Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 24 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: rumor: Pentax 645D Price: $6500 USD  (Read 97388 times)
brentward
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 36


« Reply #40 on: February 17, 2010, 02:18:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: KLaban
... on film.

On velvia and techpan. ;o)

It resolves 85 -90 LP/mm. To be honest, I'm not sure what the digital lenses resolve though. Maybe I'm way off.
Logged

___________________________________
brentwardphoto
splashpour.com
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #41 on: February 17, 2010, 03:12:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: brentward
On velvia and techpan. ;o)

It resolves 85 -90 LP/mm. To be honest, I'm not sure what the digital lenses resolve though. Maybe I'm way off.
You would be surprised how good these genuine vintage lenses are on digital. Ok, it is manual focussing, but if you can live with it, just make a test on digital with a modern top lens and one of these vintage primes...it is worth to see it by yourself, really.
And the feel in hand is unbeatable.
Logged
KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711



WWW
« Reply #42 on: February 18, 2010, 02:25:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: fredjeang
You would be surprised how good these genuine vintage lenses are on digital.

How exactly are you using these vintage Pentax 6x7 lenses on digital?
Logged

fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #43 on: February 18, 2010, 02:37:55 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: KLaban
How exactly are you using these vintage Pentax 6x7 lenses on digital?
Of course, you understood that I'm talking about 35mm vintage lenses, because Pentax has not yet released their 645D so a comparaison is not yet possible.
Having shooted with both (new and vintage manual) on Pentax DSLR, I came to the conclusion that these old lenses are really on the top, BUT only if you are
interested in manual focussing, otherwise you might find them an hassle.
It is going to be more or less the same with 645D, even better as the old Pentax 6x7 lenses are known to be extremely good and recognized so worldwide.
There is nothing new in what I'm saying, there are extensive evidence from the users about that fact all over the web, and I confirm this fact: Vintage Pentax lenses are really good and worth a look.

Fred.
Logged
FrançoisTT
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 113


WWW
« Reply #44 on: February 18, 2010, 03:07:43 AM »
ReplyReply

I do not know the Pentax lenses but it depends so much on each lens... you should expect many surprises.
Some old manual focus lenses are more than excellent in digital (I think about some of the Zeiss & Schneider lenses on Rollei mount), others seems inappropriate (the best example could be the famous Biogon 38mm which is not necessary the best choice for a digital use).
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #45 on: February 18, 2010, 03:23:58 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: FrançoisTT
I do not know the Pentax lenses but it depends so much on each lens... you should expect many surprises.
Some old manual focus lenses are more than excellent in digital (I think about some of the Zeiss & Schneider lenses on Rollei mount), others seems inappropriate (the best example could be the famous Biogon 38mm which is not necessary the best choice for a digital use).
You are absolutly right François.
I is worth mentioning that not all works well in digital. I'd say to avoid third-party lenses (a part from some exceptions and you might check before on the web from users reports).
In the case of Pentax and resuming, the lenses that where generaly highly regarded in the film age also have a very good reputation in digital but there are some cases where it does not work and ones have to check case by case and find informations.
For example, the mytic 50mm f1.4 performs better in digital than the f1.2 much more expensive.
But in general, the good ones are a "secure value" than is reflected in the second-hand market.
Now, for the 645D it will be another story as it is another market and 99% of the lenses will just work fine.

Fred.
Logged
tesfoto
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 138


« Reply #46 on: February 18, 2010, 05:03:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: KLaban
How exactly are you using these vintage Pentax 6x7 lenses on digital?


There is an Contax 645 adapter for Pentax 67 lenses. They are wonderful lenses on digital.





Logged
KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711



WWW
« Reply #47 on: February 18, 2010, 05:43:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tesfoto
There is an Contax 645 adapter for Pentax 67 lenses. They are wonderful lenses on digital.

Thanks.

Anyone here using them extensively for digital capture or have any tests?
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #48 on: February 18, 2010, 03:49:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Only Pentax lenses I owned were the 6x7 format ones - the 55mm and 200mm.  The 67ll body was solid but the shutter bounce made me give up in the end. Also, the very slow synch with the huge focal plane shutter was not that wonderful an experience; perhaps if Pentax had made a series of shuttered lenses à la Hasselblad it would have been different; as far as I remember, they only made them in 100mm and 160mm and then stopped one or the other of those. A digital back on that body - I wouldn't hope so.

But when you consider that Mario Testino, Marino Parisotto Vay and Sante D'Orazio have done very well with that camera...

Rob C
Logged

pschefz
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 244


« Reply #49 on: February 18, 2010, 04:21:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Rob C
Only Pentax lenses I owned were the 6x7 format ones - the 55mm and 200mm.  The 67ll body was solid but the shutter bounce made me give up in the end. Also, the very slow synch with the huge focal plane shutter was not that wonderful an experience; perhaps if Pentax had made a series of shuttered lenses à la Hasselblad it would have been different; as far as I remember, they only made them in 100mm and 160mm and then stopped one or the other of those. A digital back on that body - I wouldn't hope so.

But when you consider that Mario Testino, Marino Parisotto Vay and Sante D'Orazio have done very well with that camera...

Rob C

add peter lindberg to that....
Logged

schefz.com
artloch.com
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #50 on: February 18, 2010, 08:58:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: fredjeang
You would be surprised how good these genuine vintage lenses are on digital. Ok, it is manual focussing, but if you can live with it, just make a test on digital with a modern top lens and one of these vintage primes...it is worth to see it by yourself, really.
And the feel in hand is unbeatable.

I've used Pentax lenses on the contax with a p31+, p21+ and Aptus 22

This is with the Aptus 22 with the pentax 105 2.4 lens

[attachment=20363:pentax.jpg]

They're sharp, but have a different look of the Zeiss lenses which are more contrasty or better put crisp.

These forums seem to be all about nat's eyelash sharpness but there's a lot more to a phtoograph than ultimate sharpness, and "detail"  whatever ultimate is.

Anyway, Pentax makes nice lenses they have a good look and the people that loved the 6x7 are still using them today.

BC
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7919


WWW
« Reply #51 on: February 18, 2010, 11:55:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I have a Pentax 67 with 45, 9072.8, 165/2.8 and 300/4 lenses which I obviously only used with film. My experience is that very fine (stunning!) 70x100 cm enlargements are very well possible with scanned images using Velvia and Provia. On the other hand I can see a lot of problems in the scanned images in actual pixels view. Chromatic aberration is pretty bad, which is quite obvious.

One thing I also noticed that images a friend shot with his Hasselblad (same subject, same condition, same time) were better than mine. This may depend on my friend having better technique or the Hasselblad having better lenses.

Now, the Pentax 645 may have better lenses than the Pentax 67, but I wouldn't hold my breath that they are good enough for digital. Just as a reminder:

Michael Reichmann found that his Canon 1Ds? essentially outperformed his Contax 645, mostly because of limitations with his Zeiss lenses. Hasselblad uses a new lens line for their cameras, calculated at Hasselblad and built at Fujinon. At least in the MTF data published by Hasselblad the new HC (Fujinon) lenses are clearly better (MTF-wise) as the old Zeiss designs. Any one can check, MTF data can be downloaded from Hasselblads website.

Michael returned to medium format, but started out with new Rodenstock Digitar lenses, specially designed for use with MFDBs.

A quoute from the Reichmann article: "But after more than a year of shooting both with a 16MP Canon 1Ds MKII and a 22 MP P25 back on the Contax, I came to a couple of realizations. The Canon and Zeiss lenses on their respective cameras were not the equal of their sensors. In other words, the sensors were outperforming the lenses. Even using the best primes on the Canon proved to me that the 1Ds MKII was not being pushed to its limit, and using lesser lenses often disappointed."

The whole article is here: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/...ital-view.shtml

Best regards
Erik

Quote from: Rob C
Only Pentax lenses I owned were the 6x7 format ones - the 55mm and 200mm.  The 67ll body was solid but the shutter bounce made me give up in the end. Also, the very slow synch with the huge focal plane shutter was not that wonderful an experience; perhaps if Pentax had made a series of shuttered lenses à la Hasselblad it would have been different; as far as I remember, they only made them in 100mm and 160mm and then stopped one or the other of those. A digital back on that body - I wouldn't hope so.

But when you consider that Mario Testino, Marino Parisotto Vay and Sante D'Orazio have done very well with that camera...

Rob C
« Last Edit: February 19, 2010, 12:00:37 AM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711



WWW
« Reply #52 on: February 19, 2010, 03:05:34 AM »
ReplyReply

My interest in these older lenses is just how well they perform when used for digital capture.

I was given some Hasselblad .fff files recently taken using a variety of V series lenses in combination with a Hasselblad 39 MP back. Unsurprisingly there was variation between the lenses and perhaps unsurprisingly there were a lot of focussing errors. Having said that, those that were sharp were knuckle-grazing sharp to the extent that they did the model no favours at all, but did prove the ability of these vintage lenses to deliver sharp files when needed.

As to whether 'sharpness' and 'detail' are important, well, it rather depends on the intention.
Logged

tetsuo77
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 92


« Reply #53 on: February 19, 2010, 04:19:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: KLaban
My interest in these older lenses is just how well they perform when used for digital capture.

I was given some Hasselblad .fff files recently taken using a variety of V series lenses in combination with a Hasselblad 39 MP back. Unsurprisingly there was variation between the lenses and perhaps unsurprisingly there were a lot of focussing errors. Having said that, those that were sharp were knuckle-grazing sharp to the extent that they did the model no favours at all, but did prove the ability of these vintage lenses to deliver sharp files when needed.

As to whether 'sharpness' and 'detail' are important, well, it rather depends on the intention.

http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/pentax645_fa35mm.html

I don´t think this is a matter of resolution or, better said, resolving power.
Or not at least THAT much about resolving power.
My biggest fears on old lenses are fringing and flare, which can get quite harsh with old lenses, and the working aperture [or best working aperture] does, indeed, change.
Logged
KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711



WWW
« Reply #54 on: February 19, 2010, 05:06:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tetsuo77
My biggest fears on old lenses are fringing and flare, which can get quite harsh with old lenses...

Indeed, and unfortunately this isn't limited to older lenses.
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #55 on: February 19, 2010, 11:01:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: pschefz
add peter lindberg to that....





And to think I had him down as a Nikonista! He also used to use Hasselblads, since I saw some of his work in one of their publications many years ago. Though I do like his shots in old factories, I never did go for his Pirelli work nor, for that matter, his taste in models. How odd that even model stratosphere can have some that turn one right off!

;-)

Rob C
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #56 on: February 19, 2010, 11:08:33 AM »
ReplyReply

With this repeated cross-indexing, does anyone know if James R and BC are one and the same?  Most confusing. And if so, why so?

Rob C
Logged

bcooter
Guest
« Reply #57 on: February 19, 2010, 11:34:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Regardless of lenses, (though with Pentax I'm pretty sure they be very good) and regardless that were talking about a camera that nobody I know has ever held, I think the real key to this is the $6,500 medium format price for a new camera.

That's where this stuff needed to be all along and honestly if medium format backs had been in this price range 6 years ago, there would a lot more RZs, V series, Contax's and Bronicas still in use rather than sitting on dusty shelves.

At this price it will open up the joys (well let's hope not all the "joys") of medium format ownership without the huge buy in and depreciation, but also offer a lot of things we've been asking for a long time like a really good lcd and in camera jpegs.

As far as being ZD like, time will tell, but that's probably painting it with a pretty broad brush and all of medium format has a lot of things in the past and present that are somewhat zd like, so that's a door I wouldn't want to open if I was comparing.

I hope it succeeds and opens up medium format for more people, more use, because at this price this is something you just about would have to have in your bag.

BC




Logged
vandevanterSH
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 626


« Reply #58 on: February 19, 2010, 11:39:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Unsurprisingly there was variation between the lenses and perhaps unsurprisingly there were a lot of focussing errors.
*********
My "V" lenses, with digital,  out perform my aged eye to focus them.  I have just purchased a 5.5 X mag hood to use with my 203,  hopefully to be more consistent with "dead on" focus.  Using the "Vs" with a Nikon, the sharpness is quite good using live view at max zoom + 3.3 mag hood.  In brief testing, using a lens testing target, the old Zeiss was equal to or better than Nikon lenses at approx same focal lengths.  I was surprised after reading many comments that new "35" mm lenses designed with CAD and using new glass were better then old "slide-rule" designed MF lenses.

Steve
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #59 on: February 19, 2010, 12:56:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: vandevanterSH
Unsurprisingly there was variation between the lenses and perhaps unsurprisingly there were a lot of focussing errors.
*********
My "V" lenses, with digital,  out perform my aged eye to focus them.  I have just purchased a 5.5 X mag hood to use with my 203,  hopefully to be more consistent with "dead on" focus.  Using the "Vs" with a Nikon, the sharpness is quite good using live view at max zoom + 3.3 mag hood.  In brief testing, using a lens testing target, the old Zeiss was equal to or better than Nikon lenses at approx same focal lengths.  I was surprised after reading many comments that new "35" mm lenses designed with CAD and using new glass were better then old "slide-rule" designed MF lenses.

Steve
Steve, I was surprised too...but it seems that this is a taboo topic. The fact that pentax DSLR have a lack in current modern optics, and the fact that the mount is 100% compatible with all vintage Pentax lenses, many pentax users have purchased vintage lenses more than in any other brand. There are sometimes problems (flare), sometimes not, the main issue as you said is that manual focussing with the garbage viewfinders we have now is a real problem if not using live-view. But...the quality is extremely high...better than new 35mm lenses? If your familiar with these I'm sure you have the answer, but...shhh...taboo subject.    

As BC said, I hope it succeeds and bring more people to MFD. A lot of big masters have been working with this system and it will be nice to see Pentax in MFD again.
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 24 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad