm/4 ED IF. Very heavy lens, barely hand holdable. Great bokeh and good sharpness at 4.0. Improves when stopped down. Razer thin depth of field. The FA 400mm/5.6 from film 645 days is lighter and already sharp at 5.6, but sometimes you need that extra stop. 7. The 800mm/6.7 ED IF. Monster lens, but works well on the 645D if that focal length is needed. The 645 range only goes to 600mm. i recently picked up the 200mm fa and the 400mm fa 645's, both do well for me. i also find that i get good results with either the 1.4 or the 2.0 teleconverters, even stacked. i can do ok with manual focus.

10-28-2013, 08:56 AM	#19
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,620	The 67 105mm is a great performer on the 645D. I borrowed one from blackcloudbrew and after the very first try, bought one of these lenses for myself. a couple of pics using the 67 SMC-A 105/2.4 Last edited by mikeSF; 10-28-2013 at 09:41 AM.

10-28-2013, 05:28 PM	#20
desertscape Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Arizona Posts: 1,272	There are so many good lenses for the 67 that it would be easier to say which ones are not a good fit for the 645D. Yeah, the 105 is proven. The 800 f/4 maybe not so much.

10-29-2013, 12:42 AM	#21
Fontan Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: 5th floor Posts: 1,610	Only fisheye option for 645d I think is 35/4.5 67 fisheye.

10-29-2013, 04:17 AM	#22
bull drinkwater Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: pontiac mi. Posts: 392	Originally posted by Fontan Only fisheye option for 645d I think is 35/4.5 67 fisheye. i have a .16 screw on lens that attatches to an adapter that screws into the filter threads of the 45mm f2.8.

10-29-2013, 09:00 PM	#23
Fontan Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: 5th floor Posts: 1,610	Originally posted by bull drinkwater i have a .16 screw on lens that attatches to an adapter that screws into the filter threads of the 45mm f2.8. Now that sounds crazy and cool at the same time. Get good results? I like my Fish but still learning it more or less.

10-30-2013, 10:28 AM	#24
bull drinkwater Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: pontiac mi. Posts: 392	Originally posted by Fontan Now that sounds crazy and cool at the same time. Get good results? I like my Fish but still learning it more or less. good but not fansastic, i am not able to post here yet but i post them at the uglyhedgehog site. it's free all you need do is regester. you resize your photos to 1mb and you're all set. i use the same username.

10-30-2013, 04:23 PM	#25
Lacunapratum Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 164	"There are so many good lenses for the 67 that it would be easier to say which ones are not a good fit for the 645D." Depends where you come from. All the non-ED 67 telephoto lenses don't do well on the 645D. Looking at the 200mm and 165mm, the 645 versions are clearly better. The 105 has its nice qualities, admittedly, if you like that focal length. Both the Arsat and the Pentax 35mm fisheye lenses are just acceptable, and the fisheye effect is almost lost due to the smaller frame. Also the 45mm only makes sense as a shift lens, otherwise the 645 45-85mm zoom is better. I have heard the two 67 zooms do o.k., but are un-proportionately heavy. Thus, the only lens I'd include in my list would actually be the 105 for its bokeh characteristics. Of course, if you have a bunch of 67 lenses, nothing is easier than mounting them on an adapter. However, if you bought a 645D and are on the fence about getting additional lenses, only those 67 lenses that I listed make sense, IMHO.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-30-2013, 08:02 PM	#26
Ed Hurst Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Posts: 1,657	I would say that the 6x7 300mm f4EDIF and 75mm f2.8AL offer results that are at least as good as the 645 equivalents and for that reason I would seriously consider them. The 55-100 6x7 zoom is also outstanding in quality on a 645D (not necessarily better than some 645 lenses, but offering a focal length range that is different in a single lens).

10-30-2013, 08:47 PM	#27
Lacunapratum Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 164	Well, I did include the 300mm ED. The three ED telephoto lenses are fine, 300, 400, and 800; the non-ED 300, 400, 600, and 800 are not. Haven't tried the 1000mirror and that one might be fine as well. I am aware that also the 75mm AL is very good, and certainly, if you have one, there is no reason not to use it. But seriously: would you buy a 75mm AL over the 75mm 645 AF, which is one of the really great lenses of the 645D set-up, high quality, compact, fast, and sharp. I want to see that person who buys a 645D just to mount those huge and heavy 67 clunkers, when the 645 range is stacked fairly well with the 25mm DA, 35mm A and FA, 55mm D FA, 75mm A and FA, 90mm D FA, 120mm macro A and FA, 150mm FA, 200mm FA, 300mm ED in 4 and 5.6, 400mm ED in 5.6, and the 600mm ED. As I said, a few of them may make sense for specific purposes, but I am fairly confident that by in large most 645D users will stick with 645 lenses.

10-31-2013, 01:19 AM	#29
bull drinkwater Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: pontiac mi. Posts: 392	Originally posted by 672 I defend the 67 75mm AL as one of the best lenses period on a 645D. Also the 105. And they are both way way way lighter and smaller than the 90mm DFA, way smaller.......... I just picked up a 45-85 now that the prices have dropped to practically free on these lenses. So , I will shoot it directly against my beloved 55-100 and let you know what i find. They both weigh about the same. My copy of the 645 400mm 5.6 is a total dog up against the 67 400mm ed if. And since they both need at least one stop closed to be useful on the digital, the 645 becomes a very slow lens. Its hard to believe the 645 version is really ED at all. So much chromatic abberation. i am happy for everyones success with any of the lenses that fit the 645d, i am just speaking of my results and preferences.

10-31-2013, 01:21 AM	#30
bull drinkwater Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: pontiac mi. Posts: 392	Originally posted by 672 I defend the 67 75mm AL as one of the best lenses period on a 645D. Also the 105. And they are both way way way lighter and smaller than the 90mm DFA, way smaller.......... I just picked up a 45-85 now that the prices have dropped to practically free on these lenses. So , I will shoot it directly against my beloved 55-100 and let you know what i find. They both weigh about the same. My copy of the 645 400mm 5.6 is a total dog up against the 67 400mm ed if. And since they both need at least one stop closed to be useful on the digital, the 645 becomes a very slow lens. Its hard to believe the 645 version is really ED at all. So much chromatic abberation. i picked up both the 200mm fa and the 400mm fa and found both a joy to use.