widest MF lenses

Alan Hogg recently requested information regarding the performance of the 45mm Pentax 67 lens with respect to light fall-off. I hope others will respond to this request, and, in fact, I would like to expand on it.

 

<p>

 

I have heard negative reports on the performance of the Mamiya 645 35mm lens, but nothing at all on the Pentax 645 35mm or Pentax 67 45mm. Many current and would be MF shooters no doubt wonder about sharpness and light fall-off of the widest MF lenses available, and this list could be a valuable resource in gathering information about the options available across formats and manufacturers.

 

<p>

 

If you have experience with the widest lens available in your format, I think many of us would benefit by hearing your impressions of it. I can contribute my .02 on the Mamiya 7 43mm and the Schneider S.A. 47XL, and will do so in a separate post. Please write and fill us in on your lens. Is it sharp enough for your needs? Too much fall-off? How troublesome are filters to use with it? Is it a lens that we're better off buying, renting, or avoiding? TIA to all who respond.

 

<p>

 

Gordon Vickrey

krmhlz@earthlink.net

RB67 50 "C": excellent, sharp (slight focus loss at extreme edges, usually cropped in printing), reasonable and expected fall-off (most would call it "not noticeable" in carefully composed or artificially lit shots). Well worth owning. The only wider lens (I believe) for the RB is a fisheye, unless there is something newer I don't know about. Thanks for asking, Gordon.

I have used my P67, 45mm lens for nearly ten years now and have had no noticable light fall off at the edge of the field. As far as sharpness is concerned, my 20x24 Ilfochrome prints from this lens are sharp except for a slight softness at the edges. This is at f/22 where diffraction is affecting the image; so at f/8, this lens is quite sharp. There is some mustache distortion in this lens but is only noticable when shooting scenes with straight lines. Overall it is worth owning.