Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-04-2015, 02:26 AM   #1
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 585
New 645 Zooms

Anybody have any news on when we might see either of the 2 new 645 zooms this year?

I am particularly keen on the Tele zoom hopefully a 90-180mm.

Scott

05-04-2015, 03:51 AM   #2
Loyal Site Supporter
unkipunki's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: South Lochaweside, Argyll
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 532
Me too, but 2015 or later seems to be the most detailed information available on this
05-04-2015, 07:20 AM   #3
Veteran Member
Kolor-Pikker's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 333
Medium format manufacturers release roughly 1 lens per year, so you can definitely expect something for 2015, and chances are it will be either a 45-80mm or 80-160mm refresh but with revised optics and SR. I wonder if they're going to end up as big as the 28-45.
05-05-2015, 02:28 AM   #4
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 585
Original Poster
Well I have the DFA90 and the FA150 and if I could replace them with one lens it would be great.

I would be ok with it being up to say 1200grams, a little heavier than the FA80-160 but if it went up to 180mm it would be good, with OS.

05-05-2015, 06:28 AM   #5
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 160
It seems that with 645 lenses Pentax seems to keep the ratio of short-to-long FL at 2x with zooms that I use and have seen. So if we do get a 180 then I dare say it will be 90 at the short end. That actually might not be bad and would fit nicely into many of our needs.
05-05-2015, 07:38 AM   #6
Veteran Member
Kolor-Pikker's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 333
QuoteOriginally posted by algrove Quote
It seems that with 645 lenses Pentax seems to keep the ratio of short-to-long FL at 2x with zooms that I use and have seen. So if we do get a 180 then I dare say it will be 90 at the short end. That actually might not be bad and would fit nicely into many of our needs.
It's anyone's guess, I think they'd be inclined to keep focal ranges contiguous, so that one starts off the another ends: 28-45-80-160, but I wouldn't be against a longer reach on the tele zoom. Canon and Nikon have long developed 3x zooms, and anyone will tell you how the EF 70-200 2.8 II is basically sharp as a prime at any focal length and aperture combination. If Pentax are even remotely as competent, they could well make an 80-200 or more.

Last edited by Kolor-Pikker; 05-05-2015 at 07:45 AM.
05-05-2015, 07:41 AM   #7
Loyal Site Supporter
unkipunki's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: South Lochaweside, Argyll
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 532
QuoteOriginally posted by Kolor-Pikker Quote
It's anyone's guess, I think they'd be inclined to keep focal ranges contiguous, so that one starts off the another ends: 28-45-80-160, but I wouldn't be against a longer reach on the tele zoom. Canon and Nikon have long developed 3x zooms, and anyone will tell you how the EF 70-200 2.8 II is basically sharp as a prime at any focal length and aperture combination. If Pentax are even remotely as competent, they could well make an 80-200 or more.
Looking at the hazy lines on the latest 645 lens roadmap it does imply that tele zoom will be other than 80-160. Or at least I inferred that from those lines. But as you you say it is anyone's guess at this point in time.
05-05-2015, 09:53 AM   #8
Pentaxian
aurele's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,906
QuoteOriginally posted by Kolor-Pikker Quote
Canon and Nikon have long developed 3x zooms, and anyone will tell you how the EF 70-200 2.8 II is basically sharp as a prime at any focal length and aperture combination.
Well the 35mm sensor size is smaller so i guess it's easier.
Keep in mind too, that in MF, people want really high end products so for that they will probably stay in the 2x range.

05-05-2015, 01:17 PM   #9
Veteran Member
Kolor-Pikker's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 333
QuoteOriginally posted by aurele Quote
Well the 35mm sensor size is smaller so i guess it's easier.
Indeed, that's why the Pentax zooms are only f/4.5 and not f/2.8, the size of the aperture has to be reduced proportionately. This is equalized somewhat by the higher light gathering power of the larger sensor and shallower depth of field.

QuoteQuote:
Keep in mind too, that in MF, people want really high end products so for that they will probably stay in the 2x range.
"High end" doesn't say anything about the function of the lens, Leica makes a 3x standard zoom for the S, although it's a variable aperture design. the most criticism it gets is that it isn't absolutely sharp in the corners. Also keep in mind that telephoto lenses are significantly easier to design than wide-angles.
05-08-2015, 07:57 AM   #10
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: throughout the US
Posts: 77
One thing is for sure, the new zooms will be very expensive. Not everyone will be able to justify or afford them, especially when many of us are getting outstanding results with 30-year-old A series zooms on the 645D/Z that we paid maybe $300 for.
05-08-2015, 11:31 AM - 1 Like   #11
Veteran Member
Kolor-Pikker's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 333
Not everyone will be able to afford them for sure, but the justifications are always there, like autofocus (compared to A glass), better sharpness wide open, shake reduction, weather sealing, better coatings and so on. This of course depends on what you want to do with the system, tripod shooters don't care about SR, but I'm ecstatic; some may not care about AF, but I only use AF except when 16x live view focusing on a tripod - not something I do often outside the studio.

If we compare with other MF systems rather than DSLRs, the 28-45 for instance is half the price of the competitors' wide zooms and has the benefit of being constant aperture and having SR. Constant aperture zooms are actually quite rare in medium format, the 28-45 could easily have been 25% lighter/smaller and also less expensive if it were f/3.5-5.6... again, something a landscape photographer would have been fine with, but I'm glad they went this route instead.

Last edited by Kolor-Pikker; 05-08-2015 at 12:04 PM.
05-08-2015, 01:21 PM   #12
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 585
Original Poster
In my view the way lenses are made for MF are all wrong.

The 28-45 should have been f5.6 and No OS for landscape tripod use. It should have been accompanied with a new light 35 f2.8 prime with OS for those who travel and want handheld.

Same goes for tele, a highly corrected 90-180 f5.6 no OS for tripod work, and a 120 or 150 f/2.8 OS for handheld travel work.

These focal lengths may need considering but you get the drift. 2 kits for 2 purposes. One for considered tripod work and one for light handheld travel work. Traveling with. 28mm and 90mm EQ system is enough for most uses for me.
05-09-2015, 02:35 AM   #13
Veteran Member
Kolor-Pikker's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 333
Unless someone at Pentax figures out how to stabilize the 645's massive sensor, I think that all new 645 lenses going forward will feature SR, unless it's an extreme design or very obviously wouldn't benefit from it, like a tilt-shift. Since these lenses already cost over $4k a piece, an extra $500 stabilizer component isn't as massive an investment as on a $500 zoom.

Personally, I would be quite happy to do all my travel photography with two moderately weighty zooms covering a wide-normal and telephoto range, since travel doesn't often leave you with enough time or knowledge of the environment to know where and how you can utilize just two fixed focal lengths optimally.

Meanwhile, if I'm lugging the tripod outside the studio, it means I usually have something specific to shoot in mind, and then I can take the lens(es) I know I'll use for sure, so I can afford to take primes and offset the weight of my tripod.

The fact that we disagree on this topic is one of the hurdles a company like Pentax has to consider when they choose what kind of users they want to please. Phase, Leica and Hasselblad already fill out other needs with their kits, so Pentax is focusing on the hand-held available light photographer - the enhanced ISO performance, SR, and lack of central shutters* proves this. It might not be what we want, but most of us are only here because of how affordable this system is, it's not like discontent is going to make us switch to Phase or anything.

*for now at least - fingers crossed
05-09-2015, 04:16 AM - 1 Like   #14
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 585
Original Poster
Hey I am all for the 28-45 and a new 90-180 and can handle the weight, I have the 28-45, 90, 150 and 300 f5.6.

But there is something liberating about using just 2 key focal lengths of light weight design on the D/Z that is great for travel or general handheld work.

I believe that Michael on Luminous Landscape wrote an article about a Phase One trip and he only took 28 and 90mm eq focal lengths and that was enough.

Anyway, I will be a happy camper if they do release the tele zoom firt rather than the mid zoom.
05-09-2015, 10:47 AM   #15
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 160
Frankly, I tend to agree. I have the 28-45 and 55 which I really like. So like said if a 90-180 modern lens came out that would be great. I have the 80-160, but would opt for a new lens with modern goodies like the 28-45 has. I would probably take a 3 lens kit since the 55 fills a nice middle gap, is small and is terrific for walk around use.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
645d, 645z, camera, equivalent, ff, format, lens, light, medium format, terms
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rumours when the new zooms come?? Shanti Pentax News and Rumors 91 01-03-2015 09:07 AM
Super Zooms vs normal zooms robert52 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 10-12-2014 07:29 PM
Zooming with your feet, will new zooms end that? VoiceOfReason Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 53 02-10-2014 06:17 PM
WR zooms vs IQ zooms being considered ChooseAName Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 10-22-2012 03:17 PM
Cheap old zooms or cheap new zooms better? okto Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 11-21-2006 02:49 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:43 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top