toni_nikkanen Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 I love my Pentax 645 system, even though it was a hard decision between theMamiya 645 (manual focus) and Pentax 645 systems. But in the end the decidingfactors were my existing Pentax 6x7 system and lenses that are useable on the645, and my general good experiences with Pentax equipment in the past (I haveno first-hand experience on Mamiya equipment). The 75, 45 and 120 macro forPentax 645 are great lenses (except for the 45mm flaring) and the body workswonderfully. However there's one thing the Mamiya system has that I'd like: The 80mm/1.9lens. I was wondering if anyone knew of a similarly fast lens that could be usedon the Pentax 645 with an adapter? I understand the Mamiya lens can't be useddue to the Mamiya flange distance being shorter than the Pentax. There's theNorita 80/2.0 lens but I've not found out if it's adaptable and where I couldfind an adapter. Are there any other options to consider? Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_rasmussen Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 The 105mm f/2.4 for the P67 is close to what are seeking (with adapter of course). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aoresteen Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 The Hasselblad 110 f/2 can be adapted to the Pentax 645. S0me use it as a normal lens. It is a very nice lens but it is a bit large. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roland_vink Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 The other fast medium format lens is the Contax 645 80/2, but I doubt it can be adapted to the Pentax 645. I'd say the P67 105/2.4 is your best option since the Pentax adapter supports the automatic diaphram. It also accepts 67mm filters like your 45 and 120 so would work with your kit very well. F2.4 is half a stop faster than f2.8, and the slightly longer focal length makes it easier to isolate a subject from the background so overall it has the same isolating power as an 80/2 lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff_drew4 Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 I would also suggest that at f/2 vs f/2.8 it's a close compromise comparing the Mamiya 80mm vs the 75mm Pentax. Of course, that also assumes that the specs are accurate and not influenced by marketing! ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toni_nikkanen Posted April 8, 2008 Author Share Posted April 8, 2008 Thank you for the suggestions. I wasn't aware of the lens for Contax 645. I've been trying to find the flange distance information for the Contax 645 mount and haven't been able to find it, but I found mention that Mamiya 645 lenses are adaptable to Contax 645, which would suggest the Contax flange distance is even shorter, therefore making infinity focus impossible when used on a Pentax 645. But I am not sure. Otherwise it would be the perfect solution as far as I could afford it, though; the lens seems to be getting unreserved rave reviews. I would like to clarify my needs a bit more. I am looking for: a) hand-held shooting b) available light shooting (with the ability to get more than just the head and shoulders of one person into the shot, indoors, with limited ability to move backwards) c) shallow depth of field d) focal length close to 75mm e) totally awesome viewfinder image :) I do have the Pentax 6x7 105/2.4 lens but I find it's a bit too tight for my intended use on the 645. Also the minimum focusing distance of 1 meter is sometimes too far. Now I found the flange distance for the Norita 66 system as well: 68.2mm, somewhat shorter than Pentax 645 (70.87mm). It seems I just might have to contend with my current lens setup; it would be totally crazy to switch systems now. Admittedly I'm doing great as it is so I guess I'll manage :) (One option would be to purchase a very old Norita 66 or Mamiya 645 body and lens for cheap. But camera systems have a habit of growing and soon I would own three complete medium format systems, which would be totally crazy.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philippderganz Posted April 8, 2008 Share Posted April 8, 2008 why don?t you just buy a mamiya with the 80/1.9 ? they go for cheap nowadays. no need to change lenses and when one camera breaks you can use the other whilest the other is in for repair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toni_nikkanen Posted April 8, 2008 Author Share Posted April 8, 2008 Yes, I'm beginning to think that's exactly what I need to do. However like I said, camera systems have a bad habit of growing... I'll need to think about this until my balances become positive enough to actually do something or other :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_fromm2 Posted April 8, 2008 Share Posted April 8, 2008 Toni, you have to think bigger. Get a 2x3 Speed Graphic and then buy a 4"/2.0 TTH Anastigmat as fitted to Vinten F95 and early Agiflite aerial cameras. At this very moment there's an F95 with 4"/2 TTH on offer on eBay UK. I have mine already, and I'm not selling it. You'll need a 2x3 Speed Graphic, though. The lens' back focus is too short for it to mount on any SLR for formats larger than 35 mm and it is in barrel, i.e., shutterless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roland_vink Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 <i>I would like to clarify my needs a bit more. I am looking for: a) hand-held shooting b) available light shooting (with the ability to get more than just the head and shoulders of one person into the shot, indoors, with limited ability to move backwards) c) shallow depth of field d) focal length close to 75mm e) totally awesome viewfinder image :)</i> <p> The Pentax 645 55/2.8 would allow you to shoot at slower shutter speeds that the 75/2.8 and would be suitable for shooting indoors, so it solves a couple of issues, but I guess the focal length is too short. <p> <i>I do have the Pentax 6x7 105/2.4 lens but I find it's a bit too tight for my intended use on the 645. Also the minimum focusing distance of 1 meter is sometimes too far.</i> <p> Another option is to find a Pentax T226 closeup filter for your 105/2.4. The combined focal length is 100mm so you get a slightly shorter lens. The focusing range is approx 2.5m - 0.75m, which might be a useful range for portraiture. It it nicely reduces the minimum focus distance while allowing you to focus a reasonable distance out. Might be what you are looking for? There is one available at <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/40996-REG/Pentax_37832_67mm_T226_SMC_Super.html">B&H</a>. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aoresteen Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 I picked up an 80mm f/1.9 lens off ebay for $35 in exec condition. I use a M645 1000S body. They are too cheap not to buy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toni_nikkanen Posted April 12, 2008 Author Share Posted April 12, 2008 Well, I have found the ultimate answer. A friend is making a long-overdue comeback to photography. He's restarting from scratch, so I'm going to find a Mamiya 645 body and 80/1.9 lens (among other things, such as enlargers etc.) for him. We'll see what impact, if any, this will have on my own equipment :) Took some more photographs with my Pentax 6x7 and 645 equipment today. Some tripod landscape stuff using EFKE R25 film with 6x7 and some snapshots using Tmax400 film with the 645 and flash. Both systems are a joy to use, to be sure. But sometimes you end up being somewhat of a doofus; I took my Pentax 6x7 55mm with me. When I had the camera on a tripod, ready to accept the 55mm wide-angle lens, I noticed something is not right. The lens just wouldn't fit. What's worse, the lens rear cap of the 55mm just wouldn't fit the 105/2.4 I just removed from the 6x7 body. After a moment of being a total doofus, I finally realized the 55/4 was equipped with the Pentax 6x7 to 645 adapter. Happily the on-lookers didn't understand I was going through some serious incompetence at the time and I got my shots at last. Too bad the location wasn't all I tought it would be, a nice hill with good sunshine and so on, but the view was just simply boring and I lacked the creativity to make it interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now