Getting a 300mm

gavincato · 01-05-2016, 08:10 PM

Hey guys

On a 645z, looking to get a 300mm. This is for people/animal shooting. Bokeh is important. Before anyone suggests using the 150mm like a normal person, I already am. I like a more longer compressed look for certain shots.

Any opinions on whether I should get the 645 version of the 300mm or the 67 version?

I don't mind about manual focus. If the 67 lens is better, i'm up for using it.

cheers

Lacunapratum · 01-05-2016, 08:22 PM

Both are great. The 67 is sharp from F4 while and over the entire field while the 645 gets significantly better at F5.6, especially in the corners. I'd still recommend the 300mm 645 lens for portraits, especially at F4. Sharp but not too sharp, wonderful bokeh, and the autofocus comes in handy. Sort-of like those old 180mm/2.8 ED Nikkors, but one class better.

Thomas · 01-05-2016, 08:30 PM - **1 Like**

The 67 300mm M* is excellent and very sharp even at f/4, but DOF is very shallow. I have no experience with either of the 645 versions, but I do have the 645 150-300 and, based on my tests, at f/8 it's competitive with the 67 300mm. The 300 wins in the bokeh catergory, but it's big and heavy. An example:

Tom

**Ed Hurst** · 01-06-2016, 12:09 AM

Bokeh will vary across different 300mm lenses, but the actual DOF should be the same.

If size is no object, you will not do better than the 6x7 300mm f4 EDIF (not to be confused with the earlier f4 non-EDIF). Just a superb lens!

Thomas · 01-06-2016, 06:17 AM

Hi Ed:

To clarify my ambiguous post: The 300mm M* is very sharp even at f/4, but the DOF is so shallow at f/4, that it can be a problem to get everything desired in focus, as I'm sure you know. Since I generally use f/8-f/16, I find myself using the 150-300mm rather than the 300mm unless I want the bokeh of that lens. I suspect The 300mm would be great for some wedding shots with creamy OOF backgrounds, but perhaps the 645 300mmm would be more suitable as Lacunapratum suggests.

Tom

btnapa · 01-06-2016, 07:34 AM

Originally posted by Thomas

The 67 300mm M* is excellent and very sharp even at f/4, but DOF is very shallow. I have no experience with either of the 645 versions, but I do have the 645 150-300 and, based on my tests, at f/8 it's competitive with the 67 300mm. The 300 wins in the bokeh catergory, but it's big and heavy. An example:

Tom

Hi Thomas,

I am glad this post came up. There is a great likelihood (after a visit to Ricoh's CES booth in Vegas today) I may pull the trigger on a 645Z purchase. I already own three lenses (A120 Macro, FA45-85, FA 200). The next lens will be something longer and possible the 35mm as well. I have been looking for user feedback and reviews on the 150-300. Could you post some pics or elaborate more on this lens. My work involves landscapes and still life which is F11 and up territory.

The reviews are almost not existent for this lens. Any feedback would be appreciated.

Theov39 · 01-06-2016, 11:18 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Thomas

The 67 300mm M* is excellent and very sharp even at f/4, but DOF is very shallow. I have no experience with either of the 645 versions, but I do have the 645 150-300 and, based on my tests, at f/8 it's competitive with the 67 300mm. The 300 wins in the bokeh catergory, but it's big and heavy. An example:

Tom

Great photo! very evocative of the melancholy of a rainy day....

Thomas · 01-06-2016, 07:32 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by btnapa

Hi Thomas,

I am glad this post came up. There is a great likelihood (after a visit to Ricoh's CES booth in Vegas today) I may pull the trigger on a 645Z purchase. I already own three lenses (A120 Macro, FA45-85, FA 200). The next lens will be something longer and possible the 35mm as well. I have been looking for user feedback and reviews on the 150-300. Could you post some pics or elaborate more on this lens. My work involves landscapes and still life which is F11 and up territory.

The reviews are almost not existent for this lens. Any feedback would be appreciated.

I seem to have exceeded my storage here, so I was unable to load my test shots. I compared the 150-300 to the 150mm FA, 200mm FA and the 67 300mm M*. Based on this single test at f/11, I decided the zoom gave up little to the other lenses. The lens is very light and easy to carry, so I don't hesitate to use it rather than the others; it is slower, but at f/11 that point is moot. My experience with this lens is more favorable than some of the reviews I have read. Take a chance. You can always resell if not happy

Lacunapratum · 01-06-2016, 07:37 PM

I like mine too and find it sharp as well. However, the 645 300mm/4 FA does very well for portraits at f/4. Once you stop down you somewhat loose the medium format advantage.

mikeSF · 01-06-2016, 09:05 PM

I have the 67 M* version and I can't say enough good about it. A wonderful lens all around.

gavincato · 01-06-2016, 10:10 PM

So what I'm getting here is the 67 version is better, but not as easy/convenient/light to use as the 645 300mm version?

If thats the case the 67 version will do - remember you are talking to this crazy idiot who uses a 645z at a wedding with a zeiss 110mm f/2 lens and a full set of canon lenses at the same time. Doing things the hard way is me

**gofour3** · 01-06-2016, 10:23 PM

Originally posted by gavincato

So what I'm getting here is the 67 version is better, but not as easy/convenient/light to use as the 645 300mm version?

If thats the case the 67 version will do - remember you are talking to this crazy idiot who uses a 645z at a wedding with a zeiss 110mm f/2 lens and a full set of canon lenses at the same time. Doing things the hard way is me

You want this version of the 67 300/4:

SMC Pentax-M* 67 300mm F4 ED [IF] Reviews - 67 Telephoto Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

The older 6x7 Takumar and 67 300/4 is missing a tripod mount and not that good:

SMC Pentax 67 / SMC Takumar / Super Takumar 6x7 300mm F4 Reviews - 67 Telephoto Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

Phil.

**yurihuta** · 01-07-2016, 07:56 AM

If you don't mind carrying around some extra mass, take a look at this 67 M* 400mm f/4

SMC Pentax-M* 67 400mm F4 ED [IF] Reviews - 67 Telephoto Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

Obviously longer than the 67 M* 300mm f/4

I've found my copy to be beautifully sharp and crispy (nice contrast). I think surftodog (member here) is selling one for a similar price to a mint copy of the 67 M* 300mm would cost. Just a thought...

Originally posted by gavincato

Hey guys

On a 645z, looking to get a 300mm. This is for people/animal shooting. Bokeh is important. Before anyone suggests using the 150mm like a normal person, I already am. I like a more longer compressed look for certain shots.

Any opinions on whether I should get the 645 version of the 300mm or the 67 version?

I don't mind about manual focus. If the 67 lens is better, i'm up for using it.

cheers

desertscape · 01-07-2016, 11:33 AM - **1 Like**

Another vote for the 67 300 M*. A great performer. From an optical design perspective, I have always liked the 400 M* and 300 M* over the 645 ED version. Both the 400 M* and 300 M* use nearly the same cross section with a 3 element rear group behind the diaphragm. The 645 300 appears to be an older design using a single negative field flattener behind the diaphragm.

gavincato · 01-07-2016, 02:20 PM

cheers guys really appreciate all the info

01-05-2016, 08:10 PM	#1
gavincato Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: NSW, Australia Posts: 247	Getting a 300mm Hey guys On a 645z, looking to get a 300mm. This is for people/animal shooting. Bokeh is important. Before anyone suggests using the 150mm like a normal person, I already am. I like a more longer compressed look for certain shots. Any opinions on whether I should get the 645 version of the 300mm or the 67 version? I don't mind about manual focus. If the 67 lens is better, i'm up for using it. cheers

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Getting a K50	anniam	Pentax K-30 & K-50	15	04-10-2015 04:34 AM
FA* 300mm 4.5 VS A* 645 300mm f4	Halco	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	12	02-22-2015 05:55 PM
Kansas Rep. Pete DeGraaf: Getting pregnant from rape is just like getting a flat tire	deadwolfbones	General Talk	15	06-02-2011 09:15 AM
DA 55-300mm, Worth Getting Fixed?	geezer52	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	02-14-2011 06:04 PM
Getting to 300mm and Beyond....	dbpdbp	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	12-17-2006 01:20 AM

01-05-2016, 08:22 PM	#2
Lacunapratum Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 164	Both are great. The 67 is sharp from F4 while and over the entire field while the 645 gets significantly better at F5.6, especially in the corners. I'd still recommend the 300mm 645 lens for portraits, especially at F4. Sharp but not too sharp, wonderful bokeh, and the autofocus comes in handy. Sort-of like those old 180mm/2.8 ED Nikkors, but one class better.

01-05-2016, 08:30 PM - 1 Like	#3
Thomas Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 434	The 67 300mm M* is excellent and very sharp even at f/4, but DOF is very shallow. I have no experience with either of the 645 versions, but I do have the 645 150-300 and, based on my tests, at f/8 it's competitive with the 67 300mm. The 300 wins in the bokeh catergory, but it's big and heavy. An example: Tom

01-06-2016, 12:09 AM	#4
Ed Hurst Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Posts: 1,657	Bokeh will vary across different 300mm lenses, but the actual DOF should be the same. If size is no object, you will not do better than the 6x7 300mm f4 EDIF (not to be confused with the earlier f4 non-EDIF). Just a superb lens!

01-06-2016, 06:17 AM	#5
Thomas Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 434	Hi Ed: To clarify my ambiguous post: The 300mm M* is very sharp even at f/4, but the DOF is so shallow at f/4, that it can be a problem to get everything desired in focus, as I'm sure you know. Since I generally use f/8-f/16, I find myself using the 150-300mm rather than the 300mm unless I want the bokeh of that lens. I suspect The 300mm would be great for some wedding shots with creamy OOF backgrounds, but perhaps the 645 300mmm would be more suitable as Lacunapratum suggests. Tom

01-06-2016, 07:34 AM	#6
btnapa Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 1,621	Originally posted by Thomas The 67 300mm M* is excellent and very sharp even at f/4, but DOF is very shallow. I have no experience with either of the 645 versions, but I do have the 645 150-300 and, based on my tests, at f/8 it's competitive with the 67 300mm. The 300 wins in the bokeh catergory, but it's big and heavy. An example: Tom Hi Thomas, I am glad this post came up. There is a great likelihood (after a visit to Ricoh's CES booth in Vegas today) I may pull the trigger on a 645Z purchase. I already own three lenses (A120 Macro, FA45-85, FA 200). The next lens will be something longer and possible the 35mm as well. I have been looking for user feedback and reviews on the 150-300. Could you post some pics or elaborate more on this lens. My work involves landscapes and still life which is F11 and up territory. The reviews are almost not existent for this lens. Any feedback would be appreciated.

01-06-2016, 11:18 AM - 1 Like	#7
Theov39 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2015 Location: Sydney Posts: 594	Originally posted by Thomas The 67 300mm M* is excellent and very sharp even at f/4, but DOF is very shallow. I have no experience with either of the 645 versions, but I do have the 645 150-300 and, based on my tests, at f/8 it's competitive with the 67 300mm. The 300 wins in the bokeh catergory, but it's big and heavy. An example: Tom Great photo! very evocative of the melancholy of a rainy day....

01-06-2016, 07:32 PM - 1 Like	#8
Thomas Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 434	Originally posted by btnapa Hi Thomas, I am glad this post came up. There is a great likelihood (after a visit to Ricoh's CES booth in Vegas today) I may pull the trigger on a 645Z purchase. I already own three lenses (A120 Macro, FA45-85, FA 200). The next lens will be something longer and possible the 35mm as well. I have been looking for user feedback and reviews on the 150-300. Could you post some pics or elaborate more on this lens. My work involves landscapes and still life which is F11 and up territory. The reviews are almost not existent for this lens. Any feedback would be appreciated. I seem to have exceeded my storage here, so I was unable to load my test shots. I compared the 150-300 to the 150mm FA, 200mm FA and the 67 300mm M*. Based on this single test at f/11, I decided the zoom gave up little to the other lenses. The lens is very light and easy to carry, so I don't hesitate to use it rather than the others; it is slower, but at f/11 that point is moot. My experience with this lens is more favorable than some of the reviews I have read. Take a chance. You can always resell if not happy

01-06-2016, 07:37 PM	#9
Lacunapratum Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 164	I like mine too and find it sharp as well. However, the 645 300mm/4 FA does very well for portraits at f/4. Once you stop down you somewhat loose the medium format advantage.

01-06-2016, 09:05 PM	#10
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,622	I have the 67 M* version and I can't say enough good about it. A wonderful lens all around.

01-06-2016, 10:10 PM	#11
gavincato Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: NSW, Australia Posts: 247 Original Poster	So what I'm getting here is the 67 version is better, but not as easy/convenient/light to use as the 645 300mm version? If thats the case the 67 version will do - remember you are talking to this crazy idiot who uses a 645z at a wedding with a zeiss 110mm f/2 lens and a full set of canon lenses at the same time. Doing things the hard way is me

01-06-2016, 10:23 PM	#12
gofour3 Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 8,092	Originally posted by gavincato So what I'm getting here is the 67 version is better, but not as easy/convenient/light to use as the 645 300mm version? If thats the case the 67 version will do - remember you are talking to this crazy idiot who uses a 645z at a wedding with a zeiss 110mm f/2 lens and a full set of canon lenses at the same time. Doing things the hard way is me You want this version of the 67 300/4: SMC Pentax-M* 67 300mm F4 ED [IF] Reviews - 67 Telephoto Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database The older 6x7 Takumar and 67 300/4 is missing a tripod mount and not that good: SMC Pentax 67 / SMC Takumar / Super Takumar 6x7 300mm F4 Reviews - 67 Telephoto Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database Phil.

01-07-2016, 07:56 AM	#13
yurihuta Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Washington DC, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 632	If you don't mind carrying around some extra mass, take a look at this 67 M* 400mm f/4 SMC Pentax-M* 67 400mm F4 ED [IF] Reviews - 67 Telephoto Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database Obviously longer than the 67 M* 300mm f/4 I've found my copy to be beautifully sharp and crispy (nice contrast). I think surftodog (member here) is selling one for a similar price to a mint copy of the 67 M* 300mm would cost. Just a thought... Originally posted by gavincato Hey guys On a 645z, looking to get a 300mm. This is for people/animal shooting. Bokeh is important. Before anyone suggests using the 150mm like a normal person, I already am. I like a more longer compressed look for certain shots. Any opinions on whether I should get the 645 version of the 300mm or the 67 version? I don't mind about manual focus. If the 67 lens is better, i'm up for using it. cheers

01-07-2016, 11:33 AM - 1 Like	#14
desertscape Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Arizona Posts: 1,272	Another vote for the 67 300 M. A great performer. From an optical design perspective, I have always liked the 400 M and 300 M* over the 645 ED version. Both the 400 M* and 300 M* use nearly the same cross section with a 3 element rear group behind the diaphragm. The 645 300 appears to be an older design using a single negative field flattener behind the diaphragm.

01-07-2016, 02:20 PM	#15
gavincato Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: NSW, Australia Posts: 247 Original Poster	cheers guys really appreciate all the info