Pentax 67 75mm AL

[thomas_janik]

<p>I have an opportunity to purchase a 67 75mm f/2.8 AL. I can't find much information about it however. Anyone have any opinions, experience or links?</p>

[jim_momary]

<p><a href="http://harrysproshop.com/Pentax_67/a/a.html">http://harrysproshop.com/Pentax_67/a/a.html</a><br>

<a href="http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/medium-format/pentax/PRD_143674_3113crx.aspx">http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/medium-format/pentax/PRD_143674_3113crx.aspx</a><br>

<a href="http://webspot5.info/dcolucci/p67ss.html">http://webspot5.info/dcolucci/p67ss.html</a><br>

Some bits & pieces.<br>

Jim M.</p>

[steve_rasmussen]

<p>Hi Thomas, I can't imagine it being sharper than the 75mm f/4.5. If you need the extra speed of this lens, I can understand its attraction. I thought Pentax would have made it with an f/32 stop; no such luck.</p>

[thomas_janik]

<p>Thanks for the replies fellows. I don’t really need the 75, as I have the 55-100mm. I can rationalize by thinking it is faster, close-focusing, small (for a 67 lens) and easier to carry. Anyway, it’s too late, I bought it. I know this lens is rare and was afraid I might never see one again. I was hoping someone would tell me that it is the 67 equivalent to the 35mm 77mm f/1.8 or some other “magical” lens.</p>

<p>Steve, I know the lack of f/32 or 45 in the 67 lenses is a sore point with you; interestingly, many of the 645 lenses have f/32. I wonder why the difference</p>

[dougmiles]

<p>Well, it may correspond to the 35mm f/2.0 SMCP FA AL ... as both have aspherical elements and perform very well. I've had my 75/2.8 AL since 2003 (it was introduced in 2001), enjoying its excellent saturation and contrast. Small, fast, sharp, focuses closely... what's not to like? Ans: Barrel distortion. But it's my favorite single lens for the P67, very versatile. And it has this hard-to-define wow factor that comes through even when adapted to a P645 in comparison with the 645's own 75.<br>

It weighs in at 560g, a bit less than the 1210g 55-100 introduced in 1998. While it's a useful zoom range, I find it's a vastly different experience lugging it around, compared to the 75. Though it does stop down to f/32. <grin><br>

Hope and expect you'll get fond of this fine lens, Thomas.</p>

[steve_rasmussen]

<p>"Steve, I know the lack of f/32 or 45 in the 67 lenses is a sore point with you; interestingly, many of the 645 lenses have f/32. I wonder why the difference"<br>

It is my opinion that Pentax realized the limitations of not having smaller stops late in their development of the 67 lenses. In general, the 645 lenses were more recent designs and I believe that is the reason why they have smaller stops. One would think all 67 lenses after a given point in time would have had smaller stops but this was not always the case. The 300 EDIF did not have f/45 like the older version.</p>

[ed_hurst]

<p>The 75mm f2.8AL is a wonderful lens in terms of resolution, contrast, colour and ease of focusing (I find it much easier to nail focus with this lens than the f4.5 version for obvious reasons). The slight disadvantage in terms of distortion is something I have read about from others, and might well be visible for some subjects (e.g. brick walls, buildings, etc.) but has never been visible in my work. As an aside, I am also using this lens with an adaptor on my 645D and it is a stunning combination.</p>

<p>In short, I love it - if the slight distortion one reads about affects your particular subject matter, then watch out for it, but otherwise it's stellar! Optically as good as the wonderful 300mm F4 EDIF.</p>

<p>Enjoy!</p>

<p>Ed</p>

[thomas_janik]

<p>"Optically as good as the wonderful 300mm F4 EDIF", that's quite a recommendation. Thanks Ed, I feel better already.</p>

[ed_hurst]

<p>I can't prove the veracity of my statement scientifically - it's just me experience based on lots of practical usage with both 67ii (mostly on slide film) and some experience with the 645D. The distortion that others have reported has never been noticeable to me...</p>

[hans_jonsson]

<p>Hi Thomas!<br>

Please show some results. I have one myself but I am waithing fror my developed colour negatives and my first BW is still undeveloped.<br>

I am very happy with my purchase and use most of my lenses wide open. I have no clue what 2.8 corresponds to in the 35mm world when it comes to shallow depth of sharpness however. <br>

Will the more than four times bigger negative and the doubled focal length get me the same depth of field as my Leica Summicron 2.0 or the Summilux 1.4 albeit with better quality? <br>

Hans</p>

 

[anthony_chang2]

<p>I have just got mine brand new, naturally reluctant to take it out of its box, but couldn't resist it for longer than 2 minutes. Now in used condition, it is absolutely magical in its close focussing, you can take a shot of a tiny insect and fill the frame. The 45mm F4 focusses closer but because it is a wide angle, it pushes the subject back and you never get the effect of the 75mm. I don't understand Doug Miles's problem with "barrel distortion", (did you drop yours?) I can't see any, and to come up with detrimental comments like that is hardly fair on Pentax, who have turned out a superlative product. If I could only have one lens for my P67ii, this is it. I can't wait to see my slides. And well done Thomas. Will keep you posted. Tony</p>

[dougmiles]

<p>Hi Anthony - Congratulations on your fine new lens... how did you manage to find a brand new one, given the demand for this lens and its short supply! As you'll note in my post, I am very fond of this lens... it is probably the favorite of my 16 P67 lenses. So I hope and expect you'll become as fond of yours. It's partly the focal length, which I find very useful for general walk-around, but it has other attributes and is all-round a brilliant lens.<br /> The only possible criticism I think is this bit of barrel distortion. It's just a fact, it's there, and I accept it. If you make a shot with a line known to be straight running close to and parallel with an edge of the frame, it will be visible... as with the following test shot. See that the lines are slightly curved at bottom and left and right? I tend to avoid this situation, and for most photos the bit of distortion is not a factor.<br>

There is a positive side to a bit of barrel distortion in wide lenses though... Rectilinear wide lenses tend to stretch things in the corners out of shape, particularly disturbing for heads for instance, and this could be considered a form of distortion too. A bit of barrel distortion reduces the stretch effect.<br /> Best wishes!<br /> Doug<br /> <img src="http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/gallery/77/U77I1364694581.SEQ.0.jpg" alt="" width="1022" height="773" /></p>

[anthony_chang2]

<p>Hello Doug<br>

Thanks for your instant reply to my blog. I got mine on eBay. There is still one more from the same stock (SK Photo-I think Japan). Plus a few used ones. I was a little peeved with the comment because if there was "barrel distortion" with it, that is not unique to this lens. The other lenses in the P67 line-up have them too. Not to mention lenses from other manufacturers. Incidentally, my current collection consists of : 45mm F4, 55mm F4, 105mm F2.4, 135mm F4 macro, 200mm F4, 400mm F4 ED (IF) plus 1.4X rear converter and 800mm F6.7 ED (IF) with its dedicated 1.4X rear converter and 1,2&3 auto extensions.<br>

I don't do straight vertical lines, so it doesn't bother me. I believe from your other comments that you love this lens, (more than the other lenses in your arsenal) which is comforting to know, but it is the way you have highlighted the so called weakness of this lens that surprised me.<br>

I absolutely love it, because it allows me to shoot handheld in most situations, the compactness, versatility and speed brings the camera into a different league to what it usually is (i.e. the lumbering juggernaut-especially the 2 Super-telephotos, INCLUDE the necessarily massive tripod and accessories and you'll see what I mean. I'm not complaining after all, I paid good money for them and have lots of fun fiddling about with them, and should I get too old and knackered to lug them around, you'll find them on eBay soon enough).<br>

It is like having a medium format camera AND compete with these digital lot, and come out on top. Like having your cake and eat it. Yes the 75mm F2.8 AL brings a certain freshness to the camera that I haven't had in the 7 years that I have had the system. Anyway, it all sounds well and good, and happy shooting. Best Regards. Tony</p>