Pentax 67 lenses-sharpest?

[md_derr]

For the Pentax 67, what do you consider the sharpest lenses? I have the 45mm, 135mm and 200mm, and would like to bridge some gaps, if not go beyond to 300mm. What are your thoughts about the 75mm, 90/2.8, 105, 165/2.8, 165/4 and 300?

[steve_bingham]

Michael,

 

<p>

 

Twenty four years ago I tested a Pentax's 105mm lens against a Hassleblad 80mm. I used the Air Force large chart. Interestingly enough the two were equal at the center, but the 105mm was clearly superior at the edges and corners! Go figure. This held through all the f-stops and in daylight and in low level tungsten. I was very scientific in all aspects of the test. However, this sort of test only measures resolution. There are other aspects of lens design and function I could not test.

 

<p>

 

As for the 45mm, I have a 20x24 Cibachrome print (of the Totem Poles in Monument Valley, Arizona)hanging in a dozen homes that is tack sharp everywhere. It has been published four times.

 

<p>

 

I have had two Pentax 67 systems in the past. Sold them. Currently purched a new 67 with the 45mm and 135mm. Will be testing them soon.

 

<p>

 

I can't find any tests on Pentax 67 lens on the Internet. Anybody out there that has run actual tests?

 

<p>

 

Steve

[chauncey_l._walden]

Modern Photography tested the 75 f/4.5 at one time with these results:

(stop-center-edge)4.5-E-E;5.6-E-E;8-E-E;11-E-E;16-E-E;22-G-E.

For a comparison, their results from a Bronica's 75 f/2.8 Nikkor:

2.8-G-A;4-G-A;5.6-G-A;8-G-G;11-VG-VG;16-VG-VG;22-G-VG.

[jim_sabo]

Michael,

 

<p>

 

I recently accuired the Pentax 1.4x converter. I used it a few times

with the 200 and have been very pleased with the results. I looked at a used 300, but decided against it due to its long minimum focus. I've also gotten some nice images from my 75, but haven't done a critical test on any of my lenses.

 

<p>

 

I do have a 20x24 enlargement of a saguaro taken with the 55. The sharpness of the thorns is amazing! (pun intended)

 

<p>

 

Regards, Jim

[chris_patti]

I have both the 90/2.8 and the 165/2.8. Although I've done no tests, I find both to produce excellent, very sharp results (especially the 90). I wish the 165 focussed a bit closer, however.

[fotor]

the 165 f2.8 is very sharp, the 105mm probably the sharpest, and I've been using the 300mm with incredibly great results. I have the Pentax 2x teleconverter and this has produced excellent results with all lenses, especially those in the normal to slight tele range.

[steve_rasmussen]

Michael, I own the 75, 105 and 300 of which you are concerned. The 75 and 105 are a toss up as to which one is sharpest. They are both incredible. The 300 is a different story. After shooting with this lens for quite some time, I found that it was soft at certain f-stops. The lens is soft at f/4 and 5.6. My guess is that the designers had to compromise with what is known as spherochromatism (the change in spherical aberration with color). They sacrificed the outer edges of the optical image because they knew the photographer could stop down and cut off the worst part of this defect. I do like this lens but recommend using it between f/8 and f/32. It can be quite sharp if used properly. I have done some sharpness tests using a test chart that I made. The results reflect my recommendation above. Steve R.

[myron_gochnauer]

I used to own both the 90 and 105 lenses. I tested them as carefully

as I could both in the field and with charts. My conclusion was that

they were essentially identical in performance, center and corner.

I sold the 90 because I "see" the world as a 105. The 90 and 105

were the only 6x7 lenses about which I had no doubts or complaints.

I was never pleased with the design compromises Pentax used in wide

angles. (I had 45, 55 -- first & second versions, but not the latest,

and an early 75.)

[t_roth]

I used a 300mm on a P67 10 years ago, got some lovely shots of owls and eagles. can recommend it without qualification.

[charles_shoffner]

I have the 45, 55, 75 shift, 90, 165, and 300 for the P67. My personal favorites for landscape and architectural work are the 55, 75 shift, and the 300. The 90 and 165 are great for portraits, and I love the 45 for its depth of field, near to far. The sharpest lenses using Fuji Velvia and a tripod mounted camera have been the 55, 75 shift (amazing sharpness and contrast) and the 165.

[milco_van_klingeren]

Last week i've done a lot of portraits with the 165 4.0LS, and the week before some landscapes in Italie. I regret now that i did not use this lens so much before. It is incredible sharp. The 150 2.8 is definitely of less quality.

[bill_davis2]

I'm not sure that sharpness should be your determining factor - in my experience the quality of all the Pentax 67 lenses is excellent and the differences are negligible. Getting the best spread of focal lengths is what you should aim for, so that you have a good variety of perspectives available. I use a 75mm as a wide standard - it's a very fine lens. For years my only other lens was the 200mm - which is a great all-purpose short telephoto. I also have the 45mm and 300mm - both of which perform to a very high standard - although you need to avoid over-use of the excessive wide angle perspective of the 45 and the 300 is a bit if a beast to carry around.

 

I find that 'less is more' and try to limit the number of lenses I take out with me - having too many choices can get in the way of picture-making !!!

[jeff_chastain]

The 90 leaf shutter lens is the sharpest 67 lens I have tried, in fact it is one of the sharpest lenses of any type I have tried. Not made for a long time, it is a find in shows or in pawn shops.

[roy_l._jacobs]

Great: 55mm(n), 105mm, 200mm(n), 400EDIF

Very, very good: 45mm, 75mm

 

I am still evaluating the 165 2.8 and the 135. The 35 is not a great lens. So-so sharpness and no CRC so edges are very soft. Note, all of the lenses I have rated great or very, very good are super lenses and I own them and use them. It is just a matter of the great ones having a bit of an edge. I use the 45 and am using an old 75 more for street shooting in NYC with a waist level finder. so far results are very good.

[scott_evans6]

I did not like the 135 for sharpness but the 105, 200, and 75mm were and are excellent lenses for me.<div></div>