What do you consider to be the sharpest Pentax 645/67 lens in your kit?

johnsey · 08-13-2014, 05:11 AM

I would go with my 165LS & 45mm for my 67. My recently acquired 75mmm and 120 macro for the 645 both are considered to be quite sharp, but I haven't got to test them out yet.

Ryan Tischer · 08-13-2014, 12:43 PM

Just a note to folks, don't confused the 67 45mm with the 645 45mm...as the 645 version is one of the weakest P645 lenses in most accounts...in fact, pretty much everyone has agreed that the 645 45-85mm zoom is sharper at 45mm than the prime. I've never tested the 67 45mm.

Jusuf · 08-13-2014, 03:45 PM

Hi

35A is an excellent lens shifted on the 5D II, so I assume it will resolve very nicely on the 645Z. Not so my copy of the FA 35.

In the close-up-range I found my 67 100/4.0 to have better contrast than the 645 120A. In the distance though, the 120 outresolves the 67 100.

My 67 55mm of the latest version wasn't that excellent in the corners when shifted by 20mm for stitched panos on the 5D II. And there were some pronounced CAs. But it does have excellent contrast.

The 645 FA 45-85 is a very nice lens but I had t go through three copies before I found one that did not have an issue with centering. The 67 55-100 is much like a FA 45-85 but without the issues of centering (and much heavier of course).

The FA 80-160 is excellent to appr. 135mm and seemed a little contrastier than the A-Version. Much better resolving lens than the 67 90-180 (at least my copies were, especially in the long range, the 67 90-180 suffers).

The 645 A 55mm, A 75, A 150 all resolve and handle excellent when stopped down a little. Like them a lot tilted/shifted.

The FA 200 from f5.6 onwards resolved much like my Canon 70-200 L IS USM but CAs were definately an issue wide open and in certain lighting conditions.

The FA 300/5.6 needs to be stopped to 6.3 or 8.0. Helps a lot, but contrast never reaches that of Canon L-teles. Similar with the FA 400 which as the FA 200 greatly suffers from CA wide open.

Pentax 67 105 is excellent from f4.

Pentax 67 45mm has corner issues (as mentioned by others) but should be just alright on a sensor of 44x33mm,

67 SMC (non-Takumar) 200/4.0 is not as sharp as the FA 200 and wide, ill-defined CAs are an issue with that otherwise brilliant lens (still great for film or black and white and a tad contrastier than the 165mm).

Summary:

My ideal kit will probably include A35, FA 45-85, FA 80-160, FA 200. Sometimes I might want to add the 25mm (which I do not own) or the FA 300/5.6

If I know I will need macro or a lens for portraiture in the kit, then I will replace the 80-160 by the 67 105, the 120A and the 150/3.5 A

My weight-saving do it all landscape kit would be 25mm, A35, FA 45-85, 67 105, 150/3.5 A and leave it to FF beyond the 150A

In any case/scenario, beyond 300mm, I will stick to Canon/Sony/Nikon FF and AF.

Future:

I am hoping for a mirrorless medium-format with a larger sensor (56mm wide) and a suitable tilt-adapter so I can put my 67 55-100 back to work as landscape-workhorse.

jonmarsh · 08-13-2014, 03:57 PM

Originally posted by Ed Hurst

The best performers in my experience are:
- 6x7 300mm f4 EDIF (film or digi)
- 6x7 75mm f2.8 AL (film or digi)
- 645 120mm A (only used it on digi)
- 645 35mm A (only used it on digi)
- 6x7 55mm f4 (final version) - especially when used on 6x7 film, but no slouch on 645D/Z

Many others are very good, but these are the standouts for me.

+1 on this selection, but toss in the 645 120mm FA, and you might well want to add the 645 150mm F2.8 FA.
I don't like the zoom lenses because of their performance limitations, but I find myself in many situation where the 645 45-85 FA is indispensable.

Thomasbrowphoto · 08-13-2014, 03:59 PM

Originally posted by Ryan Tischer

Just a note to folks, don't confused the 67 45mm with the 645 45mm...as the 645 version is one of the weakest P645 lenses in most accounts...in fact, pretty much everyone has agreed that the 645 45-85mm zoom is sharper at 45mm than the prime. I've never tested the 67 45mm.

Thats a good point, I have yet to try either of the 45mm options. I have read quite a lot that the 645 45mm is a poor lens so I have always stayed well clear of it. I have the 45-85mm & it is definitely a strong contender for a zoom.

greatgable · 08-16-2014, 04:48 AM

What are best, 67 or 645 lenses!
Looking to use on 5d3 with mirex tilt shift adaptor.
55mm 67 lens or 45 mm 645 similar to 28mm full frame.
Which is best?
Thank you!

---------- Post added 08-16-14 at 04:59 AM ----------

What's the 55like?

jonmarsh · 08-16-2014, 08:53 AM

I like the late model Pentax 67 55mm quite a bit- it's quite sharp across the field, handles nicely, only real "downside" is the size of the thing... but OTOH, it's impressive looking to the non gear literate. It had decent bokeh, too, in spite of not being a very bright lens, and works OK for close up portraits- a casual picture I took that way of my daughter and her fiancé is one of their favorites- it certainly does't have an iPhone look to it! It's a good walking about general purpose prime, being somewhat similar in FOM to a 31mm on ASP-C 35mm.

For situations requiring fast FOM flexibility, I do use the 645 45-85 mm - and as ThomasBrown surmises able, it is more than competitive with the 45mm prime. In a short prime, the 645 35mm is the lens of choice. I have bought far too many lenses on eBay, but at least the pricing there has enabled me to make a lot of direct comparisons in real shooting situations for myself.

Now, using the 55mm with a Mirex tilt-shift adapter on a Canon is an interesting/curious application- I have the Pentax 67 75mm shift lens, and a Hart-Blei shift/tilt also; the Pentax is better performing optically (resolution and CA). You must have an interesting application requirement to be going this way...

donesteban · 08-16-2014, 12:45 PM

One lens that didn't show up on the list yet is the 55 SDM kit lens of the 645D. What? Yes, it has a small weakness on the border of the 645D frame, needs to be stopped down quite well to be good there. BUT: If you combine it with a 2x converter, it changes . The converter is cutting away the border, magnifying the rest of the picture, and that part of the lens is extremely sharp. Many lenses become softer when using a converter. The 55mm isn't really, unless you use it completely open. So it might not be the sharpest lens on the border when used native, but it is certainly one of the sharpest lenses when used in combination with a 2x converter. That is really nice, as there is a gap in my lens setup, this combination is really covering. I use 35, 55, 75mm. And then the 300*, not the 200mm. For the 300mm, I need the 2x converter anyway. Not I have space for one more lens in my bag. The 120mm Macro? Not too far from the 75mm. But much too far from the 300mm. The 150/3.5? Small, light, very sharp, just close enough to the 300mm. But I hate the gap between 75 and 150mm, I frequently would like to use something between (much more than between 150 and 300mm). The 55 SDM is offering this, by using the 2x converter I anyway need for the 300*.

mikeSF · 08-16-2014, 01:59 PM

Originally posted by donesteban

One lens that didn't show up on the list yet is the 55 SDM kit lens of the 645D. ...

yeah, i had it on my list

Lacunapratum · 08-16-2014, 03:25 PM

Originally posted by mikeSF

yeah, i had it on my list

Just finished a comparison I wanted to do for a long time, which remains incomplete, but is nevertheless interesting for what it is and I thought I'd share the outcomes. These are mostly lenses that I have had in my personal possession for a long time, and that I always wanted to compare. Tests were shot on my 645D at 100ASA on a tripod and with mirror up, and images were taken at two F-stops, one fairly wide open, and another at F11.

150mm. I compared two FA versions and an adapted Zeiss/Rollei Sonnar. At F11, one of the 150mm FA lenses did best, better than the Sonnar, while at F4 the Sonnar faired better than the Pentax lenses, which much more beautiful bokeh. Nevertheless, the Pentax lenses had a nice soft touch to them, which made them equally attractive, at least for portraits.

120mm Macro. Tested two A versions and one FA version. One of the A versions did better than the other A and the FA at F4 and F11. The FA and the 2nd ranked A were about equal. Performance at F4 was almost on the same level as F11, and all three lenses outperformed the three 150mm lenses I tested.

75mm. Compared the 75mm FA and an adapted P67 AL. The P67 AL was simply much better than the 75mm FA. The 75mm FA was very soft at 2.8, while the P67 AL was already quite good wide open.

55mm. Contenders were an adapted P67 55mm/4, the A version 55mm/2.8, and the recent DFA 55mm/2.8. In the center, the 67 lens was slightly better than the other two at F11, while it was slightly worse than the other two lenses at F4. My copy of the DFA had remarkably even performance at F4 and F11, and at least in the center, the tiny 55mm A lens was a good match for the new DFA at F11, while the A was slightly inferior at F4. Corner performance of the P67 was top, closely followed by the 55mm DFA. In fact, at F11, both lenses performed at an equal level while at F4, the P67 was slightly better. The 55mm A came in as a distant third in terms of corner performance.

35mm. Perhaps my copy of the A is less than stellar and/or perhaps I have been lucky with my copies of the 35mm FA. In this test the FA clearly outperformed the A version at both F-stops and both in the center and in the corners, and I have been very happy with this version of the FA and a previous version that I sold at the end of the Pentax film days.

I'd be curious to see how the Pentax lenses stack up against some of the other Zeiss and Schneider lenses in my arsenal, but it'll take a while until I get to do another test. I am also not saying that this is the final word - others have published similar tests here, and differences in outcomes likely represent sample variation. Nevertheless, I was glad I found the time to verify lens performance in my own lens stable and thought I'd share the results for everyone's consideration.

bull drinkwater · 08-19-2014, 10:36 PM

I have 2 6x7's and 7 645's, I find them all so good that I don't concern myself with com paring them.

mikeSF · 08-20-2014, 11:45 AM

Originally posted by Thomasbrowphoto

Thats a good point, I have yet to try either of the 45mm options. I have read quite a lot that the 645 45mm is a poor lens so I have always stayed well clear of it. I have the 45-85mm & it is definitely a strong contender for a zoom.

poor lens, no I wouldn't call it that. The 25, 35, and 55 are a bit better, IMO, but I would not say the 45 is poor. It is on par with the A75, I'd say.
For the price, it is actually a good value, IMO.

here are a few pics I shot using the A45 on the 645D

https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeoria/9244126521/in/photostream/lightbox/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeoria/9167881575/in/photostream/lightbox/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeoria/9665606359/in/photostream/lightbox/

Thomasbrowphoto · 08-20-2014, 07:41 PM

Originally posted by mikeSF

poor lens, no I wouldn't call it that. The 25, 35, and 55 are a bit better, IMO, but I would not say the 45 is poor. It is on par with the A75, I'd say.
For the price, it is actually a good value, IMO.

here are a few pics I shot using the A45 on the 645D

https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeoria/9244126521/in/photostream/lightbox/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeoria/9167881575/in/photostream/lightbox/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeoria/9665606359/in/photostream/lightbox/

Well these images contradict what I have heard, these are great Mike. You have changed my thoughts on the lens. Thanks for Sharing.

Christian-NRW · 08-21-2014, 01:36 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Lacunapratum

75mm. Compared the 75mm FA and an adapted P67 AL. The P67 AL was simply much better than the 75mm FA. The 75mm FA was very soft at 2.8, while the P67 AL was already quite good wide open.

Thanks for this test, Lacunapratum. I do not own a digital MF camera, but a 645N system and a 67II system. Your results equal mine in those cases I own or owned the same lenses. Two things I'd like to contribute:

- mounted to the 645N, shot on Velvia 50 and scanned on a Screen Cezanne Elite with ~5000dpi confirmed, the 645 FA 75/2.8 and the 67 SMC 75/4.5 are very equal at f8 and f11. The P67 has a bit less contrast whereas the 645 FA suffered from greater CA. Resolution is practically the same, differences are nouances, in the center as well as on the edges of 6x4,5 frame.

- the P67 SMC 75/2.8 AL is the sharpest and most contrasty lens and probably in a league of its own in the P67 system.

I still need to get he latest version of the P67 55/4.0 which is not that rare but supposed to be very good as well to see if its more similar in performance to either my latest version of the P67 200/4.0 or my 75/2.8 AL. But having the P67 45mm it is not that urgent in terms of perspective opportunities.

harumo · 08-30-2014, 09:09 PM

Like most folks here, I agree, I think 120mm is the sharpest (in my system). I do like the quality of images I've good from from it.

Since I like to shoot wide open for that shallow DoF, I also like the fact that 150mm can go to F/2.8 ... now I wish 120mm could go that wide ...

note;
I have no fund for DFA 90mm - that is the new king in town so I've heard ...

08-13-2014, 03:45 PM	#18
Jusuf New Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 3	Hi 35A is an excellent lens shifted on the 5D II, so I assume it will resolve very nicely on the 645Z. Not so my copy of the FA 35. In the close-up-range I found my 67 100/4.0 to have better contrast than the 645 120A. In the distance though, the 120 outresolves the 67 100. My 67 55mm of the latest version wasn't that excellent in the corners when shifted by 20mm for stitched panos on the 5D II. And there were some pronounced CAs. But it does have excellent contrast. The 645 FA 45-85 is a very nice lens but I had t go through three copies before I found one that did not have an issue with centering. The 67 55-100 is much like a FA 45-85 but without the issues of centering (and much heavier of course). The FA 80-160 is excellent to appr. 135mm and seemed a little contrastier than the A-Version. Much better resolving lens than the 67 90-180 (at least my copies were, especially in the long range, the 67 90-180 suffers). The 645 A 55mm, A 75, A 150 all resolve and handle excellent when stopped down a little. Like them a lot tilted/shifted. The FA 200 from f5.6 onwards resolved much like my Canon 70-200 L IS USM but CAs were definately an issue wide open and in certain lighting conditions. The FA 300/5.6 needs to be stopped to 6.3 or 8.0. Helps a lot, but contrast never reaches that of Canon L-teles. Similar with the FA 400 which as the FA 200 greatly suffers from CA wide open. Pentax 67 105 is excellent from f4. Pentax 67 45mm has corner issues (as mentioned by others) but should be just alright on a sensor of 44x33mm, 67 SMC (non-Takumar) 200/4.0 is not as sharp as the FA 200 and wide, ill-defined CAs are an issue with that otherwise brilliant lens (still great for film or black and white and a tad contrastier than the 165mm). Summary: My ideal kit will probably include A35, FA 45-85, FA 80-160, FA 200. Sometimes I might want to add the 25mm (which I do not own) or the FA 300/5.6 If I know I will need macro or a lens for portraiture in the kit, then I will replace the 80-160 by the 67 105, the 120A and the 150/3.5 A My weight-saving do it all landscape kit would be 25mm, A35, FA 45-85, 67 105, 150/3.5 A and leave it to FF beyond the 150A In any case/scenario, beyond 300mm, I will stick to Canon/Sony/Nikon FF and AF. Future: I am hoping for a mirrorless medium-format with a larger sensor (56mm wide) and a suitable tilt-adapter so I can put my 67 55-100 back to work as landscape-workhorse. Last edited by Jusuf; 08-13-2014 at 10:47 PM.

08-16-2014, 03:25 PM	#25
Lacunapratum Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 164	Originally posted by mikeSF yeah, i had it on my list Just finished a comparison I wanted to do for a long time, which remains incomplete, but is nevertheless interesting for what it is and I thought I'd share the outcomes. These are mostly lenses that I have had in my personal possession for a long time, and that I always wanted to compare. Tests were shot on my 645D at 100ASA on a tripod and with mirror up, and images were taken at two F-stops, one fairly wide open, and another at F11. 150mm. I compared two FA versions and an adapted Zeiss/Rollei Sonnar. At F11, one of the 150mm FA lenses did best, better than the Sonnar, while at F4 the Sonnar faired better than the Pentax lenses, which much more beautiful bokeh. Nevertheless, the Pentax lenses had a nice soft touch to them, which made them equally attractive, at least for portraits. 120mm Macro. Tested two A versions and one FA version. One of the A versions did better than the other A and the FA at F4 and F11. The FA and the 2nd ranked A were about equal. Performance at F4 was almost on the same level as F11, and all three lenses outperformed the three 150mm lenses I tested. 75mm. Compared the 75mm FA and an adapted P67 AL. The P67 AL was simply much better than the 75mm FA. The 75mm FA was very soft at 2.8, while the P67 AL was already quite good wide open. 55mm. Contenders were an adapted P67 55mm/4, the A version 55mm/2.8, and the recent DFA 55mm/2.8. In the center, the 67 lens was slightly better than the other two at F11, while it was slightly worse than the other two lenses at F4. My copy of the DFA had remarkably even performance at F4 and F11, and at least in the center, the tiny 55mm A lens was a good match for the new DFA at F11, while the A was slightly inferior at F4. Corner performance of the P67 was top, closely followed by the 55mm DFA. In fact, at F11, both lenses performed at an equal level while at F4, the P67 was slightly better. The 55mm A came in as a distant third in terms of corner performance. 35mm. Perhaps my copy of the A is less than stellar and/or perhaps I have been lucky with my copies of the 35mm FA. In this test the FA clearly outperformed the A version at both F-stops and both in the center and in the corners, and I have been very happy with this version of the FA and a previous version that I sold at the end of the Pentax film days. I'd be curious to see how the Pentax lenses stack up against some of the other Zeiss and Schneider lenses in my arsenal, but it'll take a while until I get to do another test. I am also not saying that this is the final word - others have published similar tests here, and differences in outcomes likely represent sample variation. Nevertheless, I was glad I found the time to verify lens performance in my own lens stable and thought I'd share the results for everyone's consideration. Last edited by Lacunapratum; 08-16-2014 at 05:27 PM.

08-20-2014, 11:45 AM	#27
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,620	Originally posted by Thomasbrowphoto Thats a good point, I have yet to try either of the 45mm options. I have read quite a lot that the 645 45mm is a poor lens so I have always stayed well clear of it. I have the 45-85mm & it is definitely a strong contender for a zoom. poor lens, no I wouldn't call it that. The 25, 35, and 55 are a bit better, IMO, but I would not say the 45 is poor. It is on par with the A75, I'd say. For the price, it is actually a good value, IMO. here are a few pics I shot using the A45 on the 645D https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeoria/9244126521/in/photostream/lightbox/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeoria/9167881575/in/photostream/lightbox/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeoria/9665606359/in/photostream/lightbox/ Last edited by mikeSF; 08-20-2014 at 11:53 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
What are your most used lens and what do you use them for? What lens do you have that	pearsaab	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	55	01-26-2021 03:13 PM
Pentax 67 what is the silver catch nxt to the 120/220 selector do?	10speeduk	Pentax Medium Format	6	09-19-2013 06:45 AM
Misc Collections - If you don't know what to do with the space in your house	Rense	Post Your Photos!	3	01-09-2011 10:46 AM
What do you do for lens servicing , Pentax doesn't seem to be interested	seacapt	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	01-07-2009 07:35 PM
what do you use to clean your lens?	slip	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	17	05-25-2007 01:07 PM

08-13-2014, 05:11 AM	#16
johnsey Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Fargo, ND Posts: 113	I would go with my 165LS & 45mm for my 67. My recently acquired 75mmm and 120 macro for the 645 both are considered to be quite sharp, but I haven't got to test them out yet.

08-13-2014, 12:43 PM	#17
Ryan Tischer Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Duluth, Minnesota Photos: Albums Posts: 458	Just a note to folks, don't confused the 67 45mm with the 645 45mm...as the 645 version is one of the weakest P645 lenses in most accounts...in fact, pretty much everyone has agreed that the 645 45-85mm zoom is sharper at 45mm than the prime. I've never tested the 67 45mm.

08-13-2014, 03:57 PM	#19
jonmarsh Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 40	Originally posted by Ed Hurst The best performers in my experience are: - 6x7 300mm f4 EDIF (film or digi) - 6x7 75mm f2.8 AL (film or digi) - 645 120mm A (only used it on digi) - 645 35mm A (only used it on digi) - 6x7 55mm f4 (final version) - especially when used on 6x7 film, but no slouch on 645D/Z Many others are very good, but these are the standouts for me. +1 on this selection, but toss in the 645 120mm FA, and you might well want to add the 645 150mm F2.8 FA. I don't like the zoom lenses because of their performance limitations, but I find myself in many situation where the 645 45-85 FA is indispensable.

08-13-2014, 03:59 PM	#20
Thomasbrowphoto Veteran Member Join Date: May 2014 Location: NSW, Australia Posts: 335 Original Poster	Originally posted by Ryan Tischer Just a note to folks, don't confused the 67 45mm with the 645 45mm...as the 645 version is one of the weakest P645 lenses in most accounts...in fact, pretty much everyone has agreed that the 645 45-85mm zoom is sharper at 45mm than the prime. I've never tested the 67 45mm. Thats a good point, I have yet to try either of the 45mm options. I have read quite a lot that the 645 45mm is a poor lens so I have always stayed well clear of it. I have the 45-85mm & it is definitely a strong contender for a zoom.

08-16-2014, 04:48 AM	#21
greatgable New Member Join Date: Jul 2014 Posts: 10	What are best, 67 or 645 lenses! Looking to use on 5d3 with mirex tilt shift adaptor. 55mm 67 lens or 45 mm 645 similar to 28mm full frame. Which is best? Thank you! ---------- Post added 08-16-14 at 04:59 AM ---------- What's the 55like?

08-16-2014, 08:53 AM	#22
jonmarsh Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 40	I like the late model Pentax 67 55mm quite a bit- it's quite sharp across the field, handles nicely, only real "downside" is the size of the thing... but OTOH, it's impressive looking to the non gear literate. It had decent bokeh, too, in spite of not being a very bright lens, and works OK for close up portraits- a casual picture I took that way of my daughter and her fiancé is one of their favorites- it certainly does't have an iPhone look to it! It's a good walking about general purpose prime, being somewhat similar in FOM to a 31mm on ASP-C 35mm. For situations requiring fast FOM flexibility, I do use the 645 45-85 mm - and as ThomasBrown surmises able, it is more than competitive with the 45mm prime. In a short prime, the 645 35mm is the lens of choice. I have bought far too many lenses on eBay, but at least the pricing there has enabled me to make a lot of direct comparisons in real shooting situations for myself. Now, using the 55mm with a Mirex tilt-shift adapter on a Canon is an interesting/curious application- I have the Pentax 67 75mm shift lens, and a Hart-Blei shift/tilt also; the Pentax is better performing optically (resolution and CA). You must have an interesting application requirement to be going this way...

08-16-2014, 12:45 PM	#23
donesteban Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Posts: 124	One lens that didn't show up on the list yet is the 55 SDM kit lens of the 645D. What? Yes, it has a small weakness on the border of the 645D frame, needs to be stopped down quite well to be good there. BUT: If you combine it with a 2x converter, it changes . The converter is cutting away the border, magnifying the rest of the picture, and that part of the lens is extremely sharp. Many lenses become softer when using a converter. The 55mm isn't really, unless you use it completely open. So it might not be the sharpest lens on the border when used native, but it is certainly one of the sharpest lenses when used in combination with a 2x converter. That is really nice, as there is a gap in my lens setup, this combination is really covering. I use 35, 55, 75mm. And then the 300, not the 200mm. For the 300mm, I need the 2x converter anyway. Not I have space for one more lens in my bag. The 120mm Macro? Not too far from the 75mm. But much too far from the 300mm. The 150/3.5? Small, light, very sharp, just close enough to the 300mm. But I hate the gap between 75 and 150mm, I frequently would like to use something between (much more than between 150 and 300mm). The 55 SDM is offering this, by using the 2x converter I anyway need for the 300.

08-16-2014, 01:59 PM	#24
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,620	Originally posted by donesteban One lens that didn't show up on the list yet is the 55 SDM kit lens of the 645D. ... yeah, i had it on my list

08-19-2014, 10:36 PM	#26
bull drinkwater Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: pontiac mi. Posts: 392	I have 2 6x7's and 7 645's, I find them all so good that I don't concern myself with com paring them.

08-20-2014, 07:41 PM	#28
Thomasbrowphoto Veteran Member Join Date: May 2014 Location: NSW, Australia Posts: 335 Original Poster	Originally posted by mikeSF poor lens, no I wouldn't call it that. The 25, 35, and 55 are a bit better, IMO, but I would not say the 45 is poor. It is on par with the A75, I'd say. For the price, it is actually a good value, IMO. here are a few pics I shot using the A45 on the 645D https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeoria/9244126521/in/photostream/lightbox/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeoria/9167881575/in/photostream/lightbox/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeoria/9665606359/in/photostream/lightbox/ Well these images contradict what I have heard, these are great Mike. You have changed my thoughts on the lens. Thanks for Sharing.

08-21-2014, 01:36 AM - 1 Like	#29
Christian-NRW New Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Posts: 1	Originally posted by Lacunapratum 75mm. Compared the 75mm FA and an adapted P67 AL. The P67 AL was simply much better than the 75mm FA. The 75mm FA was very soft at 2.8, while the P67 AL was already quite good wide open. Thanks for this test, Lacunapratum. I do not own a digital MF camera, but a 645N system and a 67II system. Your results equal mine in those cases I own or owned the same lenses. Two things I'd like to contribute: - mounted to the 645N, shot on Velvia 50 and scanned on a Screen Cezanne Elite with ~5000dpi confirmed, the 645 FA 75/2.8 and the 67 SMC 75/4.5 are very equal at f8 and f11. The P67 has a bit less contrast whereas the 645 FA suffered from greater CA. Resolution is practically the same, differences are nouances, in the center as well as on the edges of 6x4,5 frame. - the P67 SMC 75/2.8 AL is the sharpest and most contrasty lens and probably in a league of its own in the P67 system. I still need to get he latest version of the P67 55/4.0 which is not that rare but supposed to be very good as well to see if its more similar in performance to either my latest version of the P67 200/4.0 or my 75/2.8 AL. But having the P67 45mm it is not that urgent in terms of perspective opportunities.

08-30-2014, 09:09 PM	#30
harumo Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2014 Location: South Bay, California Posts: 25	Like most folks here, I agree, I think 120mm is the sharpest (in my system). I do like the quality of images I've good from from it. Since I like to shoot wide open for that shallow DoF, I also like the fact that 150mm can go to F/2.8 ... now I wish 120mm could go that wide ... note; I have no fund for DFA 90mm - that is the new king in town so I've heard ...