Pentax 645D

[Christians86]

Hi, after reading this thread up and down, forward and backwards - also reading others here, I decided to join. It seemed like a lot of objective and knowledgeable people here, so I'll just jump to the question

I'm having a luxury problem - I got the Pentax 645D but stroke of faith with the 120 F4 macro and 55mm kit lense, for 4500 USD dollars almost unused - 2000 auctions. I already have the H4D-31 with 35-90 and D800 with 14-24 and up to 70-200. So I'm thinking that I need some lenses for the Pentax, but I won't buy lenses for it which are useless or allready covered buy what I have. By that I mean that unless the pose as a good lense for the Pentax I can save my money from buying it.

I have already gotten the 200 mm F4 and 80-160, I got both for 500 usd inc shipping and tax to Norway at very good condition. I'm thinking that since I have a very wide lense for Nikon, and when testing on the road today - I thought that 35 mm on Hassy worked fine, 14-24 on 35mm became to wide and hard to work with, and with 40 MP I have some place to cut.

I'm thinking of buying:

35 mm FA
45 mm FA

I think that those two, or at least the 35 mm would cover my need for landscape, as I have the macro for food and plantlife, and the 80-160/200 for portraits.

Also - after testing today, I do think that hasselblad is about to be sold later this year...it's not a big loss for me, but using it on the road to Bergen in Norway and rain came down...I was less concerned with the Pentax than Hassy

I hope that someone has time to look at this - non of my friends are used to MF, so I had to find other places to ask questions like this. I'll upload some pictures later

Thanks in advance, and also - apologies if my english isn't all that good..I'm Norwegian

 

[Shashin]

Welcome.

Both 35mm lenses are good for different reasons. The manual version has kind of a cult following. I have it and it is very nice.

Based on reviews, I did not get the 45mm. It seems to be one of the consistently poor performing lens for the 645D. The 45-85mm zoom is considered much better if you want that focal length.

The 150mm is highly rated as are the 300mm f/4 and 400 f/5.6 telephotos. (The 600mm is great too, but rare.) I have the 300mm f/5.6 because of its size and weight--it is not a focal length I use often. It is OK, but I find the contrast a little low, but nothing that can't be fixed in post.

I am sure other will add to this, although I think we all own the same lenses.

 

[Christians86]

Hi, thanks a lot - both for welcome and help

I think I'll drop the 45mm then - but I figured I wanted the 35 mm, since using it with my Hassy has worked very well. Ebay is such a nice thing

 

[Ed Hurst]

Another vote for the 35mm (I would get the A version if I were you...)

 

[Christians86]

Is there a reason for the A version? I found the FA version for reasonable price - in Norway they claim bloodprices for these lenses...about 3300 USD for a new one, and the used ex++ was 800 usd...

 

[Ed Hurst]

If you have a good price for the FA, I'd say for for it (I must have missed that part of your message). Apparently the A is said to do slightly better overall on the 645D, but since both are so good, if you have a good deal on the FA, you will be happy with it.

 

[Christians86]

If you have a good price for the FA, I'd say for for it (I must have missed that part of your message). Apparently the A is said to do slightly better overall on the 645D, but since both are so good, if you have a good deal on the FA, you will be happy with it.

My bad, I didn't say anything about that - I assumed the FA would be recommended. Tomorrow its 17. May so I'll have a lot to take pictures of...I need to test the 200 mm and 80-160 mm. But with 35 mm - 55 mm - 80 - 160mm - 120 mm - 200 mm...I should have what I need?

 

[Ed Hurst]

That selection of lenses should cover most eventualities! Of course one could always make a case for others in addition, but that is a good set to get going with.

 

[Shashin]

I have 35mm, 55mm, 120mm, and 300mm.

 

[bensonga]

Give some thought to the Pentax 645 75mm f2.8 lens. Everything I've read is that this little fast lens performs very well on the 645D. You can find excellent examples for very low prices at KEH.com etc.

Perhaps Dave (D&A) will chime in here soon with a link to the extensive lens tests he has done. There are also excellent lens reviews on the Pentax forum.

Gary

 

[Ed Hurst]

My line up is the following 645 lenses: 35mm A, 55mm DFA, 120mm macro A, 150 f2.8 FA, 45-85 FA and the following 67 lenses: 55 f4, 75 f2.8AL, 90 f2.8, 90 f2.8L/S, 105 f2.4, 135mm f4 macro, 150 f2.8, 165 f2.8, 200 F4, 300 F4EDIF and 55-100 f4.5. Do let me know if you want any info. on the performance of any of these on the 645D.

As you can see, quite a bit of duplication here (it's a collection that has built up piecemeal over 13 years - with changing objectives in different periods - so it is hardly a coherent or sensible set to own; there are lenses here I hardly use now due to the duplication) - so I am certainly not advocating that you build up a set like this. Less is more!

 

[Ed Hurst]

Perhaps Dave (D&A) will chime in here soon with a link to the extensive lens tests he has done. There are also excellent lens reviews on the Pentax forum.

Gary

Good point Gary - Dave (D&A)'s tests are very interesting and useful. They do not include 67 glass at this stage as far as I know (not a criticism of your excellent and exhaustive work Dave - it lay outside the scope) - I only mention this because 67 glass is, in some cases, a strong option for the 645D if you don't need speed. Nevertheless, I would suggest anyone reads Dave's work before investing in glass for the 645D - compulsory reading!

 

[Shashin]

I had the Pentax 105mm 67 lens for my 645D. It was a good lens, but I replaced it with the 120mm Macro. With 67 lenses, you are limited to center weighted metering and, at least with my 105mm, the AWB seemed to be different. AWB is much better in the A 120mm in side-by-side test. I also like to control the aperture with the camera dial rather than on the lens--you do not get aperture information in the viewfinder with 67 lenses.

Still, that is not to say 67 lenses cannot be fine, just given the 645 counterparts, I am not sure of the benefits.

 

[tsjanik]

Link to Dave's review:

Comprehensive Testing: Results & Observations with Pentax 645 Lenses used on the 645D - The GetDPI Photography Forums

Agree with all the comments, in particular Gary's about the 75m-small, light, sharp, inexpensive.

 

[D&A]

Link to Dave's review:

Comprehensive Testing: Results & Observations with Pentax 645 Lenses used on the 645D - The GetDPI Photography Forums

Agree with all the comments, in particular Gary's about the 75m-small, light, sharp, inexpensive.

Hi Tom,

I just caught this thread and everyone has offered some great advice!

Thanks ever so much for posting the link to my comprehensive lens tests for Pentax 645 lenses.

A few responses to some of the comments made. The Pentax FA 75mm f2.8 lens is a little gem. When stopped down a few stops it's very sharp and contrasty but many samples do suffer from high levels of CA when reflective items are present and shot under bright sunlight.

Since I performed my initial lens tests I had a chance to compare more samples of the 35mm A* manual focus 645 lens vs the FA 35mm AF 645 lens....since there are a lot of user opinions regarding these two similar lenses. I cannot make any definitive statement about the differences since sample to sample variation is quite prevalent (especially with the Fa version), but as a general comment I have noted slightly to somewhat better edge performance at infinity in the manual focus A* 35mm version but also a higher level of CA on occasion. The FA version displays a greater amount of field curvature that gives the appearance of softer edges with flat field objects primarily towards mid-distance and infinity subjects, but CA is appears to be better controlled. It's therefore a tradeoff depending on ones needs and also the convenience of having AF.

As noted, the FA 45-85 zoom is excellent, especially towards the wider end. It's a gem of a lens, and convenient to use. Some samples at the long end are better than others...but when a good one is found, it's definitely worth having.

A very underrated lens is the FA 150 f2.8...a wonderful portrait lens, that almost feels like it's missing elements, its so light (especially for such a fast lens) and makes a great pairing with the FA 45-85mm zoom.

Personally I much prefer the FA 150mm f2.8 that to the FA 200 f4 for a variety of reasons, although a good sample of the latter is decent, but best when stopped down...making it quite a slow lens.

Much of this info is in the comprehensive lens tests. Lastly thanks everyone for your kind words. Everyone's contributions to the 645D system has made this a wonderful and valuable resource for Pentax medium format.

Dave (D&A)

 

[D&A]

As Tom as pointed out, the Pentax A* 600mm f5.6 lens isn't quite as large as it appears. It's a superb performer although I find I don't often use it often enough...whereas the FA 300 f4 645 lens is simply spectacular and of course more manageable in size.

One issue with the 25mm D FA lens is it exhibits an unusually high level of CA and it's been somewhat of a problem for nature shooters. The DA version which is from all indications is optically similar, has tried to eliviate this problem by extending out the built in front hood to shield the front element. I suspect (but have no proof) that some additional coating may have been employed to also address the CA issue.

Dave (D&A)

 

[tsjanik]

I had the FA and A 35mm lenses. I kept the A version; they are both good lenses, but I didn't care for the field curvature Dave refers to in the FA. You could use it to advantage in certain situations (e.g. center focus far, edges closer). Here is a shot taken with 35mm A and a crop of the lower left edge. The edge sharpness of the A is quite good.

Tom

Christians86, I wouldn't hesitate to buy an FA for $800, it's a very good price. In fact, it might be better if you didn't mention what good prices you paid, many of us paid more :cussing:

 

[Christians86]

Christians86, I wouldn't hesitate to buy an FA for $800, it's a very good price. In fact, it might be better if you didn't mention what good prices you paid, many of us paid more :cussing:

Sorry :toocool: - In Norway people tend to think that D800 etc is the same as MF, and its a small marked for this, also I don't think people know what to find on ebay if they try.
But last question - I can get the A version for 520 USD and the FA for 860 USD...if autofoucus is the only difference and I'm going to use it for landscape - it might be money well saved, and also I can buy the 45-85 for +/- the difference. Would that be better? (Sorry to ask "stupid" question - but I found that people here have experience with these, non of my friends have)

 

[tsjanik]

I kept the A and sold the FA, so my recommendation would be to buy the A and save the money. It really comes down to AF or not.

 

[D&A]

It may or may not be a tough choice in deciding between the A* and FA versions. In my opinion is it depends on what is primarily being shot with the lens and how it's going to be used. For close up and close-mid distance shots, the field curvature of the FA is held to a minimum and the edge to edge sharpness is extremely good into the corners with little to no trace of CA evident. As the subject distance becomes greater, the field curvature of the lens is quite evident and as Tom pointed out, may play a role in soft corners, especially if your subject is a landscape where all detail (center and edge) is near infinity.

It also appeared the FA version had the ultimate edge in center sharpness...not a lot but it could be seen in crops.

I did encounter more CA in the A* lens, especially with brightly lit scenes.

Interestingly, when I physically look at the front element of the FA lens, it's is curved and quite bulbous...whereas the A* version isn't. I wonder if this has anything to do with the field curvature?

In any case the A* is a best buy and generally has less to be concerned with. The FA is fussy...sample variation in terms of getting proper AF fine tune nailed is great but when all the stars align (so to speak), the FA provides some remarkably good performance and AF in certain instances is handy.

If you can test both on your 645D, you'll know which one to get...if not, the safe bet and always an excellent performer is the A* lens.

I hope to revisit this comparison in the near future.

Dave (D&A)