Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-26-2017, 07:08 AM   #1
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2017
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 120
Lens choice: 6x7 45mm vs 55mm f/4 vs 55mm f/3.5

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.


Morning, folks!

I'm brand new to the Pentax family and to medium format film in general. I caught the bug when I stumbled across a Lomo Lubitel at a garage sale last summer. But I didn't start shooting until last month, when I met up with a buddy who has a Pentax 67 and a Mamiya 645.

Needless to say I fell in love with the 67. The hand-holdability, the max shutter speed, the low price, the SLR form factor... and the mojo of the handle. I got really lucky and found a 67 (not 6x7) with a TTL viewfinder, 75mm f/4.5 lens, handle, and strap for a fantastic price. The body is in amazing shape, too. So I am very happy and I am looking to expand my lens collection.

I opted to go with the 150mm f/2.8 vs the 165mm f 2.8 for two reasons:

1) My buddy has the 165 already, and I want to somewhat compliment his lens selection for when we shoot together
2) I read on the forums here that the 150 is basically the same quality but for a cheaper price. I can't attest to the quality, but certainly the Ebay price was easier on my wallet than the 165.

Now to my question!

I'm looking for a wide-angle lens to compliment my portrait length (150) and my normal length (75). I want to use it for landscapes and architectural photography mostly. In general, I want to use this camera for fine art/portrait photography, walk around/street photography, and landscapes/architectural photos.

Again, I am looking to save coin (because I have a DSLR that is my true workhorse and pride and joy). Should I:

1) Spend the "big bucks" (looks like $250-300) on the 45mm?
2) Save some money (spend about $200-220) on the 55mm f/4? (FYI, my buddy has this lens, too)
3) Go with what seems like the cheapest option ($150ish) an go with the 55mm f/3.5?
4) Just stick with my 75mm, because its somewhat wide, and spend my extra scratch on another lens, like the 105?

Of course, the concern with the 100mm diameter 55m, f/3.5 is finding appropriate filters. That being said, I plan on scanning all of my negatives and processing them in lightroom/photoshop. Will I need to rely on filters, and if not, should I just save the money (and look SO COOL with the HUGE diameter) and go with the f/3.5? What are the pros and cons for each of these lenses? Is there any reason I simply MUST HAVE the 45mm?

Second question:

It seems like you can save quite quite a bit of money by accepting lenses with fog, scratches on the elements, fungus, balsam separation, banged up threading, etc. This may be an obvious answer, but I should steer clear of all of those issues, right? Particularly for a wide-angle, where I am likely to stop way down for landscapes?

Third and final question! Is there a place other than Ebay I should be looking for to find better deals on lenses?

Thank you so much for the help-- hope to hear from you all soon!

04-26-2017, 07:52 AM   #2
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Sydney
Photos: Albums
Posts: 844
Steer clear of sellers that don't offer a returns policy is my advice. I'd avoid problematic lenses, and go for those described as near perfect (but with a returns policy, just in case some lies have infiltrated the description. You can often negotiate some pretty large price reductions if you do end up with anything less than perfect!)

The 45 can be had for less, so long as you're willing to wait for the right auction to come along (and believe me, they do!). I've not used the 55, but I can say the 45 has quite a bit of distortion, but does produce some decent shots (my favourite lens is still the 105 f2.4, the others I own don't get much mileage after seeing what that can do tbh)
04-26-2017, 08:02 AM   #3
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,113
1) Given that you want to do landscape & architecture plus share lenses with your buddy (who has the 55/4), the 45 seems like the obvious choice. You can always crop a photo taken with a 45 to get the FoV of the 55 but unless you start blending and merging multi-frame images, you can't get a wider angle image out of a 55.

2) You are right to avoid fog/scratches/fungus if your landscape work has high dynamic range (i.e., shadows, back lighting and bright sky). If your style tends toward lower contrast scenes, a cheap but imperfect lens might be fine.

3) I've got no direct experience with other marketplaces accept reading the anecdotes here that PF marketplace and KEH seem to be respected.

Good luck!
04-26-2017, 08:05 AM   #4
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2017
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 120
Original Poster
Thanks for the reply! The return policy tip is a good one. I'll keep an eye out for reputable sellers.

I did lose an auction for a decent 45mm yesterday by $2.50. Closing price was $212.50 including shipping, I think. Definitely lower than "buy it now" prices. Since I don't have a big trip for a few months I have the luxury of time to find a good deal.

I wonder if the 55 would have less distortion. I may prefer that over the extra field of view.

What do you use the 105 for? I imagine its mostly for street/portrait work. Do you use it for other purposes? Did it replace your 150/165 range lenses?

Thanks!

04-26-2017, 08:42 AM   #5
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 269
the 105mm is the fastest lens in the system, @ f/2.4 it gives a super shallow depth of field that is approx equivalent to an f/1.2 on FF. Its the most widely used lens for portraits in the system inspite of its relatively short focal length (search flickr and 500px). In my opinion, the best bang for the buck in the system and a definite must have. will it replace your 150mm? that depends, the system is so heavy i rarely go out with more than 1 lens. and that for me is the 105mm.
04-26-2017, 09:02 AM   #6
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2017
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 120
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by AtitG Quote
the 105mm is the fastest lens in the system, @ f/2.4 it gives a super shallow depth of field that is approx equivalent to an f/1.2 on FF. Its the most widely used lens for portraits in the system inspite of its relatively short focal length (search flickr and 500px). In my opinion, the best bang for the buck in the system and a definite must have. will it replace your 150mm? that depends, the system is so heavy i rarely go out with more than 1 lens. and that for me is the 105mm.
That's great information. Good news is I spent about $100 on the 150mm including shipping, so it is absolutely worth it to me to have it as a starter portrait lens before I upgrade to the 105. When shooting portraits I wont feel bad about taking them both out (I'm use to carrying a lot of gear). I knew that the 105 was fast but I did not think it was that fast in full frame terms. I just wish it was longer focal length, but after all, it is frequently nice to be able to take tight portraits very close to the subject.
04-26-2017, 12:03 PM - 1 Like   #7
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,272
What is sometimes called distortion in the 45mm is actually perspective stretching. This does not lend itself to architecture subjects. Distortion (differential image magnification at the film plane) is fairly low in the 45mm, consisting of mustache distortion.

04-26-2017, 01:17 PM   #8
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2017
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 120
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by desertscape Quote
What is sometimes called distortion in the 45mm is actually perspective stretching. This does not lend itself to architecture subjects. Distortion (differential image magnification at the film plane) is fairly low in the 45mm, consisting of mustache distortion.
I think I'm familiar with that. My Tokina 11-16mm APS-C Zoom lens does this. It does make the buildings look wobbly on the outer edges. Do you think the 55mm would be a better lens for this application?
04-26-2017, 03:18 PM   #9
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,272
The 55 would be better but the 75mm shift lens is better than the 55 but has the drawback of not being wide enough in many occasions.
04-26-2017, 07:43 PM   #10
Junior Member




Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 33
QuoteOriginally posted by Femto1969 Quote
Morning, folks!

I'm brand new to the Pentax family and to medium format film in general. I caught the bug when I stumbled across a Lomo Lubitel at a garage sale last summer. But I didn't start shooting until last month, when I met up with a buddy who has a Pentax 67 and a Mamiya 645.

Needless to say I fell in love with the 67. The hand-holdability, the max shutter speed, the low price, the SLR form factor... and the mojo of the handle. I got really lucky and found a 67 (not 6x7) with a TTL viewfinder, 75mm f/4.5 lens, handle, and strap for a fantastic price. The body is in amazing shape, too. So I am very happy and I am looking to expand my lens collection.

I opted to go with the 150mm f/2.8 vs the 165mm f 2.8 for two reasons:

1) My buddy has the 165 already, and I want to somewhat compliment his lens selection for when we shoot together
2) I read on the forums here that the 150 is basically the same quality but for a cheaper price. I can't attest to the quality, but certainly the Ebay price was easier on my wallet than the 165.

Now to my question!

I'm looking for a wide-angle lens to compliment my portrait length (150) and my normal length (75). I want to use it for landscapes and architectural photography mostly. In general, I want to use this camera for fine art/portrait photography, walk around/street photography, and landscapes/architectural photos.

Again, I am looking to save coin (because I have a DSLR that is my true workhorse and pride and joy). Should I:

1) Spend the "big bucks" (looks like $250-300) on the 45mm?
2) Save some money (spend about $200-220) on the 55mm f/4? (FYI, my buddy has this lens, too)
3) Go with what seems like the cheapest option ($150ish) an go with the 55mm f/3.5?
4) Just stick with my 75mm, because its somewhat wide, and spend my extra scratch on another lens, like the 105?

Of course, the concern with the 100mm diameter 55m, f/3.5 is finding appropriate filters. That being said, I plan on scanning all of my negatives and processing them in lightroom/photoshop. Will I need to rely on filters, and if not, should I just save the money (and look SO COOL with the HUGE diameter) and go with the f/3.5? What are the pros and cons for each of these lenses? Is there any reason I simply MUST HAVE the 45mm?

Second question:

It seems like you can save quite quite a bit of money by accepting lenses with fog, scratches on the elements, fungus, balsam separation, banged up threading, etc. This may be an obvious answer, but I should steer clear of all of those issues, right? Particularly for a wide-angle, where I am likely to stop way down for landscapes?

Third and final question! Is there a place other than Ebay I should be looking for to find better deals on lenses?

Thank you so much for the help-- hope to hear from you all soon!
The 150/2.8 is a "sleeper" for sure. Its smaller size makes it under-rated, I think.

I have the new 55 and 45. I wish I used the 55 more. The 45 keeps attracting me, even though the perspective/distortion keep challenging me. If I ditched the 45 I would use the 55 and my results might be better, but I would miss the challenge of trying to make the shot work. Failure is how one learns, I guess. (p.s., I'm not a professional.)
04-26-2017, 11:25 PM - 1 Like   #11
Veteran Member
Silent Street's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Castlemaine, Victoria, AUS
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,149
The 45/55mm and 75mm lenses (75mm of any speed) are in my opinion complimentary as a team, although your kit should have at least one f2.8 or f3.5 lens rather than all f4 lenses: reason being that the 67 is not all that easy to focus in dim light, or when using a polariser and that's where a baseline f2.8 of even an f3.5 lens is a godsend. Is that 55mm f3.5 mentioned a Takumar? I seem to recall somewhere it uses 82mm filters (?)

The 55mm is an all-time favourite among legions of P67 users for the quality it produces. I use the 55mm and 45mm the most in-field, with the 75mm f2.8AL my standard go-to when not in expansive landscapes and/or when extra viewfinder brightness is necessary. There are a few reports of this lens (55 f4) having a scratchy focus and/or noticeable rattles inside the lens. I do not have either of these, but a prospective purchase should be checked for any faults, minor as well as major (fungus, scratched front elements or inability to achieve accurate focus).

There really is not that much to separate the 45mm from the 55mm; they are both excellent performers optically, and the 55mm might come across as a rather heavy, daggy, dated design (it is an old Distagon design) compared to the smaller, squat and modern 45mm and its attendant slimline (ultra-wide angle) hood, compared again to the larger hood for the 55mm. Are they the same performers optically? In my experience, yes absolutely.

The 55mm uses 77mm filters while the 45mm uses 82mm filters — a B+W KSM C-POL filter in this size can cost about $700; I've lost a couple....
Yes, you can have 'fun with filters' if you can use those normally employed with your digimon, as I do (actually I use filters coming off Canon's L-series lenses which are also part of my toy collection).

Distortion exists in both the 45mm and 55mm lenses. It is minimally intrusive in closed landscapes, but it will become a glaring problem once alighment moves out of the perpendicular. As a rule I do not tilt either 45 or 55mm lenses up; if I absolutely must, it is very slightly and with consideration to any introduced distortion.

.:: A word about shift lenses
The 75mm shift lens is only that — just shift, and it's often nothing more than a novelty than a must-have. In architecture, there must be a corresponding correction at the film plane (not just the lens plane), hence the continuing use of large format cameras in architectural photography. When a lens offers tilt and shift (most commonly in 35mm, occasionally and hugely expensively in MF), it then becomes invaluable for adjusting depth of field (without stopping down to say f16 or f22), focus peg and even "swinging around" elements of the scene, among lots of other tricks and treats. A shift lens can allow you to "remove" your reflection in a front-on shoot of windows/doors. It can also be used to create a faux-panorama by shifting the lens between two exposures.

Lastly, consider the weight of any and all lenses you add to your 67 kit, as the caboodle will be a pain in the proverbial (back!) if you gather up say 4-5 lenses + tripod + Mars Bars + whatever else you routinely cart along... Trust me, I never needed or wanted a chiropractor until a year or so after filling out my 67 kit...

Last edited by Silent Street; 04-27-2017 at 12:40 AM.
04-27-2017, 07:06 AM   #12
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2017
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 120
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by desertscape Quote
The 55 would be better but the 75mm shift lens is better than the 55 but has the drawback of not being wide enough in many occasions.
I think I will skip the 75mm shift for now, since I need to get more essential bases covered, and I don't want to spend an arm and a leg on a specialty lens right now. Duly noted that the 45, 55, and 75 shift all have advantages and drawbacks for doing architectural photography. Thanks for the input!

---------- Post added 04-27-17 at 07:40 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by desertscape Quote
The 55 would be better but the 75mm shift lens is better than the 55 but has the drawback of not being wide enough in many occasions.
I think I will skip the 75mm shift for now, since I need to get more essential bases covered, and I don't want to spend an arm and a leg on a specialty lens right now. Duly noted that the 45, 55, and 75 shift all have advantages and drawbacks for doing architectural photography. Thanks for the input, and thanks to Silent Street for your points as well. Quite informative.

QuoteQuote:
I have the new 55 and 45. I wish I used the 55 more. The 45 keeps attracting me, even though the perspective/distortion keep challenging me. If I ditched the 45 I would use the 55 and my results might be better, but I would miss the challenge of trying to make the shot work. Failure is how one learns, I guess. (p.s., I'm not a professional.)
I think this is a case for me to use the 55. Since I'm new to medium format and film in general, and definitely a hobbyist at this point, I want things to be easy and rewarding. I might get frustrated at "wasting" film in tough shots that are likely to be warped. Maybe the more challenging stuff is better for the future, when I'm not already challenged by the system.

QuoteQuote:
Is that 55mm f3.5 mentioned a Takumar?
It is a Takumar. And from what I've seen, they are generally a bit cheaper than either the 55mm f/4 and the 45mm f/4 probably because the filter size is a whopping 100mm.

If you think the extra fraction of a stop of light and cheaper price is worth the immense filter size, I will certainly consider buying this lens. It does seem like an appealing option to me-- if I can get around the necessity to spend an arm an a leg on filters.
04-27-2017, 03:17 PM   #13
Veteran Member
Silent Street's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Castlemaine, Victoria, AUS
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,149
QuoteOriginally posted by Femto1969 Quote
I think I will skip the 75mm shift for now, since I need to get more essential bases covered, and I don't want to spend an arm and a leg on a specialty lens right now. Duly noted that the 45, 55, and 75 shift all have advantages and drawbacks for doing architectural photography. Thanks for the input!

---------- Post added 04-27-17 at 07:40 AM ----------


I think I will skip the 75mm shift for now, since I need to get more essential bases covered, and I don't want to spend an arm and a leg on a specialty lens right now. Duly noted that the 45, 55, and 75 shift all have advantages and drawbacks for doing architectural photography. Thanks for the input, and thanks to Silent Street for your points as well. Quite informative.



I think this is a case for me to use the 55. Since I'm new to medium format and film in general, and definitely a hobbyist at this point, I want things to be easy and rewarding. I might get frustrated at "wasting" film in tough shots that are likely to be warped. Maybe the more challenging stuff is better for the future, when I'm not already challenged by the system.



It is a Takumar. And from what I've seen, they are generally a bit cheaper than either the 55mm f/4 and the 45mm f/4 probably because the filter size is a whopping 100mm.

If you think the extra fraction of a stop of light and cheaper price is worth the immense filter size, I will certainly consider buying this lens. It does seem like an appealing option to me-- if I can get around the necessity to spend an arm an a leg on filters.

There might be a review here on the Pentax forums of the early Takumar 55mm; it is likely a heavy beast and a huge element up front makes me squirm. Whether or not the optical performance was improved in subsequent releases of the 55mm I don't know.

And where will you find 100mm screw-in filters for that Takumar? Yes, you can use something like the Lee filter system but it's still a very big and unwieldy size to wrangle. The problem of tackling reflections with those sort of filters is also well known. I'll tell you that my 82mm filters are big enough to cause fumbling moments with my small hands!

Last edited by Silent Street; 04-27-2017 at 03:29 PM.
04-27-2017, 10:03 PM   #14
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,272
QuoteOriginally posted by Silent Street Quote
Whether or not the optical performance was improved in subsequent releases of the 55mm I don't know.
They were improved at each new design.
04-28-2017, 07:20 AM   #15
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2017
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 120
Original Poster
Matter is somewhat settled

Hi, folks,

The matter has been somewhat settled!

First, I dug up this resource from another thread in this forum, which was exactly the information I needed. It details the filter sizes, the quality, and if the lens was updated for each lens and iteration, in a nice table. Using it I determined that the 55mm f/4 "67" is alleged to be one of the best lenses in the system. I need wide, but I don't need outrageously wide for now. And I'd like to tackle a more challenging lens like the 45mm after I have more experience.

Second, I found a fantastic deal on a bundle of the 55mm f/4 (newest and best version) and the 200mm f/4 (newest and best version) with a handful of throw ins, like the 55mm hood, several filters, and a focus assistant handle. Conveniently the lenses have the same filter size. I view the mismatched filters as gravy, however I am hoping one turns out to be a b/w neutral density filter (a guy can dream, right?). Its probably just a polarizer. Wanna check it out? FYI - I did not pay the asking price - the seller gave me a pretty great deal!

I'm excited to have the 200mm in my arsenal now, too, since it is renowned to be a good one, and I'm hoping to do a lot of portraiture. I'm wondering if it will perform well with a 2x converter for portraits or wildlife. I'm also happy to now only have to hunt for killer deals on one or two more lenses instead of 3 or 4. I'm still hoping to find a workable 105 f/2.4 for a bargain.

Let me know what you think!
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!
45mm, 45mm f/4, 55mm, 55mm f/3.5, 55mm f/4, 645d, 645z, arm, buddy, camera, copy, f/3.5, leg, lens, lenses, medium format, money, pentax 67, price, question, shift, size, takumar, thanks, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Pentax 6x7 400mm f4 SMC Takumar & 6x7 to K mount adapter littledrawe Sold Items 8 04-30-2012 04:58 PM
Pentax 645 120mm macro and Pentax 645 35mm lenses and Pentax 6x7 45mm lens. Newmoon Pentax Medium Format 11 03-14-2012 02:10 PM
Choice of lens for shooting large group: DA 15mm vs DA 16-45mm EdMaximus Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 14 03-19-2011 11:05 AM
6x7 45mm Vs 55mm Isis Pentax Medium Format 16 02-14-2011 05:17 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:44 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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