Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Do you use a Pentax 645/645N ?
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001
I use the manual version. I have used the 35, the 55 the 75 and 150 lenses.
They are very sharp and contrasty. The finder is bright and the camera is
easy to focus. It handles sort of like a motorized 35mm camera. I have used
it for portraits and enlarged the plus-x negatives to 16x20. The
enlargements are very sharp. It is not my prime medium format camera
because it lacks a mirror lock-up and most of my serious work is done on a
tripod. But for handheld use it is very fine.
"TheSandFox" [email protected]> wrote...
>
> Does anyone in this newsgroup use a Pentax 645 or 645N? I seldom see anyone
> mention these cameras. What gives?
>
> TSF.
From: [email protected] (Johan W. Elzenga)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: pentax 67 lenses on 645
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001
Graham M Smith [email protected]> wrote:
> Maybe I am simply using the wrong search terms, but I cannot find any
> details on the web of how the Pentax 67 lens to pentax 645 lens adapter
> works. Nor is it explained in the literature that pentax has sent me.
It's pretty simple. The adapter is a small ring, that fits the 67 lens
on one side and the 645 camera on the other. Just like a converter does,
but without any glass elements inside (it's really just a ring) and with
two different bajonets on both sides. You can leave the adapter on the
camera if you change between different 67 lenses, or you can leave the
adapter on the 67 lens if you only use one 67 lens on your 645 system.
> Can anyone tell me if this adapter retains the auto diaphragm control when
> a 67 lens is fitted to the 645. What features are lost when using 67
> lenses in this way.
Automatic diaphragm is retained, but if you use the new 645N, you will
loose multi-segment pattern metering. Integral metering ans spot
metering still work.
--
Johan W. Elzenga [email protected]
Editor/Photographer www.cheetah.demon.nl
To: [email protected]
From: "xato0" [email protected]>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002
Subject: [PentaxMF] P645NII review
Michael Reichmann has published a good review of the newest P645.
Alas but it's only a backup body for him.
http://www.luminous-%20landscape.com/645nii.htm
Warren
From russian camera mailing list:
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002
From: Bob Shell [email protected]
Subject: Re: Using Pentacon-6 or screw-mount Kiev Lenses on a Pentax 645
mlee777rf at [email protected] wrote:
> Good morning from Melbourne, Australia
>
> Has anyone out there used an adapter that does this?
> If so, full-aperture metering and focussing maintained?
>
> Mike
Z�rk makes such an adapter. Check www.zoerk.com for info.
I use Pentacon Six lenses on my Mamiya 645 using one of Z�rk's
adapters. You get infinity focus, but the diaphragm is not
automatic. The meter still works, though.
You can't use screw mount lenses on a Pentax 645 unless you
want to do extreme close ups. Since the camera body is deeper
than a 35mm SLR it has the same effect as using extension tubes.
I know of no adapter for this fitting.
Bob
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Kiev/Arsat adapter got Pentax 645?
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2001
[email protected] wrote:
>I heard that such an adapter exists (I guess it would be a Pentacon six to
>Pentax A mount). Any ideas where I can order one?
>Are these optical adapters? if so, are they good quality?
>
>Thanks,
>-G
Be extremely careful when dealing with these adapters. There are
several being sold on Ebay, and I purchased one from a fairly
reputable used dealer from Shutterbug. The problem is that, as far as
I know, no one officially "manufactures" these things (if i'm wrong
about this, please do not hesitate to correct me) and many of them are
hand machined by individuals seeking to fill a niche. The quality
ranges from good to absolutely awful.
They are not optical adapters, just fitted rings with mounts on both
ends. The one I purchased wouldn't even begin to fit my Pentax 645.
Not even a few degrees of rotation and certainly not into the proper
locking position. I returned it and was promptly refunded. I've heard
from users who simply got out their tools and finished the filing job
themselves. I'd personally feel better about them if some of the
sellers actually tried them before they sold them. Some of the P6
mount lenses are very intriguing (the Zodiak 30mm gets great reviews
and is 1/4th the price of the Pentax made 35mm f3.5 wide angle), but I
wouldn't dare rip up the mount of a Pentax 645 to use them.
There seems to be more working adapters for the Mamiya 645 mount
than for the Pentax. Maybe it's a simpler mount, or just more popular,
who knows. Good luck in your search.
mpphoto
From: Ron Todd [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Pentax Medium Format
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002
Tim Fitzharris shoots a Pentax 645 and shows his work in Popular
Photography in his Nature column.
AIR: The 645 has been discontinued for a while, it was replaced by the
645N with autofocus. I understand the 645N is being replaced with the
645NII, which has a dozen or so small improvements including mirror
lockup.
NikonBoy wrote:
>
> Does anyone know if the Pentax Med. Format (645) is any good? As it seem to
> very rare, and what is worth in the market (US$)?
>
> Cheers
> NB
Ronald Lee Todd M.B.A., C.P.A.
From: "P�l Jensen" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: model upgrade cycle-times? Re: Hasselblad dumping!!
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002
"John Halliwell" [email protected] skrev
> The 'matrix' metering used in the 645N(II) is the same one developed for
> their 35mm line, after over a decade of development it's reported to be
> excellent.
Not only that but the whole electronic circuitry (only modified for higher
voltage) and the AF system. The mechanical parts, including the shutter, was
lifted wholesale (almost) from the old model.
From: Douglas A. [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Pentax 645 NII opinions wanted
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002
"Maimya" [email protected] wrote:
>Looking for comments from any Pentax 645 NII users. Handling? Lens quality?
>Anything?
Great system, lens quality is second to none. Leaf shutter lenses are
available if you need them. It has 2 tripod mounts which makes it a
pleasure to use when shooting verticals. AF is reasonably quick, and
very accurate even in dim light. Film flatness is excellent, and the
inserts are quick and easy to load and change. If it has a downside,
its that there is no polaroid back option, at least not an inexpensive
one. You can also use all of the excellent Pentax 67 lenses on it with
an adapter.
From: Douglas A. [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Pentax 645 NII opinions wanted
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002
[email protected] (Bill Hilton) wrote:
>Maybe they have a way to "go digital" with replacements for the film inserts in
>the future, which would allow you to use the same lenses, but until/unless they
>offer this solution I'd advise buying Mamiya or Blad or something else with
>interchangeable backs and a clear-cut digital o
Bob, Pentax demonstrated a digital insert at Photokina this year. You
can read about it on the Luminous-Landscape Web site.
From: [email protected] (Bill Hilton)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 27 Nov 2002
Subject: Re: Pentax 645 NII opinions wanted
>Bob, Pentax demonstrated a digital insert at Photokina this year. You
>can read about it on the Luminous-Landscape Web site.
Thanks Dan, found these two links on Michael's site, one mentioning the digital
back, the other a review of the 645 NII for the original poster in this thread.
Would like to see more info on rez, price and a frank assessment of the
limitations of the Pentax digital solution, but at least the path exists.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/new/photokina2002.shtml (Sept 29 entry)
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/645nii.shtml
Bill (not Bob)
From: "Art Begun" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: 645 Auto Focus camera comparisons
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003
I think people have compared the 645N and the Mamiya in this group.
If you go to www.google.com and go to the groups page you can search
this group for comments. Haven't seen much on the Contax. The big
difference on the 645N and the new 645NII is mirror lock up but
someone on this group did some comparison shots and appears to have
proven that mirror lock up is not important on the Pentax because the
mirror is well dampened on the way up. So if you are on a budget you
might want to try to pick up a used 645N because they are pretty much
bargained priced as some people decide they just have to have the NII.
On ebay the 645N goes for around $850 with insert. The auto focus
normal lense is around $275 on ebay. Many examples, like the ones I
bought are close to mint in the box.
"fg" [email protected] wrote
> yes, i guess inserts are ok.
> I'd like to see a comparison between the various af camera features - any
> idea where ?
From: John Halliwell [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: 645 Auto Focus camera comparisons
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003
fg [email protected] writes
>and if I look around at used equip what is the designation for the 645N 's
>AF lenses - or are all the Pentax 645 lenses AF ?
I believe the manual focus lenses (for the original 645) are the 'A'
series, the AF ones are the 'FA' series (645n & 645nII). As always when
reading descriptions of used gear, be careful, the seller may not the
right naming of everything.
--
John
Preston, Lancs, UK.
Photos at http://www.photopia.demon.co.uk
From: "Art Begun" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: 645 Auto Focus camera comparisons
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003
That is corrected. Also the LS lens means leaf shutter. It will not
be auto focus. There are a couple of those available in the Pentax
line. Some people also refer to the manual focus lenses as MF.
Basically you want the FA lenses for autofocus. By the way the manual
lenses do fit and work but are manual focus on the N and NII.
...
From: [email protected] (Bill Hilton)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 13 Mar 2003
Subject: Re: Pentax 645 : quality of 35/3.5 non-AF lens
>From: [email protected] (Fernando)
>I shoot mostly landscapes (expecially by night) and I'm used to
>superwideangles (with 35mm I use a 20mm most of the time); so I'm very
>interested in the 35/3.5 lens.
>
>Unfortunately, I've read that this lens is OK in the center, but poor
>in the corners, even stopped down;
>
>So please, could someone tell me his experiences with this lens in
>particular, and generally Pentax 645 manual focus lenses?
I have the 645 with 7 lenses (35, 45, 55, 75, 120 macro, 200, 300) and in
general I think the lenses are excellent, very sharp and contrasty (and of
course a fraction of the cost of many other 6x6 or 645 kits). I don't shoot
the 35 mm that much but to me it seems like it's not as sharp as say the 45 or
55mm (which are excellent) and I think there's a good deal of distortion at
the edges.
I also use a Mamiya 7 II and the equivalent lens for that kit is the 43 mm,
which is an incredible lens, very sharp. Probably because there's no mirror so
the back of the lens almost touches the film plane, allowing them a lot more
design flexibility. I find myself shooting with this lens on the Mamiya 7 a
LOT more than I ever shot the 35 mm on the Pentax.
Basically I'd recommend the Pentax 645 system overall, except for the nagging
feeling that digital will pass it by (there's no solution in place yet), but if
the 35 mm is your favorite focal length you might try to rent a kit for a
weekend and run a few rolls thru to make sure it is up to your standards.
Bill
From: W Bauske [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Pentax 645 : quality of 35/3.5 non-AF lens
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003
Fernando wrote:
>
> [email protected] (Bill Hilton) wrote
>
> > I have the 645 with 7 lenses (35, 45, 55, 75, 120 macro, 200, 300) and in
> > general I think the lenses are excellent, very sharp and contrasty (and of
> > course a fraction of the cost of many other 6x6 or 645 kits). I don't shoot
> > the 35 mm that much but to me it seems like it's not as sharp as say the 45 or
> > 55mm (which are excellent) and I think there's a good deal of distortion at
> > the edges.
>
> You have been very helpful, thank you!!
> I'm very sad now (I really, against all odds and logic, hoped that all
> those info about the 35/3.5 were wrong! :) ), but you helped me
> avoiding a wrong purchase.
>
Another lens option is to get one of those 30mm Arsat P6
mount lenses and use a P6 to Pentax 645 adapter to see how
that lens would perform. Just saw such a lens on ebay a few
days back for $215 (B.I.N.). I was debating if it was worth
bothering with and thought the adapter in and of itself might
be useful to allow using any P6 mount lens, including the
Zeiss Jena ones. Also, one can buy a Pentax 67 to 645 adapter
and use 67 mount lenses on a 645 if you want. There is a 35mm
67 lens available too.
Also, the FA 35mm 645 lens is a different design than the A 645
35mm so it may perform better assuming the previous post above
was the A model. Check B&h Spec pages for the differences.
Just some thoughts. There are many ways to get where you want to go.
Wes
From: [email protected] (Fernando)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Pentax 645 : quality of 35/3.5 non-AF lens
Date: 13 Mar 2003
W Bauske [email protected] wrote
> Another lens option is to get one of those 30mm Arsat P6
> mount lenses and use a P6 to Pentax 645 adapter to see how
> that lens would perform. Just saw such a lens on ebay a few
> days back for $215 (B.I.N.). I was debating if it was worth
> bothering with and thought the adapter in and of itself might
> be useful to allow using any P6 mount lens, including the
> Zeiss Jena ones.
I own a full set of CZJ lenses (latest MC models) and an Arsat
30/3.5-MC too.
The latest, being a fish-eye, is not what I need (a true wideangle).
I'm quite satisfied with those lenses (unfortunately there's no CZJ
30mm :) ), but using them on the Pentax would lead to
1) Losing full-open operation
2) Losing AE
3) Lots of weight and bulkiness (CZJs are good performers, but tank-like!)
Anyway thanks for the advice.
By the way, the Arsat 30/3.5 MC is a SUPERB lens, its only flaw is
that it suffers flaring (even being MC), so you have to take care in
avoiding direct lights (not easy for a fish-eye!).
Well, in the end I guess this could be a problem for other fish-eyes
too...
If you are really interested in buying an Arsat 30 let me know, I
could share info and pics with you (it's with me since August 2002).
> Also, the FA 35mm 645 lens is a different design than the A 645
> 35mm so it may perform better assuming the previous post above
> was the A model. Check B&h Spec pages for the differences.
This is interesting.
Could I use the FA on a non-AF Pentax 645 body? I cannot afford a
645N...
Regards!
Fernando
From: Lutz Kirchner [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Pentax 645 : quality of 35/3.5 non-AF lens
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003
Fernando schrieb:
> Could I use the FA on a non-AF Pentax 645 body? I cannot afford a
> 645N...
Yes, you can use these lenses without limitations. Of course without AF.
You can also use the manual lenses on the AF bodies.
BTW, the Arsat 30 mm can relatively easy be used on the 645 with
stop-down metering. The image won't be that bright in the finder, but it
isn't as bad as I thought it would be. The lens is awfully big and
heavy. For the price it is still all right.
Lutz Kirchner
From: [email protected] (Fernando)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: New to 645
Date: 21 Mar 2003
"Gordon" [email protected] wrote
> I have shot 35mm for 30+ years and now want to do 645. I do mostly handheld
> shooting and want to continue that. I have done a lot of research on whats
> out there and it boils down to this. If the RF645 wasn't so limited by lens
> selection, the decision would be made. So, of the 645 slr's, which has the
> least mirror/shutter vibration. No autofocus to be considered.
I'd suggest an older (non-AF) Pentax 645.
One of the best mirror dampering available, integrated prism with TTL
metering, integrated winder and grip; the body is sturdy and
well-built, yet light enough, and the ergonomics are OK (apart from
the ME-like button-operating functions: why not a dial, Pentax?). You
can find a complete kit (camera+120 back+std lens) in good conditions
for less then $600.
Non-AF lenses are cheap and easy to find; lots of Pentax lenses are
available, plus you have the option to use Pentacon/Kiev60 lenses via
easy to find adapters.
Only drawbacks (to my opinion):
1) you can change the back, but not mid-film.
2) non-AF body does not have spot metering (only weighted-average)
3) no digital back available (maybe will be for newer 645NII)
4) lenses are good, but not astounding (i.e., they're not Zeiss),
expecially the 35/3.5 (equiv. 21mm). In general, you have to stop down
quite a bit.
Regards,
Fernando
From: [email protected] (Fernando)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Bronica ETR vs Pentax 645 vs Mamiya 645E
Date: 14 Apr 2003
fotolover [email protected] wrote
> photography. I'm looking at used gear primarily and I can get either
> of these cameras with a 75 or 80mm lens at what appears to be
> reasonable prices ($800-1000).
Short ago I eBuyed :) a Pentax 645 (non-AF) w/120 insert, the 35/3.5
wideangle and the 150/3.5 portrait telephoto, all for $920.
Camera is in good conditions, lenses seem brand new!
This, about pricing. ;)
About the Pentax 645 system, my first hands-on impressions:
1) Handles well, but button-controlled functions are annoying (no more
on newer, AF 645N and N-II: they have a dial)
2) Sturdy, well built
3) All integrated (pentaprism, lightmeter, grip, 1.5 fps!! winder)
means you save money (just look at -even used- prices for those
"accessories") and also means less moving/detacheable parts (good for
me: less parts to break/take care of!), but also means less options to
interchange stuff (faster winder, strange prism or whatever)
4) No mid-film interchangeable back. Pentax 645 uses "inserts", that
are not lightproof backs. You have to finish the film before changing
the insert.
5) No Polaroid backs (there is one on the aftermarket, but costs a
lot). I don't shot Polaroid so I don't care, but for accurate studio
shots, they're very useful.
6) No digital backs available. What?? I cannot buy a $10'000 back for
my $900 camera?? Now this is a no-go!!! :))
7) Fabulous finder: bright, quite accurate, very easy to focus and to
perceive DOF
8) Superb mirror damping. No vibrations, bar none.
9) NO SELF-TIMER!! I hate Pentax for this. I'm accustomed to use it
with long shots on tripod (I hate cables). 645N-II has 12s self-timer,
dunno about N.
10) No mirror lockup. This is a minor hassle thanks to excellent
damping, but I'd prefer having it. 645N-II does have it (dunno about
645N).
11) NO SPOT METERING AND NO AE LOCK!!! Again, this is SILLY. All AE
functions (Aperture priority, shutter priority, full program) are
*useless* without AE lock, plus I love spot metering. 645N-II has
both, dunno about N. OK, I mostly shot manually and accustomed to
"trick" center-weighted light meters, but this is annoying.
12) Light meter is very accurate. I pitted it against my digital spot
meter and found it very reliable.
13)Shutter is almost quiet!! Very unusual for MF gear.
14)Lenses are very good, and not too heavy/bulky. Excellent, excellent
flare resistance, very good colors and contrast. 35/3.5 loses details
on corners, but Zeiss apart, it's the same for every MF lens *that*
wide (35 in 6x4.5 -> 21 in 35mm)
15)You can use AF (N, N-II) lenses on MF body, and vice versa! Of
course, to have AF you need both. :)
16)Dual tripod mount: for horiz. and vert. shots. Very clever: no
balance loss.
17)Terrific system for the price. Really.
Any further question, feel free to ask! Glad to help when I can.
Fernando
From: [email protected] (Bill Hilton)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 22 May 2003
Subject: Re: Pentax 645 system comparison to other medium format systems
>>"Bill Hilton" [email protected]
>> But if I were buying a system new today I'd think carefully about the
>> future path to a digital back, something that's easier to do with the
>> interchangeable back bodies than with the Pentax.
>From: "P�l Jensen" [email protected]
>
>There exist digital back prototypes for the Pentax 645 by some third party
>company.
Who?
> Pentax also have patented such backs. There is no difficulties in
>designing such a back as the Pentax have interchangeable film magazines.
I hope you are right, since it would mean I could use my existing Pentax lenses
on a future digital product, but so far there are digital backs from several
companies that work on many different medium format systems, but I don't see
much for Pentax.
Here's what's listed in the B&H catalog, for instance ...
Mega-Vision S3 back for Bronica, Contax 645, Hasselblad, Mamiya 645 Pro, Mamiya
RZ and RB.
Kodak digital backs for Contax 645, Hasselblad H1, Mamiya 645 AF & AFD.
Fuji 11 Mpix back for Fuji GX-680, Hasselblad, Mamiya RZ.
It's not listed at B&H, but the Phase One H 10 works with the Hassy, the Mamiya
645 AF, the Mamiya RZ Pro and the Contax 645. And the Leaf-C supports the
Hassy and the Mamiya 645 AF as well.
Nothing for Pentax, except a brief statement from PMA that they are "working"
on a digital back. Compared to viable solutions from several manufacturers for
Contax, Mamiya, Hasselblad and even Bronica.
>Digital cameras that take 645 lenses are more likely. How the future will be
>is impossible to say but it is noteworthy that Pentax is the only major
>manufacturer who makes MF.
The new Hassy H1 appears designed for digital from the ground up. Pentax
hasn't announced anything similar.
>They are also one of the few that bother with
>digital slr's at all.
And yet everyone else making MF appears to be way ahead of them.
>My guess is that Pentax is in best position to make
>viable digital solutions for MF.
It looks to me like it's exactly the opposite, they are far behind with no
published roadmap on how they might catch up.
Bill
End of Page