New Pentax 645 35mm 3.5 AF test & soapbox

[douglas_cummings]

Just finished testing this lens against my beat-up 35mm non-AF.

W/o knowing which was which on the lightbox, they were virtually

identical, the nod barely going to the older lens. These two were

great with flare, equal shooting into the sun but the sun "star"

was curiously larger with the new lens. The AF gives you AF, but

is somewhat longer and has an unfortunate 82mm filter size.

F32 gives no obvious advantage over 22, and there is a hint of

softness @ 32. Had it been sharper...alas,I may return it. (Still in

my tests it would beat both the Contax and the Mamiya). So its

ok to get if you don't already own the 35mm. The MOST

disappointing news lately is the "new" 645n body, with mirror

lock. How many shoot with the 600? That's the only lens that

needs it! Where are those multiple autofocus points?! Where is

the the 1/125 sync?! Oh well- Lets hope for a true 55mmx42mm

digital insert in 3 yrs!

[andrew_schank]

I'm not sure how extensive and well controlled your test were, but I'm not too surprised you didn't notice a significant improvement over the MF version, as it is superb from f5.6 to f22 and is built like a tank. Does the AF lens have the solid feel of the MF version? I am curious, how can you make the comment that it would "beat both the Contax and Mamiya"?

[douglas_cummings]

When the Contax first came out I had access to its 35mm, and

the Mamiya as well. Informal but I believe reliable blinded testing

showed the Pentax as the sharpest and hands down better at

flare control(the Contax owner was somewhat upset-of course

this applies only to samples I tested)). See previous posts. I

share the Pentax with a rental house and it has been dropped @

least 3 times: Performance unchanged. The new AF feels

"lighter" and has easier manual focusing action but it's not at all

sloppy. Perhaps there is somehow less color fringing on the

new design and it will be superior w/ a digital insert? (hint hint)

[andrew_schank]

How about distortion? Did you have a chance to check out how the new lens did with barrel distortion, as it is supposed to be improved in that area? The MF lens is decent in its freedom from distortion, but not outstanding in this respect. I had heard the Contax lens was very well corrected for rendering straight lines straight.

[douglas_cummings]

As we are both nature photogs, we did not test critically for

distortion which could be a very big deal to an arch. ptg. I don't

recall any obvious differences though.

[jan_tuma]

Any serious MF camera should have a mirror lock-up provision, including the P645N. By the way, I own two P645N bodies and my experience with the camera in macro-photography just confirms my statement. The P645N II innovation should therefore be acclaimed by photographers working with the camera on a tripod. It seems ridiculous to rave about multi mega AF spots in this context.

Jan Tuma

[douglas_cummings]

I have never seen any differences using the 120mm at slow

shutter speeds, but of course there was no mirror lock to test.

Mirror lock does make a difference with Mamiya bodies- but

those don't have the brakes that the P645 has. Again subject

movement sometimes demands flash anyway and 1/60 seems

fast enough to eliminate ghosting in macro. The 600 5.6 is

virtually useless at speeds 1/60 and slower, but again subject

movement usually dictates a faster ss anyway.

Multiple focus points greatly enhance autofocus shooting, as any

35mm pro body attests to. I consider the 645n an "action"

camera: If you're going with autofocus go all the way!