| Author: | | Junior Member Registered: February, 2007 Location: Okinawa, Japan Posts: 25 | | | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: February, 2008 Location: MT Posts: 1,349 | | Review Date: March 6, 2008 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | compact size, image quality, rugged | | Cons: | no modern hood available | |
The color rendition of subjects is very impressive. Though the lens isn't billed as having any high tech elements...aspherics, ED or anything. Both color and minimal distortion would suggest to me that typically unhyped Pentax just didn't say anything about it. Overall color cast is a bit cool, but I use a Pentax Cloudy filter almost always which warms it to where I like it.
30x40 enlargements are still quite crisp. Recently had a magazine run a full-page spread of an image shot through this lens. Of course, it came out great! Full page isn't much enlargement from the 6x7 cm original transparency.
Like the rest of the 67 system, it's built like a brick house and survives my field use very well.
The optional Pentax hood isn't very substantial and there is no modern tulip shaped hood available from Pentax. Good news is this lens is generally flare free considering the wide angle. With a better hood, this lens could get a 10 rating from me.
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: February, 2009 Location: SLovakia Posts: 141
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 5, 2009 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | This lens is optically near perfection, very good sharpness, no flares in direct sun | | Cons: | Just one negative - only 8 aperture blades !!!! | |
This lens is very close to be perfect. Sharpness is very good, also in corners, flares are very well controlled.
I don´t like just one thing - this lens has only 8 aperture blades,
what is a pitty, because when sun is photographed, there are only
8 light strokes. If it would have non-pair number of blades, like 9,
there could be beautiful 18 strokes!
Lens has very nice bokeh:
 | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: February, 2009 Location: Arizona Posts: 1,272
5 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 6, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $475.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Small, sharp | | Cons: | Some variability in perfomance from lens to lens | |
There are two versions of the 45mm, both are optically the same. The pre-1990 version has rougher aperture ring grip and slightly different rubber focusing ring. I have owned one since 1990 and is probably my most used lens. Needless to say, it is great for landscapes and seascapes. I always take this lens for travel work as it is small and has the angle of view for travel landscapes. This 9 element cross section is very similar to the 21mm Super Angulon-R used for the Leicaflex cameras. Its thick central elements show that the design has Biogon heritage, although modified to clear the mirror box. It uses a floating element for better close up spherical aberration correction. An obvious atttempt to correct the traditional barrel distortion seen in wide SLR lenses, was made. Its slight mustache distortion is not a show stopper. One can have the ocean in the shot without worry of it being noticably curved. I have found that the 45 is better corrected for distortion than Pentax's wide lenses for its 35mm cameras. This lens has an 8 blade diaphragm. The rear of the lens has a gel filter clip, should one want to use one. I use mine stopped down to at least f/8 and mostly to f/22. I have shot it at f/4 a few times with good results. This lens is well corrected optically and is pretty sharp in the corners at f/5.6. This lens is easily sharp enough for publication purposes. My estimate for lp/mm is 85. When comparing chromes from this lens with the 55-100 zoom, they look very similar until you look way off axis, then you can see just how sharp the zoom really is. That's why the zoom is a 10 rating and the 45 is a 9. There are reports of variation in performance from copy to copy, so my estimate above is from what I have seen. Once again, the DOF scale is a bit optimistic, so one has to be a little conservative when setting up shots with DOF. I suggest at least a half stop different on the scale. I have only seen lateral color with this lens in a few shots with extreme contrast . This equates to 4 shots out of 2000 over 20 years. Be careful when using a polarizer with this one, since it is wide enough to cause differential light/dark areas across the sky.
I would have preferrred that the 45 be upgraded like the 55mm to a Distagon-like design but the 45 was probably left alone because it performed so well as is. If I have a choice between using the 45mm or my 55-100 zoom, I usually choose the zoom.
Overall a great lens.
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: March, 2010 Posts: 20
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 18, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $450.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Extremely sharp. Solid constuction. | | Cons: | | |
This is my favorite Pentax 67 lens. I agree with assertions made by others, but this is such an agreeable lens. Images have superb color fidelity, contrast, resolution. Flare can be a problem, but blocking side light with a magazine works very well. A polarizer also blocks side light.
It's not perfect, but from the images you can tell it's a very high quality lens. I think the other reviewer is right about special materials, and perhaps, aspherical elements.
Sometimes variation in style is mistaken for variation in lens quality. In particular, artists who don't use a tripod need to shoot at larger apertures, and there may still be subtle problems of camera shake, if they like coffee as much as I do.
I remember just getting into medium format, hoping the image quality would be what I envisioned. This Pentax WA lenses are even better than I imagined, especially the 45mm and 55mm lenses.
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: May, 2010 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 19
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: May 25, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $380.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Extremely sharp, Excellent colour rendering, Virtually zero distortion | | Cons: | None | |
I purchased this lens last year for my landscape stuff and found this lens extremely sharp and with excellent colour rendering. Another thing is that I could hardly find any visible distortion.
Some people moving from Digital / 135 would claim the slow of this lens. F/4, a bit too slow for photography at dim light environment. However I actually stop it down to F/22 and put the camera on tripod to get the longest exposure. This F/4 is nothing to me. Plus that even though I stop it down to F/22, I still get very sharp images. It seems that sharpness has no change all the way from F/4 to F/22.
The non-visible distortion helps a lot in landscape and cityscape photography, so that I don't need to care about the distorted building. Using this lens is a breeze.
So hereby I strongly recommend any Pentax 67 users to buy this lens. You won't regret.
| | | | | Giveaway winner! Registered: December, 2007 Location: beantown Posts: 944 | | Review Date: December 7, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $300.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | size, weight, sharpness | | Cons: | filter size, no f32, dim focus tricky | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 9
| |
I like this lens a lot from only the first roll processed. My copy of the lens is indeed in good shape... mostly. I have a question about the sharpness in only a little area of about the last third of the field and it may be user error. The issue is at full open-f4 to f5.6 in medium shadow conditions on 100 iso film from a distance of around 18 feet. Now at f8 there is not a question of excellent sharpness. So, only the wider was a little concern as I've noticed the outer third was ever so slightly less impressive. I didn't recall any mention from others that the slight curvature or distortion would cause this, so I might have to do a careful inspect of the lens for a loose element... as quite a few of my lenses seem to suffer this... but truth be told, tiny knit-pick here since the bulk of the images are superb.
Overall, this lens performed very well indoors and outdoors. Flare control, I agree, very well behaved. The sharpness is mostly outstanding with so much right in front that you will have almost not complaints. This is at times these days a pricey lens for the budget shooters and the two version 55mm f4 might be a better choice as they are nice and wide much as a 28mm in 135 format, but the little extra wide was handy for the group shots although some indoor lighting conditions made it a slow lens to dial in.
Update: No physical issues found. I'll go with sticking to 5.6 and greater.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: November, 2011 Location: Castlemaine, Victoria, AUS Posts: 1,151
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: September 6, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $385.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Small size, 0.5 stop between f16 and f22 | | Cons: | Irksome MAN/AUTO lever | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax 67
| |
A squat little companion to the bigger brother 55 f4 with an optical span to match, though 55 still holds the edge — but not by much to my eyes!
For people with small hands this lens is a treat to use, with all controls falling comfortably and naturally to scale. The focus ring is especially smooth as opposed to the chunkier but no less comfortable 55. In use the aperture ring is a bit stiff and requires a decisive tug, but redeems itself with a useful 0.5 stop between f16 and f22. Like all ultra-wide angle lenses, this lens favours hyperfocal technique to balance depth of field with through-ranged sharpness and as such gets away with the limit of f22 admirably well.
Sharpness on RVP 50 and 100F trannies is outstanding from around f5.6 but I favour f8 on, and this appears to be where it squares up with the 55mm. I cannot see any distortion to squabble about. The front element is clothed by a protective glass which is thoughtful given how easily prominent front elements can be damaged by filters or accident. Art/exhibition printing is exceptionally satisfying to view, so far is the same with the 55mm and 165mm LS lenses -- up to 28x36cm; no real limit except in terms of economics and diminishing wall-hanging space!
In summary an excitingly sharp and contrasty lens which very comfortable and efficient in active handling and possessing an "out there" view with no great weight penalty.  | | | | | New Member Registered: December, 2012 Posts: 19
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 6, 2013 | Recommended
| Rating: N/A |
| Pros: | Small, lack of distortion, sharp | | Cons: | nothing | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax 67
| |
I bought this lens together with my 67. Compared to the camera it has a very low weight! Because the camera is already heavy itself, a light lens is a big benefit.
I mainly use it for landscapes, it's very sharp, also on f4.0! It had great colors and a great pro is the lack of distortion. In the pictures I made with this lens, there's almost no visible distortion!
Working with this lens is very nice, together with the waistlevelfinder, you'll have a "light" and great set-up for landscape photography.
Here are some examples: http://www.flickr.com/photos/svanvenetien/sets/72157632555467593/with/8417370862/
Winter Beach by Sebastiaan van Venetiën, on Flickr
White Beach by Sebastiaan van Venetiën, on Flickr
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: October, 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 8,090
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 7, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $450.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp and wide. | | Cons: | 82mm filter thread. Missing a f/32 aperture. | | Camera Used: 6x7, 67 and 67II
| |
The 45mm lens is a relative newcomer to the Pentax 6x7 system and the first version (6x7 45/4) was released in 1980. I have the second and last 1989 version (67 45/4) and it has the same optics as its predecessor.
Usage:
The 45/4 is a nice wide lens with a very good minimum focusing distance. This is the widest non fish-eye lens you can get for the Pentax 6x7 system. The 45/4 is sharp, but not in the same league as the 67 55/4, especially in close-up detail. A little more DOF would help, so a f/32 minimum aperture is needed. The 45/4 is also light weight for a Pentax 6x7 system lens, so no issues hand holding it.
FILTER: The 67 45/4 uses 82mm screw in filters, or Pentax 6x7 82mm bayonet filters. The lens also accepts rear mount gelatin filters. Unfortunately 82mm filters are expensive, even the old Pentax bayonet ones. It would have been nice if this lens also got updated and accepted 77mm filters, like the 67 55/4.
CASE: The 67 45/4 comes with the S90-100 soft case.
HOOD: The 67 45/4 uses a plastic clip-on PH-SB82 hood.
Summary:
The 67 45/4 is a great little lens, though not as good as the 67 55/4. Just wish it didn’t use those 82mm filters!
Price: I found my 67 45/4 here on the Pentax Forum and it cost $450.00. It was EX+ condition and came with the original box and case. I purchased the hood separately.
Sample shots taken with the 67 45/4. Photos are medium resolution Lab scans from original negatives and slides.
Camera: 67 Film: Kodak Tri-X 400 ISO: 400
Camera: 67 Film: Kodak T-Max 400 ISO: 400
Camera: 67II Film: Fuji Provia 400X ISO: 400
 | | | | |
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 21, 2015 | Recommended | Price: $250.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | size, weight, fast focus, small | | Cons: | None | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
| |
I really love this lens for traveling photography. The focus ring is really smooth that you can quickly focus on any subjects. I'm impressed about the size and weight too. Someone mentioned the filter size as one of cons. WTF. This is the widest(except fish eye lens) lens. Why do you argue about the filter size since the lens is the wide lens? I love the sharpness while I used color and B&W films.
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: January, 2015 Posts: 1 | | Review Date: May 10, 2015 | Recommended | Price: $240.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | no flare size weight sharp contrast and where the distortion? | | Cons: | Purple chromatic aberration on the corner/Bokeh with slight white outline | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 9
| |
note my is earlier version come with genuine lens hood . (slightly tighter focusing ring but not affect on image quality)
It's sharp and contrasty I almost couldn't find any distortion except when you use a ruler to see.
it's has Super-Angulon lens design (similar to Schneider/Leica 21mm lens).
but there some drawback there some ca in the corner when you inspect closely and not so nice bokeh.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: January, 2008 Location: Ottawa, ON Posts: 38 | | Review Date: January 18, 2017 | Recommended | Price: $225.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharpness, colour, lack of distortion, size, light falloff | | Cons: | CA in extreme corners | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax 67II
| |
No lens is a 10... I would rate this lens a 9.5. It is superb. I also have the 75mm 4.5 and 105 2.4 (both SMC), and subjectively this is my favorite.
The lens delivers a crisp rendition of detail and a 3D look to the images. In my opinion, the angle of view is not too wide. At 45mm, the appearance of the scene (perspective) is actually very natural.
Bokeh can be just slightly harsh when there is a busy background and the focus is on a near object, but that's typical for a lens of this type. Focuses very close, which is great. Colour is beautiful, and it handles incident light very well.
I have a high-resolution scan of an image of some trees taken in nearly ideal conditions (1/125 shutter, F8), and you can make out individual pine needles about 80 feet away. That's on Portra 400. I'm certain that the lens is out-resolving the scanner. Can't wait to try out some Ektar or Portra 160 in the summer months.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: January, 2011 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 982
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 17, 2017 | Recommended | Price: $200.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Very sharp, excellent contrast, very little if any distortion | | Cons: | none that I can think of. | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 9
Camera Used: Pentax 67
| |
I'm still fairly new to the Pentax 67, having bought my camera a little less than two years ago and with the 45mm, even less than that. So far, I've shot only Tri-X 400 with it. I do my own developing and I develop my negatives in Kodak D-76. This provides me with good, medium grain exposures that result in solid looking final images.
About the lens, of the few lenses in my Pentax 67 outfit, this 45mm is, by far, my favorite. I consider this angle -- being the equivalent to a 24mm in 35mm format -- to be just about the perfect angle for general wide-angle photography. And this 45mm does not let one down. It is sharp, edge to edge, and I can't detect any appreciable level of distortion. Contrast is excellent. Depth of field is great. I would prefer to let my images do the talking though, so here goes.
The Northrup F5 Tiger II flew an "aggressor" role with the Air Force's Red Flag advanced pilot training school (the AF equivalent to the Navy's Top Gun school). Note the star on the tail. It's red, exemplifying the red star worn by the former Soviet Union military aircraft. Exposures were 1/1000 @ f/11.
A shot from my front yard facing out our cul-de-sac. Exposure was 1/500 @ f/8.
All images were scanned on an Epson 4990 scanner @ 2400 ppi using Epson Scan software.
| | | | | New Member Registered: August, 2013 Posts: 10
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 16, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $275.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Compact (as far as Pentax 67 lenses go), no visible distortion | | Cons: | Relatively high CA, especially in the corners, noticeable field curvature, not as sharp as other 67 lenses, such as the latest version of 55mm F4 | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 5
Handling: 10
Value: 9
Camera Used: Pentax 6X7
| |
I've been using many samples of this lens on just as many samples of Pentax 67 bodies ever since it was originally introduced. Currently I own the latest version of it. I've used it professionally for product, interior, landscape, street, and wedding photography with great success. The lens handles superbly, it is compact and relatively light, in fact, it may be the third smallest and lightest lens in the Pentax 67 line-up, behind the 75mm F2.8 AL and 90mm F2.8. The lens has very little, if any geometric distortion, when used correctly. It also looks great on Pentax 67 body. It does have 82mm filter size, but I standardize my 67 system to 77mm filters, so I always use a slim 82-77 step-down ring on this lens, which it allows without any vignetting.
But optically the lens is lacking. Specifically, there is pronounced field curvature, forcing the user to balance-focus the center with the corners using high-powered magnifier directly on the ground glass screen and then stop down far enough to let the depth of field sharpen everything up. Normally F11 or F16 works for me, squeezing out the maximum amount of sharpness the lens can deliver.
Furthermore, there is significant amount of CA, especially in the corners, depending on your subject matter.
Finally, the lens is not sharp enough for me, regardless of the focusing method used, definitely lagging behind the latest version of the 55mm F4. Probably the only 67 system lens that is less sharp than this one is the 35mm Fish-Eye. I am not even going to mention the bokeh, because it is insane to expect any kind of bokeh quality from an ultra-wide angle lens, such as this one.
But since there is no other choice, I've learned to live with the lens in a love-hate relationship over the years, working around its weaknesses and enjoying its strengths. In spite of my whining, this little lens had on many occasions delivered superb images for me and what can I say - I just love to hate it! 
 | | |
;)
;)
