The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Pentax 645 600mm f/5.6 or Pentax 67 600mm f/4

tsjanik

Well-known member
Glad to hear you've found your lens, I'm sure will enjoy it, but pay heed to Ed's and Dave's comments about stability. I'm convinced that the difficulty stems from the mechanical shutter of the 645Z. When it opens, it it produses vibrations (rotation) that cause movement in the camera body if the body is not directly attached to the tripod. A Manfrotto long lens support is helpful here. It attaches to a tripod leg and the portrait plate of the 645Z, giving two attachment points and resistence to rotation around the tripod head mount. The shutter effect is also seen in the 400mm (645 FA). When used on a tripod, vibrations are reduced more by attaching the tripod at the body rather than at the lens. I did a test using the 600mm with a 645Z and a Fuji 50R. The Fuji used an EFSC to eliminate vibrations from the opening of the shutter. I've combined crops of a chair in the attached photos. Colors are as they come from ACR without modification. The Z image shows signs of camera movement. I did this test several times, the Fuji was always slightly sharper at the speeds used (1/40-1/100s). I did not use any addtional stabilization I would typically have for the 645Z in this test

Tom
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Glad to hear you've found your lens, I'm sure will enjoy it, but pay heed to Ed's and Dave's comments about stability. I'm convinced that the difficulty stems from the mechanical shutter of the 645Z. When it opens, it it produses vibrations (rotation) that cause movement in the camera body if the body is not directly attached to the tripod. A Manfrotto long lens support is helpful here. It attaches to a tripod leg and the portrait plate of the 645Z, giving two attachment points and resistence to rotation around the tripod head mount. The shutter effect is also seen in the 400mm (645 FA). When used on a tripod, vibrations are reduced more by attaching the tripod at the body rather than at the lens. I did a test using the 600mm with a 645Z and a Fuji 50R. The Fuji used an EFSC to eliminate vibrations from the opening of the shutter. I've combined crops of a chair in the attached photos. Colors are as they come from ACR without modification. The Z image shows signs of camera movement. I did this test several times, the Fuji was always slightly sharper at the speeds used (1/40-1/100s). I did not use any addtional stabilization I would typically have for the 645Z in this test

Tom
Thank you Tom.

Even as I understand that the long lens support would be useful, would the Wimberley WH-200 gimbal head not be adequate?

The vibration is induced in the camera body and is independent of the attached lens. So any long lens with its hood protruding out should logically affect the camera body shake almost equally due to wind. Why should the 600mm specifically be more problematic?

It would be interesting to probe this further.
 

Ed Hurst

Well-known member
Thank you Tom.

Even as I understand that the long lens support would be useful, would the Wimberley WH-200 gimbal head not be adequate?

The vibration is induced in the camera body and is independent of the attached lens. So any long lens with its hood protruding out should logically affect the camera body shake almost equally due to wind. Why should the 600mm specifically be more problematic?

It would be interesting to probe this further.

I understand your confusion and very logical process of seeking to understand. I am not sure that I can fully explain it, as the lens does seem to be disproportionately fussy about support, even by comparison to other lenses of similar size and length (at least when used on a medium format camera with a focal plane shutter). Maybe it's about the balance of the lens... Maybe it's about the physical construction and how it transmits shutter vibration through its structure. Whatever it is, I can assure you that there is a challenge here. However good the head, I am quite confident that this lens needs support in at least two places (and ideally three) before it can deliver maximally sharp results with the Pentax 645D/Z. I have found that a decent support on the tripod mount is a starting point, then the camera needs support in a way that is separated from the lens support (ideally a separate tripod, perhaps a monopod; as a minimum, a mounting to the tripod that is significantly separated from how the lens is attached to it). The third point of support (at the front of the lens) is desirable but not essential if the first two points are done well.

If you manage to troubleshoot and analyse this, I would be delighted to see the results. But my hands-on experience seems to match that of all other people I know who have used this lens with the Pentax 645D/Z bodies, so I think you'd better set yourself to provide at least two points of support :)
 

D&A

Well-known member
There is not a lot I can add to both Tom's and Ed's excellent assessment of the situation regarding support for the Pentax A* 600mm f5.6 645 lens. At the very least a 2 point support (one for the camera and one for the lens) is absolutely necessary (as they both pointed out) or image degradation will be abundantly apparent. The most portable and least expensive way to accomplish this is as Tom mentioned...the Manfrotto long lens support where while the tripod head is attached to the lens, the Manfrotto long lens support is attached at one end to the camera body and the other to one of the tripod lens and then its extended in such a way to put slight upward pressure on the body, minimizing vibration as a consequence, resulting in rigidity of the camera body and lens as though a single unit. If though you reposition or move the camera body/lens to change composition, you have to loose (via a set screw) the long lens support. Therefore its not an ideal solution when shooting moving subjects nor is it the ultimate in support. then again a two tripod support is also not ideal with moving subjects. The Manfrotto though the most portable solution in the field compared to more rigid and effective solutions.

Now with regards to the Wimberley, which I've used with this lens, its a tradeoff. It's certainly ideal when shooting moving subjects as I did with both the young Cheetah (posted earlier) as well as adult cats (cheetahs and others), but often at a sacrifice of optimal results. Moving subjects don't have to be moving at the time of the shot, but the Wimberley allows reframing if the subject is often on the move. Of course if the subject is actually moving, the Wimberley has the advantage of getting the shot which otherwise might be lost by a two tripod or Manfrotto set-up. I will add the Wimberley is far far superior than a single tripod/head combo. It often come down to what subjects you plan to shoot with this lens and that will determine your choice as a solution to providing adequate support.

As they have both pointed out, there is something about the combination of the 645 body ( 645D/Z) and this lens that's clearly different in required support vs. other camera large lens combinations that are just as large and weighty. Long ago I actively shot with Pentax 35mm bodies (both film and digital) with their humongous Pentax 250-600 f5.6 zoom lens as well as their 600 f4. Same goes with Nikon pro bodies and their super telephotos and never have I encountered the issues that I have with the Pentax A* 600mm 645 lens. In those other large lens's situations I even was able to get by with a single support point under the lens and on rare occasions with a monopod. No in camera or lens stabilization was available either.

if I had to venture a guess and I could be completely mistaken, I think it has to do more with the 645D/Z body than anything else. Maybe its the boxy shape of the body along with a much larger than 35mm mirror box and accompanied vibration and that vibration transmits to the lens. Maybe the construction and materials used in the lens, lends itself to picking up vibration more than other large lenses and combined with the vibrations induced by the 645D/Z results in the extraordinary need for vibration reducing support.

Trial and error test shots with various support will provide you with the solution and although the Wimberley head may and usually will result in clarity in images, testing with 2 point support will also demonstrate what is missing when the Wimberley is employed vs. a 2 point support system.

Dave (D&A)
 
Last edited:
I understand your confusion and very logical process of seeking to understand. I am not sure that I can fully explain it, as the lens does seem to be disproportionately fussy about support, even by comparison to other lenses of similar size and length (at least when used on a medium format camera with a focal plane shutter). Maybe it's about the balance of the lens... Maybe it's about the physical construction and how it transmits shutter vibration through its structure. Whatever it is, I can assure you that there is a challenge here. However good the head, I am quite confident that this lens needs support in at least two places (and ideally three) before it can deliver maximally sharp results with the Pentax 645D/Z. I have found that a decent support on the tripod mount is a starting point, then the camera needs support in a way that is separated from the lens support (ideally a separate tripod, perhaps a monopod; as a minimum, a mounting to the tripod that is significantly separated from how the lens is attached to it). The third point of support (at the front of the lens) is desirable but not essential if the first two points are done well.

If you manage to troubleshoot and analyse this, I would be delighted to see the results. But my hands-on experience seems to match that of all other people I know who have used this lens with the Pentax 645D/Z bodies, so I think you'd better set yourself to provide at least two points of support :)
Thanks Ed. I will keep these points in mind when I start using the lens.

I was hoping to use this lens to shoot stationary but slowly moving about birds and mammals. With two tripods for the lens and the camera, one would be restricted to shoot in a single and straight direction, thus removing manoeuvrability out of the equation. That would be highly restrictive.

So when it comes to birds/mammals, I could only shoot birds in their nests (once spotted) or a mammal resting leisurely in one spot.

That means the more portable option of the 400mm + 1.4X would still have applications despite owning this 600mm lens. 😅
 
There is not a lot I can add to both Tom's and Ed's excellent assessment of the situation regarding support for the Pentax A* 600mm f5.6 645 lens. At the very least a 2 point support (one for the camera and one for the lens) is absolutely necessary (as they both pointed out) or image degradation will be abundantly apparent. The most portable and least expensive way to accomplish this is as Tom mentioned...the Manfrotto long lens support where while the tripod head is attached to the lens, the Manfrotto long lens support is attached at one end to the camera body and the other to one of the tripod lens and then its extended in such a way to put slight upward pressure on the body, minimizing vibration as a consequence, resulting in rigidity of the camera body lens as a single. If though you reposition or move the camera body/lens to change composition, you have to loose (via a set screw) the long lens support. Therefore its not an ideal solution when shooting moving subjects nor is it the ultimate in support. then again a two tripod support is also not ideal with moving subjects. The Manfrotto though the most portable solution in the field compared to more rigid and effective solutions.

Now with regards to the Wimberley, which I've used with this lens, its a tradeoff. It's certainly ideal when shooting moving subjects as I did with both the young Cheetah (posted earlier) as well as adult cats (cheetahs and others), but often at a sacrifice of optimal results. Moving subjects don't have to be moving at the time of the shot, but the Wimberley allows reframing if the subject is often on the move. Of course if the subject is actually moving, the Wimberley has the advantage of getting the shot which otherwise might be lost by a two tripod or Manfrotto set-up. I will add the Wimberley is far far superior than a single tripod/head combo. It often come down to what subjects you plan to shoot with this lens and that will determine your choice as a solution to providing adequate support.

As they have both pointed out, there is something about the combination of the 645 body ( 645D/Z) and this lens that's clearly different in required support vs. other camera large lens combinations that are just as large and weighty. Long ago I actively shot with Pentax 35mm bodies (both film and digital) with their humongous Pentax 250-600 f5.6 zoom lens as well as their 600 f4. Same goes with Nikon pro bodies and their super telephotos and never have I encountered the issues that I have with the Pentax A* 600mm 645 lens. In those other large lens's situations I even was able to get by with a single support point under the lens and on rare occasions with a monopod. No in camera or lens stabilization was available either.

if I had to venture a guess and I could be completely mistaken, I think it has to do more with the 645D/Z body than anything else. Maybe its the boxy shape of the body along with a much larger than 35mm mirror box and accompanied vibration and that vibration transmits to the lens. Maybe the construction and materials used in the lens, lends itself to picking up vibration more than other large lenses and combined with the vibrations induced by the 645D/Z results in the extraordinary need for vibration reducing support.

Trial and error test shots with various support will provide you with the solution and although the Wimberley head may and usually will result in clarity in images, testing with 2 point support will also demonstrate what is missing when the Wimberley is employed vs. a 2 point support system.

Dave (D&A)
Thank you Dave for such a detailed explanation.

It is amply clear to me that this lens is going to be a different ball game and throw up challenges never before encountered.

I would be eagerly waiting for the arrival of the lens in February and then try to use it. I hope to put in place an adequate support system for the camera and lens combination to get optimal results.

Thank you once again.
 

D&A

Well-known member
Thank you Dave for such a detailed explanation.

It is amply clear to me that this lens is going to be a different ball game and throw up challenges never before encountered.

I would be eagerly waiting for the arrival of the lens in February and then try to use it. I hope to put in place an adequate support system for the camera and lens combination to get optimal results.

Thank you once again.
Although the lens has many possible uses, do you have some idea if you mostly plan to use it for static subjects or those that occasionally or often move.? I ask as this might dictate the type and degree of support required.

Dave (D&A)
 
Although the lens has many possible uses, do you have some idea if you mostly plan to use it for static subjects or those that occasionally or often move.? I ask as this might dictate the type and degree of support required.

Dave (D&A)
For now, I plan to use it for stationary objects or those moving occasionally and again becoming stationary. More like animals in habitat.

But some degree of manoeuvrability is most highly desirable for the sake of slight changes in composition etc.
 

D&A

Well-known member
For now, I plan to use it for stationary objects or those moving occasionally and again becoming stationary. More like animals in habitat.

But some degree of manoeuvrability is most highly desirable for the sake of slight changes in composition etc.
That's helpful to know. I should have mentioned that the Manfrotto long lens support "does" allow for small changes in composition simply by loosing the knurled knob which is like a set screw, loosing head and then re-tightening both. In practice its a fairly quick procedure. Of course a true two point stability set-up is best.

Dave (D&A)
 
Last edited:
That's helpful to know. I should have mentioned that the Manfrotto long lens support "does" allow for small changes in composition simply by loosing the knurled knob which is like a set screw, loosing head and then re-tightening both. In practice its a fairly quick procedure. Of course a true two point stability set-up is best.

Dave (D&A)
Thanks Dave.

I will check out the Manfrotto long lens support. Will need to look for one.

Is this the one you are recommending:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bh...rotto_293_293_Telephoto_Lens_Support.html/amp

And does this one go on the Wimberley WH-200 gimbal head? Or on the Arca Swiss ball head that I have?

If I am putting this on the gimbal head as a self-contained unit with camera & lens mounted on the long lens support, then there will be a very fair degree of of manoeuvrability possible, right?
 

D&A

Well-known member
This was helpful when I photographed the moon:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/554349-REG/Manfrotto_359_359_Long_Lens_Support.html

Seem to be discontinued, Sad!

Martin
Yes, the product Martin provided the link for, is the Manfrotto long lens support I was referring to in my posts above. It helps tremendously although not the pinnacle of 2 point support for a very large lens, it is portable and does allow some lateral movement, slow and methodical as it may be to accomplish that. It was around for years so no doubt copies of this particular long lens support can be found.

Dave (D&A)
 
Yes, the product Martin provided the link for, is the Manfrotto long lens support I was referring to in my posts above. It helps tremendously although not the pinnacle of 2 point support for a very large lens, it is portable and does allow some lateral movement, slow and methodical as it may be to accomplish that. It was around for years so no doubt copies of this particular long lens support can be found.

Dave (D&A)
Thanks Dave.

The item seems to be available on a few websites though :)

https://www.castlecameras.co.uk/manfrotto-359-1-long-lens-support/p785


https://www.adorama.com/bg3591.html


https://carmarthencameras.com/manfrotto-359-long-lens-support.html


And a review on the following:-

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums...support-gimbal-head-need-tame-smc-1000mm.html
 

D&A

Well-known member
The Adorama site (link) says "On Backorder". I doubt they'll get any new ones in. The other site seems to have one in stock.

Dave (D&A)
 
Top