Wide and Somewhat Wonderful

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>One of the nicest medium-format wide-angle lenses that's come my way, the SMC Pentax 6x7 55mm f/4.</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>I've had the fish-eye 35mm f/3.5 and the 55mm f/4 for quite some time, and never really thought seriously about the "in between" 45mm until a friend, who'd somehow acquired two, offered me one at a price I really couldn't refuse. It turned up a couple of weeks ago just as I was getting the new darkroom up and running, so I've used the lens quite comprehensively since it arrived to test a variety of film and developer combinations. A few interesting images emerged, and I'll post some, below.</p>

<p>It's a very fine lens indeed, a fraction sharper than the 55mm lens and seemingly much wider, with minimal distortion. If you consider the fact that a 45mm lens on a 35mm format is heading into the wide-angle arena, you can imagine how it looks on 120 rollfilm in the 6x7 format. Wide, very wide... It's of the usual fine construction, mostly metal, with 9 elements in 8 groups and an angle of view of 89 degrees. The glass has a lustrous amber coating, and it came with a skinny little lens hood that cuts out only the worst unwelcome light. However, the lens is remarkably resistant to flare, a happy characteristic that most of the Pentax /Takumar 67 lenses seem to share.</p>

<p>I've run quite a few films over the last few weeks, re-acquainting myself with the surviving films and chemistry, and my local suppliers have remarked that they've noticed an upswing in the demand for B&W film and processing supplies, a situation we find encouraging. It certainly leaves digital monochrome in a different space, not necessarily better or worse, but certainly different. Film definitely has more "bite"... Anyway, here are an assortment of images, no great art but hopefully interesting. The films are either Adox CHS-100, or Fomapan 200, developed in ID-11 and scanned on an Epson V700.</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>No.2</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>No.3</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>No.4</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>No.5</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>No.6</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>No.7</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>No.8</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>No.9</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>No.10</p><div></div>

[SCL]

<p>As always, good to see the wonderful classics in use, and your shots truly make my mouth water for more.</p>

[craigd]

<p>I also have both the 45mm and 55mm f/4 lenses. My 45mm is a newer version than yours (it says "SMC Pentax 67" rather than "6x7"), but I don't think there's any significant difference between the two. You're right about the 45mm being wider; the difference is about the same as between 24mm and 28mm lenses on a 35mm camera.</p>

<p>I really like the Pentax 67 lenses, but I don't shoot the system much anymore because it's kind of a pain to deal with. The camera weighs a lot more than my Hasselblad, has much stronger recoil (and more noise) when shooting, and there's something about film loading that I've never quite figured out -- it always seems to be a struggle to get the tab under the left-side reel to rotate back into place after putting the film in. The Hasselblad, with its detachable backs, leaf shutters, and lighter construction, is more flexible and more fun to use.</p>

<p>As usual, your product photography and sample shots are great. "Across the Tracks" has a rustic charm to it that I like, especially with the none-too-subtle spray-painted obscenity on the car in the background.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Wonderful, even luminous, results from a obviously superb lens in the hands of someone who knows how to use it. Congratulations!</p>

[Lou_Meluso]

<p>Nice lens, Rick! Yeah, luminous, that's the word that comes to mind looking at the photos. Well done!</p>

[david_smith110]

<p>Rick, a solid post as always. I have to admit I have always been intrigued by this camera. There is one in a case a my local old style camera shop and whenever Im in there I always wander over to it and gaze at it awhile. I have really cut back on my 35mm film shooting due to costs so I cant really invest in medium format right now, either from either a gear or development cost perspective. But if I ever do this camera is on my short list to buy (right behind a nice little Yashica TLR). :)</p>

<p>Excellent photos, as usual. I especially like Robyns Yard. And the composition on Algies Rd is mind numbingly spectacular.</p>

[john_wiegerink1]

<p>Out of all my Pentax 6x7 lenses the 45mm is my favorite and I use it the most of any. I think your shots show why that is. I have two bodies and the 45mm never comes off the one and the other gets all the lens swapping. I'm going to be doing a lot of shooting with the Pentax in about three weeks and will have to post some shots here. They'll all be B&W as that's what I shoot most since I have my own darkroom. Kinda quirky cameras, but first rate optics that's for sure. JohnW</p>

[soeren_engelbrecht1]

<p>Brilliant work, Rick. Really enjoyed it !!</p>

[k5083]

<p>Loving it. Excellent tonality. I am similarly hooked on the 50mm Sekor for my RB67 which is the closest match to your lens. It is just great to be able to sweep in all that detail and know that the neg is big enough to resolve it all. </p>

[tony_lockerbie]

<p>Great work Rick, there is a tonality and a luminosity to larger format film photos, probably hard to communicate on a computer screen, but you know what I mean. The 6x7 system is one that I have often looked at but never dabbled in, too many others to try! Just got a complete Bronica EC outfit that needs to be used, maybe look at a Pentax after that!<br>

I see what ou mean about the distortion, those lines look very straight indeed. Looks like the nights are getting chilly over there as well....still, great time of year.</p>

[dan_b.4]

<p>How did you avoid converging lines on the vertical in the first photo?</p>

[chuck_foreman1]

<p>Like Tony just said.. there a glow here approaching LF. I think it's the calibre. Great equipment; in great hands. My tastes match David S with Robyns' Yard and the the other long fence shots;these are great compositions. I also lke the one with the cars. Great to hear the darkroom is coming along. So you'Re actually doing film and scanning.... are the days of printing gone? Back in the day; a night of printing was a reward. I hope you do do some printing in your new dark room!!! Thanks again for another hammer post! </p>

 

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>Thanks for the responses, and my apologies for the confusing mixup of focal lengths with the caption for the pic, and the accompanying first paragraph. I seem to end up putting these posts together late in the evening, and sometimes fatigue intrudes on the proof reading!</p>

<p>The "luminosity" several of you noted is largely a product of the wonderful Adox CHS-100, a film that I used as a very young photographer and have only just re-discovered since production resumed. It hasn't changed; it has a marvelous silvery look to the images, but requires very gentle handling during processing. I was delighted to discover it scans very well, too. For your information, <strong>Les</strong>, the Adox was developed in stock ID-11 at 20 degrees C for 11 minutes, the Fomapan 200 for 6 minutes.</p>

<p>You're right, <strong>Craig</strong>, the Pentax 67 system has it's quirks; the film loading is definitely a knack requiring careful placement of the film in the chamber to allow the tab to recess back into it's depression. With a little jiggling I find it usually behaves itself. I used Hassleblads for few years, went on to RB-67's, and found that I felt most at home with the Pentax, in that it handles just like a big 35mm SLR and I never feel that the technology was getting in the way of the picture, as I often did with other designs of camera. I can hand-hold the Pentax at 1/60th with standard or wider lenses, which rather confounds the critics with their talk of "the thunderous slap of the Pentax mirror" and the consequent vibration. I don't find the mirror noise excessive, and most of the "slap" is the mirror returning to the down position, after the focal plane shutter has completed the exposure. The upwards movement is very well damped.</p>

<p><strong>Dan</strong>, I did what I would have done in the dark with tilting easel and lens by using perspective correction in Photoshop. If one has the tools one may as well use them... And yes, <strong>Chuck</strong>, I've been enjoying the magic of watching that image appear in the tray.<br /><br /> Thanks, <strong>David</strong>; with the fine work you do with the 35mm cameras, I think you'd feel at home with the Pentax. Interesting comments, <strong>John</strong>, and I can appreciate how one could come to consider the 45mm a "standard" lens. I remember that fine 50mm Sekor lens, <strong>August</strong>; sometimes I miss the old RB system. You're right, <strong>Tony</strong>, the days are drawing in and the nights are cool; I'll be interested to hear how you enoy the Bronica collection. And thanks, <strong>JDM</strong>, <strong>Louis</strong>, <strong>Stephen</strong> and <strong>Soeren</strong>, for your kind comments.</p>

[subbarayan_prasanna]

<p>Those pictures with the opposing and reflected light are superb, <em>sui generis</em>! I have never handled those bigger cameras, except for one TLR, Yashica 124G. Thanks for the beautiful post. sp.</p>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>Thanks, <strong>SP</strong>,<strong> </strong>I'm pleased you approve of the images. Take it from me, 35mm is a lot quicker, easier and more economical!</p>