MF lens availability

[aboudd]

I've been struck lately at the lack of manufacturer's lenses for cameras like the Pentax 645D and the Leica S2. As a fan of Leica gear in the past, I was tempted when the S2 arrived, but the lack of lenses available is incomprehensible. While I appreciate that Leica is a different company than in the past, how does one offer such a fine piece of gear with no lenses? I've noticed that they have introduced adapters for Pentax and Mamiya lenses which I find even stranger. Leica glass is legendary. Why, and this is in no way a slam at the quality of their lenses, own an S2 if one has to use Pentax and Mamiya lenses?

The 645D is a different story - sort of. There are plenty of used lenses available for the 645D, but only two new lenses of current manufacture, the 55 and 25 and the 25 is not readily available, many months after announcement. Surreal isn't it?

 

[MGrayson]

I've also been struck by the dearth of glass. For Leica, their whole range is in short supply, not just the S glass. It' just a guess, but I'd say that camera bodies are basically computers with some mechanical bits for the shutter and possibly mirror. The world has gotten very good at mass-producing computers, and so camera bodies are easy. Lenses are a much harder to manufacture, and one can't just rent space on another production line if demand is twice what you expected. I bet Pentax and Leica have both sold more MF bodies than they expected. Ditto for the M9.

Just a guess.

Matt

 

[tsjanik]

Aboudd:

Leica is a new system; I guess I'm not surprised that lens development is slow until a customer base is established. In the case of Pentax, it's my understanding that the 645 lenses are still manufactured as they are available new in Asia and Europe. When the end of the 645NII and 67II was announced, Hoya explicitly stated 645 lenses production would continue. My impression is that the lack of lenses in the US is a result of Pentax USA's decision not to import them. I was told exactly that by a Pentax USA 645D rep. Keep in mind that Pentax did not expect to sell many 645Ds; John Carlson estimated 100 in the US-total. Hoya had no interest in cameras, I don't fault Pentax USA for being reluctant to make a financial commitment to 645D lens distribution. Perhaps with Ricoh and the apparent success of the 645D, things will change. However, the old Pentax is no more, I think the days of good lenses at good prices are gone, e.g. 5k for the 25mm.

Tom

 

[Shelby Lewis]

This is why I now shoot an RZ, lol... great lenses (and lots of them) and accessories at low prices.

... but I won't mention the backaches from the weight of the system

(I feel your pain, guys!)

 

[D&A]

Aboudd:

Leica is a new system; I guess I'm not surprised that lens development is slow until a customer base is established. In the case of Pentax, it's my understanding that the 645 lenses are still manufactured as they are available new in Asia and Europe. When the end of the 645NII and 67II was announced, Hoya explicitly stated 645 lenses production would continue. My impression is that the lack of lenses in the US is a result of Pentax USA's decision not to import them. I was told exactly that by a Pentax USA 645D rep. Keep in mind that Pentax did not expect to sell many 645Ds; John Carlson estimated 100 in the US-total. Hoya had no interest in cameras, I don't fault Pentax USA for being reluctant to make a financial commitment to 645D lens distribution. Perhaps with Ricoh and the apparent success of the 645D, things will change. However, the old Pentax is no more, I think the days of good lenses at good prices are gone, e.g. 5k for the 25mm.

Tom

Hi Tom, Aboud & All,

I've heard a number of conflicting stories regarding continued production and sale of Pentax AF 645 lenses overseas (in Asia and Europe). Apparently some of the lens are still listed as "orderable" in these geographical regions, but either they are prohibitedly expensive or upon placing an order, there is an indefinite wait. It was presumed by some reliable sources I have spoken with, that for a time, after the 645D was released, that many of these listed lenses (as being available) were either older stock that had to be warehouse pulled when an order was placed, or were available on a per order bases...meaning that once thay had a sufficient number of orders placed for a particular lens, a small run was made. Prices for even those previous, relatively reasonably priced FA 645 lenses has skyrocked if ordered new (overseas). I think with Pentax, it's been a matter of shifting ownership these past many years and in-house uncertainty just which direct and products would go ahead and get the "green light" for continued production. This most certainly included FA 645 lenses.

As Tom and Aboud expressed, the days for new $500.00 FA 645 lenses appears over...but thats also has happened with many other photographic companies that are "sound" financially. It's partly due to the economic times we now live in and the realities of companies protecting themselves and their investments. I also believe in the case of Pentax's new 25mm 645 lens, the unfortunate events in Japan these past 12 months, certainly made things more difficult.

As for Leica, I think many have expressed the various reasons why their lenses (both S2 and M) are in short supply. In this case it may be more a question of demand outstripping supply due to the unexpected numbers of individuals getting into Leica M photography and use of mirrorless cameras that can utilize these lenses. Production facilities and trained personel are also limited at Leica (for the moment). As for the S2 (which I recently took some model shots with)...others know far more than I...but I would venture a guess that Leica has tread carefully as to both not overproduce the number of lenses manufactured (being conservative on not knowing sales projections of S2 bodies in the coming years) as well as the "painstakingly" amount of time they need for manufacturing much of their exotic glass for these lenses (as well as for some of the M glass). Just some thoughts.

Dave (D&A)

 

[Jack]

And it's why I shoot a Phase DF and a tech camera. I would like to own an S2, but I cannot live with the limited lens line-up. The harder reality is I can't afford to own two MF systems, so had to choose between Leica and a more complete system...

 

[David Schneider]

When I decided to add MF to my studio, I looked hard at some of the features of the 645D, but couldn't get past the lack of lenses or having to use older film lenses. S2 was not at a price point to intergrate mf into my business. Like Jack, I wanted a more complete system. Those of us who feel the same are Phase or Hasselblad users. Or have need or funds for two systems, or what's available meets their needs.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I just can't go there on the S2 until I see more lenses in there lineup and I just can't get past the 5k or more per lens. I need a option for wider than 35mm and not sure how long that wait will be and would not do anything until they are out. It's been quite a long time to be waiting, a working Pro just can't wait without another system on hand. I actually thought about it and if I sold all my Phase I could get there maybe but for me the system simply is not mature enough as my only system. Will see how time marches on and I need to see what phase does on the new body as well. Frankly in all honesty I thought of going completely tech cam and sell my DF and glass and go get a Nikon D3x to get all that type of work done. My situation is very complicated because of my diversity of shooting. Other issue is I dislike every current 35 body out there right now.


Going with adapters for me is just not a good solution. Leica needs 2 or 3 more lenses to make me think more about it. It's one thing to wait for updated glass when you have a system of lenses you can use it's another thing waiting it out for new glass with no options.

 

[Shashin]

I am not sure how many lenses a system has is important, but whether they have the focal lengths you need. With most of the systems I had, it did not matter if the manufacturer released more lenses because I had what I needed--I never bought into a system hoping something might be offered in the future, I made sure they were available. And to be honest, if you need lots of choice in optics, you don't get medium- or large-format cameras.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I dont agree with your last comment though. I need choices in optics and MF has been serving me just fine with my current Phase system plus I can add a tech cam for even more options. That's the one beauty of having a back. You have options.

 

[Shashin]

Really? Are you saying a MDF system is going to have the same number of lens choices as a Canon or Nikon DSLR system? And I don't mean the same focal length by different manufacturers. There are options in MFD, but they are really not that great compared to smaller formats.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I don't need 64 lens choices but anything is better than 4 . I have at least 12 before I even think of a tech cam just in Phase and Schneider. Than I have around at least 15 focal lengths in tech cam.
That's not even counting the whole Mamiya line or even the whole Hassy V line.

I think my point here is this . I have options in many flavors to get anything I need done.

The point you are missing here is Leica has 4 dedicated to there system. Than it's adapters. How many dedicated digital lenses are made for the Pentax 2 or 3 than you have to rely on on lenses built for film. Almost all the lenses for the tech cam are built for digital as well as my Phase one glass and the LS glass. All of the Hassy H where made for digital. Hassy and Phase folks have numerous offerings that we can use. Not sure how you could refute that. Your Pentax system by and large is limited to older lens designs and Pentax has yet to replace them yet with digital lenses yet. Frankly you have the MF limitation more than a Hassy or Phase owner. Where 35mm came into this conversation is simply not comparative , it's not MF quality. How can you say go buy 35mm if you need many optics. We are wanting to use MF so 35mm should not even be part of the equation unless you found some magical way of getting image quality better than MF than we are all being idiots for going MF in the first place.

Sorry but many of us are getting it done in MF with a vast amount of choices in glass so yes I don't agree with your comment.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

If you sit and go over lenses in a Canon line some are built for APC sensors and Some for FF you start pulling it all apart than count the redundant lenses 1.2,1.4,1.8 plus all the overlapping zooms the number does get smaller. Yes I would say more but it's serving a much bigger market share.

As MF shooters we care about our market and which system is going to provide the most for your needs.

 

[Shashin]

Yup. You are right.

I don't need 64 lens choices but anything is better than 4 . I have at least 12 before I even think of a tech cam just in Phase and Schneider. Than I have around at least 15 focal lengths in tech cam.
That's not even counting the whole Mamiya line or even the whole Hassy V line.

I think my point here is this . I have options in many flavors to get anything I need done.

The point you are missing here is Leica has 4 dedicated to there system. Than it's adapters. How many dedicated digital lenses are made for the Pentax 2 or 3 than you have to rely on on lenses built for film. Almost all the lenses for the tech cam are built for digital as well as my Phase one glass and the LS glass. All of the Hassy H where made for digital. Hassy and Phase folks have numerous offerings that we can use. Not sure how you could refute that. Your Pentax system by and large is limited to older lens designs and Pentax has yet to replace them yet with digital lenses yet. Frankly you have the MF limitation more than a Hassy or Phase owner. Where 35mm came into this conversation is simply not comparative , it's not MF quality. How can you say go buy 35mm if you need many optics. We are wanting to use MF so 35mm should not even be part of the equation unless you found some magical way of getting image quality better than MF than we are all being idiots for going MF in the first place.

Sorry but many of us are getting it done in MF with a vast amount of choices in glass so yes I don't agree with your comment.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Well not to say we do not need more choices in all our systems. I have a list and it's not short either. ROTFLMAO

I admit I'm a bonafide lens whore. But more important the new systems like the Pentax and Leica need to grow and they need the support from users buying them to see more choices for the end user and I really want that to happen. We need to think of our MF
market growth and that is not by brand name only but the MF industry at large.

 

[D&A]

Guy Wrote --->"How many dedicated digital lenses are made for the Pentax 2 or 3 than you have to rely on on lenses built for film."<<<

Guy, my comments here only reflect upon the Pentax Medium Format lenses used on the 645D body and in no way comments on your statements regarding other capable medium format systems. For approx. the last 9 months, I've been testing multiple samples of virtually every Pentax AF 645 lens made, on the 645D body. I haven't yet posted these comprehensive results. What I can say, for better or worse that with regards to the digital specific lenses Pentax has released for the 645D (all two of them), that optically they are no better and in fact in some performance related areas, worse than many of their (Pentax's) film era AF 645 lenses....many of which have notable performance by most critera. So I'm not sure in this particular case that digital specific designed lenses have a unique advantage...at least not yet with regards to their use on Pentax's 645D. Time will tell when future lenses are released by them.

No doubt with other manufacturers, both medium format and 35mm, that many of the latest digital specific lenses, clearly outperform their film era counterparts. I've seen this most certainly with the 35mm DSLR systems I've shot with, in making lens comparisons and choices. So the Pentax MF system as it is today represents a good value and offers a tremedously wide variety of focal length lenses..both fixed focal length and zooms. Many of these legacy lenses may not be readily available as new, especially here in the states...but most are fairly plentifull on the used market in most all types of conditions and for what some would consider reasonable cost. In fact some are downright inexpensive when compared to other manufacturer's MF lenses. In this regard it's more of a complete system than it initially appears to some, although I'd be the 1st to agree that not all lenses take full advanatage of what the 645D sensor may be capable of. If and when Pentax releases a host of digital specific lenses and they clearly offer clear advanatges over their film era counterparts (other than weather resistance), then my assessment of this system would certainly change.

Aside from the digital specific 25mm (effective 19.5mm) and 55mm (effective 43mm) MF 645 Pentax lenses...Pentax's Af MF 645 lenses also include focal lengths of 35, 45, 55, 75, 120 macro, 150, 200, 300 (two different ones), 400, 33-55, 45-85, 55-110, 80-160, 100-300 and some others I left out...and these are all 645 autofocus lenses! Just multiply these focal lengths by 0.8 to get their effective focal length on the 645D body. There are also manual focus 1.4 and 2x teleconverters, new focusing screens, PTTL flashes and more. Maybe not the most complete MF digital system nor capable as some others...but the point is more complete than most are aware of. Of course as pointed out, Pentax can't rely on the past and in order to compete, must be both innovative and competitive with future lens releases, especially those that offer a higher level of performance. Lastly as Guy and others have pointed out...Pentax has to make these lenses available new on the current market, to truly make it a viable system. Some can't rely on looking on the used market for a specific lens, especially if they are a working pro and need a particular lens, "now"!

Dave (D&A)

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Thanks Dave

Yes Pentax like Mamiya has a long history of glass from the film days . So plenty out there and I found with the 22mpx back those lenses seemed to work really well, now I wonder maybe 40 mpx is the limit on them or question is where do they start falling apart. I have not tried pushing the older style on much past my P25 but I wonder about where the limit hits. Obviously its a big question at hand and not sure anyone wants to gather that all up at test it all out. Load of work there but regardless Mamiya had some good glass and some junk too. I agree be interesting to see what Pentax does next and how far you can take there legacy glass or if the newer digital future glass makes any difference. I know in Phase glass the improvements have been obvious over the old and yes some the same too.

I still want to shoot this thing too and please I don't want to sound negative on it , I truly want it to grow.

 

[D&A]

Just a note Guy, I added a fair amount to my post above (and below), after your wrote your most recent posting "above".

Additionally, the Pentax system, especially legacy lenses is much akin to the situation of Mamiya's....both having many legacy MF lenses on the market for ages...some great, some good and some just so-so with regards to how they perform on their respective digital MF bodies. You're right Guy...as the sensor size grows, many exceptionally good legacy lenses may become just fair-good competant performers when used on larger sensors. Still when I look at the recent digital specific Pentax MF lenses....and find that many legacy lenses outperformed them...one has to wonder if the new lenses are a letdown, or some of the legacy lenses were that good? Maybe a bit of both is at work here (so to speak).

***One weakness I have found though is since many legacy lenses were designed in the film-only era....some samples performed (or were adjusted) poorly....maybe fine for film but not the critical "fine" adjustment necessary for use on a sensor...while other samples of the same lens were exceptionally good. This was one of the major things to look for with regards to using legacy lenses on the Pentax 645D. The ability to "AF" fine-tune lenses, within the 645D body (menu settings), did help with this variability...at least to a degree.

Dave (D&A)

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

I think also there has to be availability before a system can be seen as pro. Not just the choice of lenses but also the ability to order a new lens and have it there tomorrow, not just from one store but many, country and worldwide. Not just one in rental stores but many. You can do that with Canon and Nikon in the 35mm world and with Mamiya and Hasselblad in the MF world.

Do you remember how panicky many pro's (myself included) got when after the Japanese earthquake disaster you couldn't get lenses or cameras anywhere? That meant if my gear got stolen or trashed and I had a wedding tomorrow then I was screwed. If I'd hired a whole crew and models for a shoot and my studio was broken into the day before and all my gear lifted, I'm going to be paying a lot of people for their time, annoying a client who may go elsewhere and I may not even know when I can rearrange the shoot.

Would you buy the Pentax or a Leica if you had to think like that? Pro's have to think like that, period.

So perhaps they want to target the serious enthusiast market, (no tethering on the Pentax practically garuantees that), people who can take a hit, even on a once in a lifetime trip to the moon, but without losing their livelihood. People who could do the job with a different camera and not worry about not getting paid or losing a client. People infact who can wait 5 months for a lens and pay double the value on the 2nd hand market.

It's a different mindset. For my personal project work (www.timelessjewishart.com) I can buy a 1960's screw mount lens knowing that it will take 2 months to get to me, will need two weeks of UV bleaching and then time to 'learn' it knowing that I can shoot for the moment with my underperforming Canon 50mm and just avoid situations where the bokeh will ruin my shots (specular highlights). I have no deadline, no client expectations, nothing but my own OC about the look I'm trying to achieve to live with while I wait. So I wait. I waited 4 years just to start the project because I was in the wrong country! When I thought I'd cracked a lens element on my 85mm lens however (was just a hair in the end) I had to know I would have a new one and immediately, I shoot 35% of each wedding with that lens and if I lost it I could not do the job, if I can't do the job infront of me then people won't take me for a job next year. Then I don't have money to put food on the table. It makes everything far more urgent.

 

[Shashin]

Would you buy the Pentax or a Leica if you had to think like that? Pro's have to think like that, period.

So, you are implying that I am not a professional?

This "my way or the highway" train of thought where something works for a particular professional doing one type of work means that is the ONLY way a professional can work is really annoying. There is actually a diversity of opinion because there is a diversity of work professionals do and a diversity of solutions they apply. Ansel Adams warned against a piano teacher with two pianos.