[Smolk]

Melbourn graveyard; Telka de Maria La Pierre 3.5/90mm, handheld

[RICHARD L.]

This new DFA 55 mm lens never ceases to amaze me every time I use it. This was taken at f/22 leaning on the iron fence around the Cemetery. Is there a DFA 90 mm f/2.8 in my near future ???

[texandrews]

This new DFA 55 mm lens never ceases to amaze me every time I use it. This was taken at f/22 leaning on the iron fence around the Cemetery. Is there a DFA 90 mm f/2.8 in my near future ???

The DFA 55 f2.8 is the most surprising lens I've ever owned. I am not a "normal" FL guy (anyone who knows me will tell you I'm just not a normal guy, period...), but this lens is the default lens on my camera. I'll do whatever to try to use it, and only swap out if I really have to. And I say this loving my other lenses in this system.

You'll love the 90 if you get it...but not as much as this baby.

[RICHARD L.]

[ivanvernon]

The DFA 55 f2.8 is the most surprising lens I've ever owned. I am not a "normal" FL guy (anyone who knows me will tell you I'm just not a normal guy, period...), but this lens is the default lens on my camera. I'll do whatever to try to use it, and only swap out if I really have to. And I say this loving my other lenses in this system.

You'll love the 90 if you get it...but not as much as this baby.

From seeing and learning about all your photographic accomplishments, I would say you are more than a normal guy. I am quite interested about the comments you and Richard have made about the F DA 55mm. I have the 55 as well as the 90, but really have not used the 55 to any extent because I have been so captivated by the P67 55mm f 4.0, which is simply amazing. I wonder if anyone has run any comparative tests of the two lenses. I will definitely put this lens on the Z and make some snaps today.

[RICHARD L.]

P67 55 mm f/4

645 DFA 55 mm f/2.8

Both lenses are extraordinary optical instruments.

The P67 55 mm f/4 was my all-time lens of choice in the argentic era along with the Pentax 67 II. The lens has no defect and doesn't know what "FLARE" is. You can shoot directly into the sun with no adverse effect whatsoever. It is entirely made of metal and will last a lifetime. It can be used in Av mode on the 645Z with the Pentax '67 to 645' adapter but remains manual-focus only.

The new 645 DFA 55 mm f/2.8 is smaller and lighter, using plastic in its construction. Coatings are more than excellent and no flare or veiling is apparent. It is Autofocus and is a natural Focal Length on the 645Z.

I paid 900 $ for a new copy of the P67 55 mm f/4 in 1991, now it sells almost for "peanuts" (I could never figure this out, the 55 mm being the very best lens in the whole 67 lens collection).

I paid 550 $ for a used copy of the 645 DFA 55 mm, making it more expensive these days.

You can't go wrong using either of these magnificent lenses.

[ivanvernon]

Here are a series of snaps from a walk-about this morning, some wide open and others at f 18 and f 22. I liked what I was seeing on the camera display screen, and liked them on the computer screen as well. I will be using this lens more often, but want to do some comparison shots with the P67 55mm/f 4.0.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[Eric Auer]

Konishiroku Pearl II | Hexar 75mm ƒ4.5 | Ilford XP2 Super ISO 1600 | CS Cd41 | CS F96 | Bleach Bypass



Interior Frames-10 by Eric Auer, on Flickr

[texandrews]

Here are a series of snaps from a walk-about this morning, some wide open and others at f 18 and f 22. I liked what I was seeing on the camera display screen, and liked them on the computer screen as well. I will be using this lens more often, but want to do some comparison shots with the P67 55mm/f 4.0.

Yeah, see? Look how beautifully that lens renders the scene. Want crisp? You got it. Want smooth transitions? Got them, too. I had a 6x7 55, but it just didn't work for me like the DFA 55

[ivanvernon]

Yeah, see? Look how beautifully that lens renders the scene. Want crisp? You got it. Want smooth transitions? Got them, too. I had a 6x7 55, but it just didn't work for me like the DFA 55

Here are a few afternoon snaps with the Z and Pentax 67 55mm f 4.0. I think I agree with you, but will walk back to the creek later and try to replicate a few of the shots with the P645 55mm f 2.8 maybe tomorrow.

[TDvN57]

Some pics of a Bougainvillea with the Z + FA* 300mm + TC 2.0. I show the ISO values and the corrected aperture. The exif aperture shows the camera indicated values, but the TC 2.0 does not adjust the f number, even though the camera exposes correctly. (original data also in exif)


#1: ISO 1100 f/5.6 => f/11 I like the bokeh, but not enough of the plant is in focus, very shallow DoF, although it does have somewhat of a 3D look.

#2: ISO 4500 f/11 => f/22 has more DoF but the background is now less "buttery". Noise levels are still very low and almost undetectable.

#3: ISO 12800 f/19 => f/38 has more DoF and the background is now starting to show details, still OK and not yet distracting to me. Noise levels are still low.

#4: ISO 18000 f/22 => f/44 has a better DoF but the background is now too prominent and the noise is starting to show.


Your thoughts? Which one do you think I should pick?

-

[Smolk]

Pentax 645N, FA 2.8/150mm

[Eric Auer]

Konishiroku Pearl II | Hexar 75mm ƒ4.5 | Ilford XP2 Super ISO 1600 | CS Cd41 | CS F96 | Bleach Bypass



Interior Frame-11 by Eric Auer, on Flickr

[ivanvernon]

Yeah, see? Look how beautifully that lens renders the scene. Want crisp? You got it. Want smooth transitions? Got them, too. I had a 6x7 55, but it just didn't work for me like the DFA 55

Just for comparison, here are some of the same sort of photos with entax 67 55mm f 4.0 instead of the 645 55mm D FA lens, mostly at f 8 or 11. I will be interested in your reaction.

[texandrews]

Just for comparison, here are some of the same sort of photos with entax 67 55mm f 4.0 instead of the 645 55mm D FA lens, mostly at f 8 or 11. I will be interested in your reaction.

I like these winter woods scenes....right up my alley, as a winter lover.

But I don't see the 6x7 55 as performing better---as I said it seemed "meh" to me with my copy. I feel like the advantages of the DFA 55 completely outweigh the 6x7 55 if their performance is pretty much the same. And at least in my case i like the performance of the DFA 55 better.