[marcusyoung]

Just posting a question here, if anyone could help?

Can A200 f4 macro(pentax full frame) be used on the 645Z? I know there is an adapter for 645 lens to k mount but not the other way.

Desertscape, I am sure you have an answer to the above.

I do have the A200 macro lens only if I am able to use it on 645Z to capitalise on the beautiful bokeh.

Thank you,

marcus

[Adam]

It wouldn't cover the full image circle, so not much of a point. Grab the 120mm F4 for the 645

[marcusyoung]

It wouldn't cover the full image circle, so not much of a point. Grab the 120mm F4 for the 645

tks, Adam. I already have the 120 f4.


marcus

[Simen1]

I'm not sure how much of the image circle it would cover, but I suspect the image circle are 35mm full frame at infinity focus and increases when focusing closer.

However, there is another problem: focal flange distance. Even if you can make it fit on the 645Z you would loose infinity focus and a lot of far focus. Making it a macro only lens. I don't know how much the magnification will vary when focusing but i would expect about 2x to 0,5x (very coarse guess). You would also loose a stop or two of light due to the extension of the light cone. Various aberrations may increase a lot since its not optimized for the longer focal flange distance.

[seventhdr]

Just posting a question here, if anyone could help?

Can A200 f4 macro(pentax full frame) be used on the 645Z? I know there is an adapter for 645 lens to k mount but not the other way.

Desertscape, I am sure you have an answer to the above.

I do have the A200 macro lens only if I am able to use it on 645Z to capitalise on the beautiful bokeh.

Thank you,

marcus

Quick Answer - NO. The registration distance, i think that is the distance from the focal point of the lens to the film/sensor plane, is shorter for 35mm lenses than for 645 lenses. This lens mount fr a 35mm lens would need to be INSIDE the mount on the 645 camera. This would clash with the mirror. So no can do!!!

Regards

Chris

[Medex]

Quick Answer - NO. The registration distance, i think that is the distance from the focal point of the lens to the film/sensor plane, is shorter for 35mm lenses than for 645 lenses. This lens mount fr a 35mm lens would need to be INSIDE the mount on the 645 camera. This would clash with the mirror. So no can do!!!

Regards

Chris

I agree with you. FFD for Pentaz 645z is 70,87 mm, FFD for Pentax crop and FF camera - 45,46 mm. Theoretically the possibility to use A200 f4 on 645z is only with additional optical adapter. Practically there is no possibility.

[Simen1]

Think of 645z longer focal flange distance as a built in macro extension tube. It is theoretically possible to use without an optical adapter. But as mentioned it will loose far focusing capability, light and some aberration resistance. I doubt there exists any adapter for this so you will need to build the adapter yourself or make a one-off order from a mechanical shop.

An optical adapter is only required if you want to preserve far focusing capability.

[Medex]

Think of 645z longer focal flange distance as a built in macro extension tube. It is theoretically possible to use without an optical adapter. But as mentioned it will loose far focusing capability, light and some aberration resistance. I doubt there exists any adapter for this so you will need to build the adapter yourself or make a one-off order from a mechanical shop.

An optical adapter is only required if you want to preserve far focusing capability.

Sure. I would like to preserve it, because 200 f4 is very good lens for telephoto. It has very good resolution, so it would be nice to adapt on 645z with outstanding image quality. In other case you can use it on 645z as other lens with 24 mm extension tube on FF or APSC camera. But in that case the bokeh will be almost like difusely blured background.

[marcusyoung]

Thank you for all your replies here.

I placed tube 2, 26.6mm and try holding the A200 macro infront of the tube with max magnification, f4, and small burst of flash light to capture the rocket blower. here is the result.. handholding the lens..



background is some pinkish stuff. The magnification seems like slightly more than 1:1 life size. Focusing done thru rocking front and back to find the point in focus. I am just trying out. I am keen on macro only. infinitiy focus is not an issue for me.. Resized


marcus

[desertscape]

You could use a negative achromat behind the lens to get it to reach the focal plane on the Z but in doing so, you are not guaranteed the same performance as the lens without it. Using a thick optical flat behind the lens will extend the focus as well but may have problems with mirror interference. For macro work only, you would still need a custom adapter. Any way you look at it, there will be problems.

[Lacunapratum]

Your 200mm macro covers at macro distances. It's an excellent lens. The issue is just to get a suitable adapter to preserve your automatic functions or at least facilitate a stable mount. You would do better getting a K-1 to use this lens.

The 120mm A and FA are ideal macro lenses for the 645 in many ways. The shorter 90mm is sharper, but 90mm is too short of a focal length for many macro applications. Longer focal lengths pose challenges any which way.

One workable compromise for the 645Z is the 150mm Apo Componon HM with adapters and extension tubes. You'll loose automatic aperture control and you need rather long extension tubes, but it works and the lens is outstanding at macro distances. It covers well and you will still have a good working distance. Alternatively, you could use a 150mm/2.8 Printing Nikkor or the 165mm/4 Ultra Micro Nikkor. Both are extremely sharp lenses, but they close down only to F11, and that is not enough for many applications. Sharpness is exceptional though. If you want to go to even longer focal lengths, why not try one of those 240mm/9 Apo Nikkors? Those close down and are relatively compact to use. However, at 240mm, you'd need huge extension contraptions to reach sufficient magnification. Working distance would be excellent though.

If you were to consider other systems, the Sigma 180mm/2.8 is an excellent macro lens. It suffers somewhat from focus breathing, but the image quality certainly makes up for it. Not sure whether it's available in Pentax mount, but I am using it with great success on my Nikon. Another long distance macro rig that works very well is the the 200mm Micro Nikkor on one of those new Sony cameras. The 7Rii has a fantastic sensor and image stabilization, and the Nikkor can be readily adapted and used in manual focus mode. The Micro-Nikkor is very sharp on the A7Rii and does not suffer from focus breathing at all, as far as I can tell.

By far the best systems for medium format macro photography were those Rolleiflex medium format SLR systems. The SL66 with built-in bellows and the 6000/Hy6 series with three lenses exclusively designed for macro photography. In addition, the Hy6's Curtagon was perfect for automatic diaphragm macro photography at high magnification in reverse position. There was a 150mm/4.6 Apo-Symmar for the automated bellows and you could add multiple extension rings, and the whole thing used leaf shutter lenses so that you'd get minimum vibrations. With some of those newer systems it is impossible to add more than one extension tubes. The Rolleiflex apparently has no limits. The tubes would slightly vignette in the corners, but that is easy to cut off.

For you at this point, the easiest solution would be to get a K-1. You won't be disappointed.

[marcusyoung]

You could use a negative achromat behind the lens to get it to reach the focal plane on the Z but in doing so, you are not guaranteed the same performance as the lens without it. Using a thick optical flat behind the lens will extend the focus as well but may have problems with mirror interference. For macro work only, you would still need a custom adapter. Any way you look at it, there will be problems.

Thank you, desertscape.

Your 200mm macro covers at macro distances. It's an excellent lens. The issue is just to get a suitable adapter to preserve your automatic functions or at least facilitate a stable mount. You would do better getting a K-1 to use this lens.

The 120mm A and FA are ideal macro lenses for the 645 in many ways. The shorter 90mm is sharper, but 90mm is too short of a focal length for many macro applications. Longer focal lengths pose challenges any which way.

One workable compromise for the 645Z is the 150mm Apo Componon HM with adapters and extension tubes. You'll loose automatic aperture control and you need rather long extension tubes, but it works and the lens is outstanding at macro distances. It covers well and you will still have a good working distance. Alternatively, you could use a 150mm/2.8 Printing Nikkor or the 165mm/4 Ultra Micro Nikkor. Both are extremely sharp lenses, but they close down only to F11, and that is not enough for many applications. Sharpness is exceptional though. If you want to go to even longer focal lengths, why not try one of those 240mm/9 Apo Nikkors? Those close down and are relatively compact to use. However, at 240mm, you'd need huge extension contraptions to reach sufficient magnification. Working distance would be excellent though.

If you were to consider other systems, the Sigma 180mm/2.8 is an excellent macro lens. It suffers somewhat from focus breathing, but the image quality certainly makes up for it. Not sure whether it's available in Pentax mount, but I am using it with great success on my Nikon. Another long distance macro rig that works very well is the the 200mm Micro Nikkor on one of those new Sony cameras. The 7Rii has a fantastic sensor and image stabilization, and the Nikkor can be readily adapted and used in manual focus mode. The Micro-Nikkor is very sharp on the A7Rii and does not suffer from focus breathing at all, as far as I can tell.

By far the best systems for medium format macro photography were those Rolleiflex medium format SLR systems. The SL66 with built-in bellows and the 6000/Hy6 series with three lenses exclusively designed for macro photography. In addition, the Hy6's Curtagon was perfect for automatic diaphragm macro photography at high magnification in reverse position. There was a 150mm/4.6 Apo-Symmar for the automated bellows and you could add multiple extension rings, and the whole thing used leaf shutter lenses so that you'd get minimum vibrations. With some of those newer systems it is impossible to add more than one extension tubes. The Rolleiflex apparently has no limits. The tubes would slightly vignette in the corners, but that is easy to cut off.

For you at this point, the easiest solution would be to get a K-1. You won't be disappointed.

Thank you for your information that you provided here. Its educational as well.

I agree the easiest is to get the k1 and is a perfect match. If there is another system that I am going into, it would likely be the canon mpe 65 twin flash with 5X magnification. \but still no, not at this point of time. gotten some extention tubes for A120, suffice for magnification as of now...thanks for your input here..


marcus

[Lacunapratum]

Thank you, desertscape.






Thank you for your information that you provided here. Its educational as well.

I agree the easiest is to get the k1 and is a perfect match. If there is another system that I am going into, it would likely be the canon mpe 65 twin flash with 5X magnification. \but still no, not at this point of time. gotten some extention tubes for A120, suffice for magnification as of now...thanks for your input here..


marcus

Thanks for your nice note, Marcus. You'll be quite close with the MP-E. I'd keep the 200mm Pentax in case you decide to get a K-1 one of these days .

[marcusyoung]

Thanks for your nice note, Marcus. You'll be quite close with the MP-E. I'd keep the 200mm Pentax in case you decide to get a K-1 one of these days .

Huh.. but the A200 has already been adapted to the 645Z..

See this image. only A200 could produce this bokeh..



marcus

[Lacunapratum]

Sublime.