Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-22-2017, 12:55 AM   #1
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 124
"downgrade" from 28-45 to 33-55?

Hi all,


I am thinking of replacing my big and heavy 28-45 by the samller 33-55. I do at least 90% of the photos taken using the 28-45 not at the short end.
I know I'd loose the SR. It's a nice feature, but not that effective as I am used it from other cameras.


But what's about image quality on the 645D? I can accept to stop down to f/8 or more to get sharp borders. Will the 33-55 be very good on the borders, too, when stopped down to f/8? It doesn't have to match the 28-45, I'd say if it gets as good as the 45-85 gets stopped down, I'd be really happy with it.

12-22-2017, 04:00 AM   #2
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2015
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 145
What do you intend to shoot with it? I have a 28-45 and wouln't part with it but I use it for landscapes. I would love the new HD 35mm for a lighter option sometimes though.
12-22-2017, 06:27 AM   #3
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 124
Original Poster
Well, landscape. The bokeh of the 28-45 is quite bad, whenever I Need some bokeh in wide angle, I use the Sigma 24-35/2.0 on a D810.


For 35mm, I already own the A Version. I love that lens, too. But I'd be missing something at 45mm.


I use two bags, each of them Holding a whole set of lenses. The "big" one is currently 28-45, 55-100(67), 120 A, 150-300 and 1.4x TC. The "small one" the 35A, 55-110 FA and 90-180 (67), plus a 1.4x TC, too.


I think I could replace the 28-45 either by a 33-55, if that one works well enough. Or by 35 und 45mm Don't know how well the 45mm works, though.
12-22-2017, 06:43 AM   #4
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2011
Location: All over the place
Posts: 2,911
QuoteOriginally posted by donesteban Quote
Well, landscape. The bokeh of the 28-45 is quite bad, whenever I Need some bokeh in wide angle, I use the Sigma 24-35/2.0 on a D810.


For 35mm, I already own the A Version. I love that lens, too. But I'd be missing something at 45mm.


I use two bags, each of them Holding a whole set of lenses. The "big" one is currently 28-45, 55-100(67), 120 A, 150-300 and 1.4x TC. The "small one" the 35A, 55-110 FA and 90-180 (67), plus a 1.4x TC, too.


I think I could replace the 28-45 either by a 33-55, if that one works well enough. Or by 35 und 45mm Don't know how well the 45mm works, though.
The 33-55 is pretty good stopped down in my experience. I still have mine in spite of having the 28-45 though haven't used it for a while. The 45 isn't that well respected though I used to have it and it was fine. To get any kind of bokeh you wouldn't be stopping down though unless getting close to the subject and then you'd need to look at minimum focus distance.

12-22-2017, 07:09 AM   #5
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,353
I'm not very familiar with medium format, why would you lose SR?
12-22-2017, 07:36 AM   #6
Emperor and Senpai
Loyal Site Supporter
VoiceOfReason's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Mishawaka IN area
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,011
QuoteOriginally posted by UncleVanya Quote
I'm not very familiar with medium format, why would you lose SR?
The sensor is so big they have to do it in the lens.

To OP, why not have both?
01-01-2018, 02:01 AM   #7
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 124
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by VoiceOfReason Quote
The sensor is so big they have to do it in the lens.

To OP, why not have both?
Too much gear. I am trying to avoid this where ever possible.
Off course, temporarly it would be possible to be able to comapre them. But after a few weeks, one would have to go.

I have a Nikon system and and Pentax APSc system beside the 645D. It is really getting too much if I keep everything I'd like to have.
01-01-2018, 10:51 AM   #8
Forum Member




Join Date: Jul 2017
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 51
I'm going to suggest that you may be disappointed. Particularly since you are considering replacing one of their very best lenses with it. There is simply nothing about the 33 - 55 that can compare with your current lens.

I have owned only one sample and used it on a 645Z. Stopped down to f8 I was satisfied with the image quality. However, I only used it in bright sunlight at base ISO, on a tripod, photographing stuff that doesn't move very much.

While I did appreciate the light weight, and the zoom range was about right for my purposes, I never really warmed up to this lens. I suspect that the build quality might have had something to do with my feelings. The images produced were certainly satisfactory and I'm not convinced that the low ratings for this lens are completely justified. However, the thing felt so cheaply made it just didn't do much for me.

My personal opinion is that weight reduction and zoom range would have to be truly overriding concerns to make this the best solution. YMMV.

If you're ok with those characteristics I strongly suggest purchasing from one of the Japanese vendors on eBay rather than new. In my view, buying one of these things from B & H and paying full retail would be way too much.

In the interests of full disclosure, my favorite lens for the 645z is the 45 - 85 zoom, closely followed by the 55.

01-02-2018, 04:18 AM   #9
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 124
Original Poster
Well, I bought the 28-45 because I was curious. It was 2nd hand, too, so my financial loss compared to what I paied will be small if selling it again.
I already own the 645 55-110. The build quality of the 33-55 should be the same, shoudn't it?

Yes, the inner tube of the 55-110 is quite unfirm comapred to my other Pentax MF gear. But it is not affecting picture quality.

I don't consider the build quality of the 28-45 that good, either, from my point of view it is just like a huge and heavy brother of the DA 18-135 WR.
Nothing I would think of comparing to my 67 55-100 and 90-180 in terms of build quality. Or to the Sigma 24-35/2.0 in my Nikon System.


The 28-45 has only three big strengths in my point of view. sharp, sharp and the SR.


Looks like there is no other way than just odering one 2nd hand from Japan. I could accept if the lens is a bit less sharp and has to be stopped down to get sharp.
Also, 33 to 45mm would be the most important part rearding picture quality, as 55mm is already covered by the 55-100 67 in a great manner.
The only thing I am not sure about is still the 35 plus 45mm vs. the 33-55mm question.
I already own a 35 SMC-A. It is great. Is the 45mm FA really softer than the 33-55 at 45mm?
01-04-2018, 03:13 AM   #10
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 124
Original Poster
I ordered a SMC-A 45/2.8 in Japan. Before checking the 33-55, I'd like to see if the 45mm is a good landscape lens, too, if stopped down. Besides that, I'd like to have a look at the bokeh, too. It might be suitable for some portrait work, too, if the bokeh is good. Maximum sharpness is not needed for that, so I woulnd't matter if it is not that sharp wide open.


If the 45/2.8 is doing the job, I'll use the 35 A and the 45A instead of the 28-45.
01-12-2018, 04:18 AM   #11
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 124
Original Poster
The 45 A has arrived. It is very sharp wide open in die middle of the Frame, and fair on the borders. The Problem is: It is not getting much better on the boders by stopping down. Even f/11 is a big difference on the borders to the 28-45, while in the middle it is hard to find a difference at any apperture.
I'll Keep them both. Because the 45/2.8 seems to be grat for Portrait work. The 28-45 is slower and has really bad bokeh. The 45/2.8 has quite a good bokeh!
01-12-2018, 05:34 AM   #12
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 101
I have both the 28-45 and the 33-55. I REALLY wish Pentax would release an updated 33-55 (like they did with the 35mm to a HD D-FA version) as the focal range of the 33-55 is perfect (for me). Whilst the 28-45 goes wider it's just SO large and SO heavy!! The 33-55 is nice and lightweight so makes a good travel lens. Yes, the quality is nowhere near that of the 28-45 but you should micro adjust your lenses anyway to make sure that you're getting the very best out of them. The 33-55 isn't a 5/10 kind of lens; more of a 7-10. For the convenience of its size and weight, though, that's a trade off that I'm willing to make. (The 28-45 is probably a 9.5/10)
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, f/8, medium format
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Horizon line detail: 645Z & 28-45, 120 macro, 45-85 Namibchris Pentax Medium Format 14 03-02-2017 07:18 PM
A35 vs FA35 vs 33-55 LA_Photographer Pentax Medium Format 32 02-09-2016 02:03 PM
Tamron 17-50mm a worthy "downgrade" (from Pentax 16-50mm)??? Ubuntu_user Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 53 11-07-2010 06:23 PM
K200D to K-x: upgrade, downgrade, or "sidegrade"? ChooseAName Pentax DSLR Discussion 19 07-19-2010 09:36 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:58 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