What wideangle would you pick if you already had the 75mm?

[stefan_geysen1]

I'm having a hard time trying to decide between the 45mm and the 55mm,since their price and quality is so similar. I currently have the SMC 75mm f4.5 and I'm very pleased with it,using it as a "wide standard" lens for my landscape photography. Which wideangle would you choose as a companion for the 75mm?

[sal_santamaura]

Stefan, I too use the 75 as a "wide standard" and recently faced the

same decision. I chose the 55. I knew from working landscapes in

other formats that the 45 would encompass more than I like and

exagerate near-far perspective beyond my taste. It would not match my

photographic perceptions. Your way of seeing things should guide you.

Reaching your conclusion based on these criteria seems like the best

approach.

[steve_rasmussen]

If you have preferred the 21-24mm in the 35mm format, then the 45mm

would be your choice. If you preferred the 28mm lens in 35 then the

55mm would suite your needs on the 67. I have the 45mm but it depends

upon what you shoot. SR

[pavel_medek1]

Stefan, I have both lenses 45 and 55mm. Year ago I preferred 55

because I thought it is much sharper, but then I found that 45

performers as high as 55. Now 45 is my most used lense (I have 45,

55, 100, 200). I am thinking to trade 55 for 75. So I would choose

45, it also have the same thread size as 75 - 82mm.

[charles_shoffner]

Here's yet another answer to add to the confusion. I have both the 45

& 55, and I use them in different situations. I like the 55 for a

natural perspective and because it does not "push" the distant

subjects even further. However, for things like architecture, I

prefer to use the 45; it's slightly wider than a 24mm on 35 and is

great for interiors, or exteriors where you have limited space to

pull back. My kit includes 45, 55, 75shift, 135 macro, 200 and 1.4x

for the 200.

If most of what you shoot is purely landscape work, then go with the

55; it's quite unlike the 75 and I think you would use that lens more

than any other for certain types of landscapes. I would choose the

55, 135, and 200 for pure landscape photography.

[brian_ellis2]

I started with the 45 and then sold it after a couple years and

bought the 55. For my tastes, the 45 was too extreme. I used it

mainly for landscapes and even large objects at any distance seemed

to become tiny specks on the print. The "wide angle" effect seemed

too great. I prefer the more natural look of the 55 for the type of

photography I do. If I did a lot of architccture, particularly

interiors, I might prefer the 45. I haven't done anything like a

scientific comparison but, FWIW, I haven't noticed any difference in

the quality of the images. Both lenses seem to be very sharp.

[patrick_drennon]

Just my $.02 worth. I do not own the 55, I do own and am very

impressed with the 45. I think the perspective recorded by the 55 is

way too similar to that of the 75. I would opt for the 45. That said I

must admit that I particularly like the effect of the semi-extreme

wide angle of the 45, some folks don't.

[dave_hampton1]

Brian Ellis has said it well from my perspective. You have to deicde

on how you see things to determine which is most appropriate. In my

lens testing the 55mm is superior in all aspects except in field of

view. The 45mm is a "softer" lens as is common when you go to more

extreme field of view in retrofocus designs. Sharpness towards the

edges is a problem. I shoot a lot near infinity between f8 and fll

and my choice is the 55mm. If sharpness is your thing, and you shoot

like I do, then (from my tripod mounted tests) the 55mm, 75mm and

105mm lenses are the best. I have used 35mm to 600mm and prefer

these three when I travel. If you want extreme sharpness and ultra-

wide (and can spare a small fortune) the Mamiya 7 43mm is the best of

many I have tested. Their 50mm and 65mm are rather awesome too.

[brian_colburn]

The very first lense I bought for my Pentax 6x7 was a 45mm. I photograph primarily waterfalls, and found that a 21mm-24mm in the 35mm format was my most used waterfall lens. I later picked up a 135 6x7 macro. It then came down to a choice of what lense to fill the gap, and that was best done by the 75mm.

[_________1]

Others have said it and I will like to chime in: it depends on how you see your subject matter.

 

That said, in a pinch, you can crop a 55mm angle of view out of a 45mm lens although some baulk at cropping the 'big' 6x7 real estate. You cannot widen your view later in the post-production {sorry digital age :P } with a 55mm lens.

 

So, with a 45mm lens, you get a 45mm AND a 55mm angles of view. In time, you may well find that the 55mm is your lens of choice in which case you trade the 45mm in for it. Or you may find that the 45mm is really IT in which case you keep it. Or in most cases, you will find out that you really need both lenses as many of us have and then you can buy the 55mm.

 

If you start off with the 55mm, you will forever be left guessing, maybe I should have gone a little wider with the 45mm.

 

Just my contrarian point of view.