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

managger · 09-02-2014, 10:28 AM

Originally posted by harumo

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.

In my system too.

Originally posted by harumo

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

I have tested it for some time and I think it's sharper than any other Pentax 645 lens.

Hurricane Images · 09-02-2014, 09:47 PM - **2 Likes**

I'm new to the world of 645, but as a Nikon owner with a range of top glass, I'm astounded by the A 150mm f3/5 on my 645D. Images hold together at 200%, and I can count the umbrella spokes in the catchlight in an eye.

bull drinkwater · 09-11-2014, 12:22 AM

I love all my 645 lenses and the two 67 lenses I have. when I do my best they all deliver. maybe the 45-85mm is a tad better than the 45mm,"maybe", but the 45mm is faster and no way short on iq. the 45-85mm is heavy as hell. to me the 45mm fa,75mm fa, and the 200mm fa, are the best you could ask for.a 2.0x auto focusing tc and a 20mm fa would complete the package. as far as i'm concerned the rest are there just to fill in gaps.

GarethC7 · 09-11-2014, 05:59 AM

MIke

Great gallery of images, forgot why I was looking at them they were all so good!

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/

onaujee · 07-11-2015, 09:15 AM

I would say the P67 300*M... I hope to try the 90 DFA soon

gavincato · 07-13-2015, 04:23 AM

cool thread!

I haven't seen the 55/2.8 645z "kit" lens mentioned - my copy is outrageously sharp at f/11-16. Not sure if I got a great copy but it blows me away on a well focussed shot - even at 2.8 it pulls in massive detail.

With my other lenses, the 35 A is incredible stopped down. I don't have much to compare it to but it whips the pants off the latest and greatest from Canon.

The 120mm macro pulls in so much detail that it's actually proving to be a bit of a nightmare with wedding ring shots. It pulls up every dirt and scratch...

algrove · 07-13-2015, 06:49 AM

You need to bring along a small ultrasonic ring cleaning machine.

Agree with you on the 55/2.8 and the A35. Do not own the 120.

Kolor-Pikker · 07-13-2015, 09:10 AM

Originally posted by gavincato

cool thread!

I haven't seen the 55/2.8 645z "kit" lens mentioned - my copy is outrageously sharp at f/11-16. Not sure if I got a great copy but it blows me away on a well focussed shot - even at 2.8 it pulls in massive detail.

With my other lenses, the 35 A is incredible stopped down. I don't have much to compare it to but it whips the pants off the latest and greatest from Canon.

The 120mm macro pulls in so much detail that it's actually proving to be a bit of a nightmare with wedding ring shots. It pulls up every dirt and scratch...

I also got lucky on the 55mm, super-sharp from wide open and the corners are great too, you can only make out some softness on a chart.

The 120mm though, it's much worse than the 150/2.8, which leads me to believe I got a bad copy. Even at f/8 my 150 has superior corner detail, but at f/4 the macro is just a joke. Neither of them come close to the sharpness of that Zeiss 110/2 lens though, even with them having a smaller apertures.

Unfortunately, I need to have a macro lens in my studio at all times, so unless I decide to get another 120M or jump for the 90M, it's not going anywhere. Luckily it's "good enough" for the generic workload I use it for.

gavincato · 07-13-2015, 08:42 PM

Quote:

The 120mm though, it's much worse than the 150/2.8, which leads me to believe I got a bad copy. Even at f/8 my 150 has superior corner detail, but at f/4 the macro is just a joke. Neither of them come close to the sharpness of that Zeiss 110/2 lens though, even with them having a smaller apertures.

Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/48-pentax-medium-format/270134-what-do-yo...#ixzz3fpkoqxdD

definitely a dud copy. as good as my 110mm zeiss is, it is maybe 20-30% as sharp as my 120mm macro. That lens is absurdly sharp. It's almost ridiculous.

Paul MaudDib · 07-15-2015, 06:43 PM

SMCP-67 55/4 (late) and SMCT-67 75/4.5. SMCT-67 105/2.4 isn't razor sharp in the corners wide open (f/2.4 is very fast!) but it's certainly very usable. I just snagged a P67 EDIF 400/4 which I'm suspecting will take the cake at the long end.

Really I've got nothing to complain about with any of my P67 lenses. The lenses I didn't mention were the 90/2.8 LS and 150/2.8 - both of them are still good performers, just not exceptional. I briefly owned a 45/4, and rate it as either good or excellent (I'm guessing excellent) but I didn't shoot it all that extensively. Superwides aren't really my thing.

Silent Street · 07-15-2015, 09:33 PM

In the landscape genre, the 45mm f4 is my go-to lens 90% of the time even though an equal-fancied 75mm f2.8 AL jostles for stage exposure. Huge prints produced with this light and nimble lens are exemplary in sharpness (f11 working Av), contrast and fidelity. Though a number of excellent prints were produced from it, I tossed my 55mm f4 more than 2 years ago because of its weight, bulk and unwieldly feel to it.

Primus · 07-16-2015, 03:56 AM

Originally posted by Silent Street

In the landscape genre, the 45mm f4 is my go-to lens 90% of the time even though an equal-fancied 75mm f2.8 AL jostles for stage exposure. Huge prints produced with this light and nimble lens are exemplary in sharpness (f11 working Av), contrast and fidelity. Though a number of excellent prints were produced from it, I tossed my 55mm f4 more than 2 years ago because of its weight, bulk and unwieldly feel to it.

You mean the 67 version, right? Have you tried it with the adapter on the 645Z? If so, is it better than the 45-85 at 45mm?

Pradeep

destroya · 07-16-2015, 10:05 AM

Originally posted by Paul MaudDib

SMCP-67 55/4 (late) and SMCT-67 75/4.5. SMCT-67 105/2.4 isn't razor sharp in the corners wide open (f/2.4 is very fast!) but it's certainly very usable. .......

I'll second these lenses. Except that my 105. I find that stopped down to f4 or 5.6 my copy is very sharp. Also, the latest 200mm smc is very sharp as well. I find that 80% of my photos are taken with the 55mm and the 105mm lenses

Hart-Worx · 07-16-2015, 12:46 PM

90mm D-FA 55mm D-FA .. .. and my 28-45 is insanely Sharp ..

Primus · 07-16-2015, 01:36 PM

Since everybody is praising the 120 f4 Macro so much, it seems that mine must be a soft copy. I compared it to my FA 150 2.8 and the FA 75 2.8 and even stopped down to f8 or f11, the other two are sharper, especially in the corners. That 75 is really good. I bought the 120 macro used from KEH, all the others from various ebay sources in Japan. My FA 45-85 and the DFA 55 are superb.

Would it be worth trying out another copy of the 120 Macro? Is it really that good?

Pradeep

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

09-02-2014, 10:28 AM	#31
managger Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Moscow Photos: Gallery Posts: 56	Originally posted by harumo 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. In my system too. Originally posted by harumo I have no fund for DFA 90mm - that is the new king in town so I've heard ... I have tested it for some time and I think it's sharper than any other Pentax 645 lens.

09-02-2014, 09:47 PM - 2 Likes	#32
Hurricane Images New Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 1	I'm new to the world of 645, but as a Nikon owner with a range of top glass, I'm astounded by the A 150mm f3/5 on my 645D. Images hold together at 200%, and I can count the umbrella spokes in the catchlight in an eye.

09-11-2014, 12:22 AM	#33
bull drinkwater Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: pontiac mi. Posts: 392	I love all my 645 lenses and the two 67 lenses I have. when I do my best they all deliver. maybe the 45-85mm is a tad better than the 45mm,"maybe", but the 45mm is faster and no way short on iq. the 45-85mm is heavy as hell. to me the 45mm fa,75mm fa, and the 200mm fa, are the best you could ask for.a 2.0x auto focusing tc and a 20mm fa would complete the package. as far as i'm concerned the rest are there just to fill in gaps.

09-11-2014, 05:59 AM	#34
GarethC7 Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 139	MIke Great gallery of images, forgot why I was looking at them they were all so good! 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/

07-11-2015, 09:15 AM	#35
onaujee New Member Join Date: Jul 2015 Posts: 7	I would say the P67 300*M... I hope to try the 90 DFA soon

07-13-2015, 04:23 AM	#36
gavincato Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: NSW, Australia Posts: 247	cool thread! I haven't seen the 55/2.8 645z "kit" lens mentioned - my copy is outrageously sharp at f/11-16. Not sure if I got a great copy but it blows me away on a well focussed shot - even at 2.8 it pulls in massive detail. With my other lenses, the 35 A is incredible stopped down. I don't have much to compare it to but it whips the pants off the latest and greatest from Canon. The 120mm macro pulls in so much detail that it's actually proving to be a bit of a nightmare with wedding ring shots. It pulls up every dirt and scratch...

07-13-2015, 06:49 AM	#37
algrove Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 160	You need to bring along a small ultrasonic ring cleaning machine. Agree with you on the 55/2.8 and the A35. Do not own the 120.

07-13-2015, 09:10 AM	#38
Kolor-Pikker Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2014 Posts: 345	Originally posted by gavincato cool thread! I haven't seen the 55/2.8 645z "kit" lens mentioned - my copy is outrageously sharp at f/11-16. Not sure if I got a great copy but it blows me away on a well focussed shot - even at 2.8 it pulls in massive detail. With my other lenses, the 35 A is incredible stopped down. I don't have much to compare it to but it whips the pants off the latest and greatest from Canon. The 120mm macro pulls in so much detail that it's actually proving to be a bit of a nightmare with wedding ring shots. It pulls up every dirt and scratch... I also got lucky on the 55mm, super-sharp from wide open and the corners are great too, you can only make out some softness on a chart. The 120mm though, it's much worse than the 150/2.8, which leads me to believe I got a bad copy. Even at f/8 my 150 has superior corner detail, but at f/4 the macro is just a joke. Neither of them come close to the sharpness of that Zeiss 110/2 lens though, even with them having a smaller apertures. Unfortunately, I need to have a macro lens in my studio at all times, so unless I decide to get another 120M or jump for the 90M, it's not going anywhere. Luckily it's "good enough" for the generic workload I use it for.

07-13-2015, 08:42 PM	#39
gavincato Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: NSW, Australia Posts: 247	Quote: The 120mm though, it's much worse than the 150/2.8, which leads me to believe I got a bad copy. Even at f/8 my 150 has superior corner detail, but at f/4 the macro is just a joke. Neither of them come close to the sharpness of that Zeiss 110/2 lens though, even with them having a smaller apertures. Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/48-pentax-medium-format/270134-what-do-yo...#ixzz3fpkoqxdD definitely a dud copy. as good as my 110mm zeiss is, it is maybe 20-30% as sharp as my 120mm macro. That lens is absurdly sharp. It's almost ridiculous.

07-15-2015, 06:43 PM	#40
Paul MaudDib Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Michigan Posts: 294	SMCP-67 55/4 (late) and SMCT-67 75/4.5. SMCT-67 105/2.4 isn't razor sharp in the corners wide open (f/2.4 is very fast!) but it's certainly very usable. I just snagged a P67 EDIF 400/4 which I'm suspecting will take the cake at the long end. Really I've got nothing to complain about with any of my P67 lenses. The lenses I didn't mention were the 90/2.8 LS and 150/2.8 - both of them are still good performers, just not exceptional. I briefly owned a 45/4, and rate it as either good or excellent (I'm guessing excellent) but I didn't shoot it all that extensively. Superwides aren't really my thing.

07-15-2015, 09:33 PM	#41
Silent Street Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Castlemaine, Victoria, AUS Photos: Albums Posts: 1,151	In the landscape genre, the 45mm f4 is my go-to lens 90% of the time even though an equal-fancied 75mm f2.8 AL jostles for stage exposure. Huge prints produced with this light and nimble lens are exemplary in sharpness (f11 working Av), contrast and fidelity. Though a number of excellent prints were produced from it, I tossed my 55mm f4 more than 2 years ago because of its weight, bulk and unwieldly feel to it.

07-16-2015, 03:56 AM	#42
Primus Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 39	Originally posted by Silent Street In the landscape genre, the 45mm f4 is my go-to lens 90% of the time even though an equal-fancied 75mm f2.8 AL jostles for stage exposure. Huge prints produced with this light and nimble lens are exemplary in sharpness (f11 working Av), contrast and fidelity. Though a number of excellent prints were produced from it, I tossed my 55mm f4 more than 2 years ago because of its weight, bulk and unwieldly feel to it. You mean the 67 version, right? Have you tried it with the adapter on the 645Z? If so, is it better than the 45-85 at 45mm? Pradeep

07-16-2015, 10:05 AM	#43
destroya Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Los Altos CA Posts: 44	Originally posted by Paul MaudDib SMCP-67 55/4 (late) and SMCT-67 75/4.5. SMCT-67 105/2.4 isn't razor sharp in the corners wide open (f/2.4 is very fast!) but it's certainly very usable. ....... I'll second these lenses. Except that my 105. I find that stopped down to f4 or 5.6 my copy is very sharp. Also, the latest 200mm smc is very sharp as well. I find that 80% of my photos are taken with the 55mm and the 105mm lenses

07-16-2015, 12:46 PM	#44
Hart-Worx Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2014 Location: Düsseldorf Posts: 32	90mm D-FA 55mm D-FA .. .. and my 28-45 is insanely Sharp ..

07-16-2015, 01:36 PM	#45
Primus Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 39	Since everybody is praising the 120 f4 Macro so much, it seems that mine must be a soft copy. I compared it to my FA 150 2.8 and the FA 75 2.8 and even stopped down to f8 or f11, the other two are sharper, especially in the corners. That 75 is really good. I bought the 120 macro used from KEH, all the others from various ebay sources in Japan. My FA 45-85 and the DFA 55 are superb. Would it be worth trying out another copy of the 120 Macro? Is it really that good? Pradeep