Contax, Pentax, Mamiya, Bronica 645 SLR - why NOT?

[Matus Kalisky]

- peri24 -
you are indeed right - trying the cameras out is the best way, however I live in a medium sized city and the amount of used MF gear even in the biggest shop is rather limited. Even in bigger cities it would be hard to find 3 or 4 645 SLRs in the same shop. So I am just doing my homework on internet ...
.. BTW - what did you choose at the end and why?

 

[MattKing]

- MattKing -
OK, before I went ahead and bothered you I went I again to butkus.org and this time managed to find the lens specifications for bot MF and AF lenses. Thank you for your offer. Still - one more general question - How do you find using the M645 hand hold? I mean like BIG 35mm SLR with pentaprism and winder.

.. Would the Mamiya AFD be any lighter?

Answering your second question first...

Based on the manuals you can download from the Mamiya site, it looks like a fully equipped Pro Tl (back, pentaprism, 80mm f/2.8 lens and winder) at about 4 pounds weighs about 75g more than an AFDII without lens.

As to your 1st question...

It might help to have some context - my 35mm stuff is small (Olympus OM, without winder, and prime lenses only, mainly). Despite that, I have no problem with a Mamiya 645 Pro. I don't often use a power winder, but I do use a left-hand grip and a focus assist lever.

Some further context might also help. For decades I've used Mamiya TLRs handheld, including doing wedding work. In recent times, I've been experimenting handheld work with even bigger cameras - a Mamiya RB67 and a Koni-Omega rangefinder.

And finally, more context still. Essentially I use my cameras with 1 1/2 hands, as I have limited strength and dexterity in my right hand.

IMHO, the weight of these cameras is far less important than their ergonomics.

Hope this helps. Don't hesitate to ask further questions.

Matt

 

[peri24]

- peri24 -
you are indeed right - trying the cameras out is the best way, however I live in a medium sized city and the amount of used MF gear even in the biggest shop is rather limited. Even in bigger cities it would be hard to find 3 or 4 645 SLRs in the same shop. So I am just doing my homework on internet ...
.. BTW - what did you choose at the end and why?

what a shame, secondhand cameras in barcelona are pretty expensive but at least we have them in the shops, and when i'm saying expensive i'm meaning 1300€ for a mamiya afd kit or 2000€ for contax kit...
Cameras to me are similar to guitars you have to try before buying, and with instruments is even worse because 2 guitars of the same model can be night and day at least with cameras you have not to deal with that , 8 years ago i did 18 hours by bus just to try a guitar that i saw on a classified ad.
As i said before i chose contax 645.
After reading reviews on internet and listening opinions everywhere i had a clear image of what were offering to me each system, but one thing didn't stop popping out, zeiss glass of contax, people swear about 120mm makro sharpness and 80mm bokeh.
When i was looking for a camera i was sure that i wanted some fast glass, faster than 2,8 if possible, that narrowed my options, contax 80mm f2 or manual mamiya 80mm f1.9 (manual lenses doesnt work in afd bodies).
That was my main reason to go with contax before holding any camera, i didnt care about other things because i have more systems for others tasks at home, so i just needed: fast lenses + fast 120 film camera.
With that in mind i went to a local shop and played with other options that i had in mind: pentax af, mamiya af, if any of them had been more ergonomic, nicer or sturdier looking than contax i would chose any of them over contax (mamiya afd was my second option) but contax apart to have a faster lens was the nicest of those three.
Then the day after i saw an ad here in apug and a two weeks later i had my contax at home. (thanks MikeSeb!!)

 

[lxdude]

The Bronica handles nicely. The 645, 6X6 and 6X7 are very similar in design, features, handling and accessories.

The accessory Speed Grip mounts easily and makes it handle similarly to a big 35, along the lines of the Pentax. It has a hot flash shoe on it. It winds manually in two strokes, but is still pretty fast. The camera's very well balanced with it.

There are three motors from different times, with the newest the lightest and most compact. All advance at about one frame per second. I only use mine when I really need it, like shooting macro close to the ground, or to simplify use on a tripod.
The rest of the time I use the Speed Grip or the crank, as they are both nearly as fast. With the larger lenses, like the 250 or 105 1:1 macro, both work well but I sort of prefer the crank, because I can handhold it easily with one hand under the lens and one under the body and get great balance. The waist level finder is really light and makes it easy to shoot fast in horizontal orientation. Together with the crank it makes a surprisingly light, well balanced setup.

Changing shutter speeds is quick and easy. DOF preview is on the lens and also quite handy. The viewfinder is bright enough for me, even with the 250mm f/5.6. I prefer a plain screen, and even though I'm no youngster I can see well enough to focus in decent light. I use the split image or microprism spot screen if I'm in really dim light. I only have Bronica screens and don't know how well other brands would work.

With smaller, lighter lenses, handling either with or without the Speed Grip is good, and I pick one or the other method depending on whether I'm looking for a little more speed and ease of handling or less weight and bulk. The leaf shutters mean shutter vibration is very low so any vibration comes from the mirror, and is not bad. The mass and low vibration make it easy for me to handhold at slower shutter speeds. With the mirror locked up there is very little vibration. Of the ETR series, only the ETR-Si has mirror lockup.

The lenses all have leaf shutters, so are somewhat bulkier and heavier compared to lenses for the Pentax. They are well made, solid and smooth. They all have Seiko shutters regulated by the electronics in the camera, and are quite reliable. Snap-on lens hoods are easily found, as is a bellows hood. All single focal length lenses from 40mm to 250mm take 62mm filters, except the 105mm f/4.5 1:1 Macro, which takes 67mm filters.

I use mine for everything I use a 35 for, which means landscape to macro, though often macro is still done with the 35. I sometimes walk around with it and two or three lenses like the 40, 75, and 150, a preloaded insert or two, and a back with B+W in it, enabling me to change between B+W and color anytime I want. I'm planning on getting a 50mm, as they're not expensive and the 40 is sometimes a little too wide for me.

Where the Bronica really shines, for me, is when I'm shooting on a tripod, mainly landscape and some closeup/macro. If I'm going to set up a tripod I would rather use a medium format camera and gain its advantages. I have an AEIII prism, which meters well, with center-weighted and spot metering. I use that when I need it, but often determine exposure by different means. I have the Action Finder, which looks similar to the action finder on a Nikon F2 or F3, though much bigger. It allows me to see the whole finder image from almost six inches away. Excellent for tripod mounted work, as I can view the image in a more relaxed fashion. It's also good for following little kids around the yard, as I can see what's happening without having the camera stuck to my face. I also have the rotary finder, which I find most useful for shooting near the ground in vertical orientation. It's big though, and has pincushion distortion, so I only use it when I really need it.

The Bronica has a lot of versatility.
I like being able to set it up the way I want. I like being able to manually wind when I don't want the sound of the motor. The interchangeable finders are very useful to me; if I had a Pentax I'd have to have the refconverter (angle finder). I find the interchangeable backs are very useful. I'm using the 35mm pano back with Kodachrome for some great shots. The pano back lets me use films not available in 120/220, and also not have to crop a regular image to panoramic format.

BTW, it also has TTL auto flash with an in body sensor, so it works with any finder, or none at all. Shutter speeds are 1/500th to 8 seconds, plus B. For long exposures the lenses have a T (Time) position which uses no battery power. The viewfinder shows 94% of the image, better than many 35's.

It does not have multi-segment metering or a 1/1000th second shutter speed, or exposure data imprinted on the film, like the later Pentax 645's. It does not have autofocus. It does not have an instant return mirror, which is no big deal to me. MF is just different that way.

The Pentax is most like a 35mm camera, in my opinion. It gives up some versatility to get that. When the Pentax 645 first came out it sounded great. I tried it and didn't like it much at all. So you never know till you try it.The newer Pentaxes look to be much improved. I might like one if I tried it. One thing about the Bronicas is the bodies and lenses are both inexpensive. Older Hasselblads are cheap, but the lenses are not.

Spare parts and factory service will be available from Tamron until late next year. Service and parts will be around for many years after that, just as with old cameras today. Koh's camera in NY specializes in Bronica and does factory repairs for Bronica.

 

[suzyj]

You are indeed not the first that tends to prefer older Mamiyas to Later Pro or Pro TL models. Is it just the finis of the body or is there more to the difference? How do the newer and older Mamiyas compare? What is your main usage of the Mamiya M645 (weddings ..?)

Mamiya In general - I would love to hear more comments on differences between Older "metal" Mamiyas , Pro/Pro TL and AFD models. It is quite confusing (apart from the AF and backs)

I shoot landscapes, people, little animals, flowers, bicycles, rust etc. I'm strictly amateur, and have never shot a wedding or similar. I'm fairly slow and methodical when shooting, and find the original M645 suits my shooting style quite well.

The older metal clad Mamiyas and the newer plastic clad ones are quite different. They share film inserts and lenses, but that's about it that's common.

The spec of the two Mamiyas I've used is:

Mamiya Super: Super body, 120 back, AE metered prism and unmetered waist level finder, hand winder.

Mamiya M645: Original M645 body (1/500 sec max shutter), 120 insert, PD metered prism and unmetered waist level finder, hand winder (from a 1000s).

Lenses (common to both): 45mm f/2.8 C N, 55mm f/2.8 C, 80mm f/2.8 C, 80mm f/1.9 C, 150mm f/2.8 A.

The super is a great camera, don't get me wrong. It takes fantastic, clear photos, is reliable, and is wonderfully easy to use (easier than the M645, which is a bit more manual).

What I liked about the super mostly was the level of automation. It has an AE prism that you can set to spot, average, or auto (it decides), and the exposure is always right. Setting it to manual exposure is simply a matter of spinning the exposure dial off AE to a number. The ergonomics were quite well thought out. You cradle it with your left hand with your left index finger on the shutter release, and the exposure, aperture and focus rings are all easily accessible with your right hand without having to look at what you're doing.

What I disliked about the super was that it felt kinda cheesy. The body is clad in plastic, the winder is all plastic, the prism is plastic (and overhangs the back) and the back is plastic. Mine showed significant signs of use (probably by a wedding photographer), and there were a few bits where the plastic was starting to crack. The lens mount is recessed a little, which makes operating the M/A slider on the lens to do DoF preview quite fiddly. When you wind it, it doesn't feel that rugged. Don't get me wrong, it never let me down.

My M645 was a bit of a basket case when I got it. All the foam had rotted, and the lining in the mirror box had turned to mush. Added to that, the frame counter didn't reset properly. That said, it had had a lot less use than my super. After a thorough CLA, it came up beautifully, looking like new.

So what I like about the M645 is that it feels like a well made watch. The winder is smooth and positive, everything fits together really perfectly, and it's all built to last. Operation with the PD prism is quite well thought out - set the exposure dial on the body to the circle, press the button on the prism to wake the meter, then adjust either the shutter speed dial on the prism or the aperture ring so the green led lights. It's easy to get to the M/A switch on the lenses, and the second shutter release button on the top is really cool.

Using the M645 with the waist level finder is a tad more awkward, as the body shutter speed dial is on the wrong (left) side, so you have to reach across the body to set the shutter speed. The other gripe with the M645 is that there's no way to change backs mid-roll. You have to use the whole roll before you can open the back up and replace the film. On the super, you can have several backs pre-loaded.

So for my shooting style (slow, deliberate) the M645 is perfect. Sure, there's no AE mode, and the film that's in it has to stay in it until it's all exposed, but that's no biggy. After all, they're only 15 shots - not the 36 shots that you have to do with 35mm.

Here's the weights of various M645 bits (I sold my super, so can't weigh it):

M645 body with 120 insert and focus screen but no film: 940g
PD prism: 511g
waist level finder: 186g
45/2.8: 474g
55/2.8: 394g
80/1.9: 430g
150/2.8: 754g

A typical setup (body, PD prism, 80/1.9) weighs 1900g.

 

[MattKing]

It's intriguing to me how personal some perceptions are .

I've always preferred the construction of the Mamiya M645 Super and Pro to the earlier models. I've always felt that the construction of the older models seemed somewhat clunky and unrefined, while the newer models seemed smoother.

There is a fair amount of plastic on the outside of the newer models, but in my experience it is durable plastic, and the structural parts are metal or glass, wherever appropriate.

I think at least part of my perception is related to the leatherette covering on the older models - I've seen quite a few that look really worn.

I tend to use my cameras (Super and Pro) with the left-hand grip with built in electronic release and hot shoe. With bracket in hand, the A-M switch is easily adjusted with my left index finger. The winding lever is easily operated with my (not fully dexterous) right hand.

All of which is to say that it is difficult for us to tell what will work best for you.

Matt

 

[Micky]

contax and a 2/80mm........enough said

 

[Matus Kalisky]

you guys are just great. I really appreciate all your replies.

Indeed - the left hand grip would be an option - I do not really need a motor winding. I just want to camera to be as comfortable to hand hold as possible - at least with lenses up to 110 - 150mm.

- MattKing -
Uh, that the Mamiya AFD is really heavy. But - do I get it right that actually the lightest of the Mamiyas are the Pro / Pro TL ones?
At which shutter speeds (combined with a give lens) do you find the mirror lock up necessary?

- peri24 -
The Contax is indeed high on my list - if not the price I would not think twice. I have checked Flickr for some samples taken with the 80/2.0 and I can only confirm that in renders beautifully (I even found some 4000x4000 pixel samples with the Kodak back). I have also heard that the 120mm macro is great but that would mean longer starving (err ... saving). Looking at the weight with a standard lens I seem to come to a number of about 1800 - 1900 g. Is that correct? Also - is there anything that you find less than optimal on the Contax?

- lxdude -
Yes - the leaf shutters do have an appeal - I actually to here and than some shots with studio flash where faster sync is an advantage (one does not need to be so picky about the background lights). So you say that the mirror is not itself a limitation for handhold shooting? Built in Flash TTL is nice too - I did not know about that.

- suzyj -
I do agree that the weight during shooting is not the main concern, but as I plan during the trips to carry the camera in some sort of shoulder bag it would be nice to save 500g. As I am after AE I would probably choose some of the Pro / Pro TL models in case of Mamiya.

Now - I would love to hear more about the Pentax. I have read that the mirror on the 645NII is very well damped - how is it with the 645 and 645N? What are the real life differences between these 3 modes? What are the ready-to-shoot weights?

In general - how do you find your lenses (of your particular setups) to perform wide open? Which are your favorites (for the picture quality)?

 

[MattKing]

Matus:

I think that the Super and Pro models are probably the lightest when you are considering the full kit (body, back, finder, winder).

Obviously, I don't use mirror lock up when hand holding. As far as tripod use is considered, I don't usually even think of using mirror lock up, because I've never really encountered a slide or negative where lack of mirror lock up has clearly affected my results.

As far as my lenses are concerned (45N, 55, 70, 110, 150 f/3.5, and 210), I have no problems with any of them, and never hesitate to use them wide open, when circumstances dictate. They are very consistent when it comes to sharpness and contrast and colour rendition. Under high flare conditions they vary slightly, but not in any way that is particularly objectionable.

I did have an older C version of the 45 that was a lot bigger than the 45 in N version, but it was of good quality (although a bit more prone to flare.

The 70mm is an old model leaf shutter version. I don't use it often, but it functions well. Unless you have the Pro Tl and the latest versions of the leaf shutter lenses and the appropriate extra cables, leaf shutter use with the Mamiya 645 cameras can be quite fiddly.

Matt

 

[PeterAM]

I have a Mamiya 1000S that I use handheld (using prism)with a left side handle and other times with the WLF. The lenses are excellent. I think it's a great camera for what I want, but have to admit that I didn't make many comparisions.

Something else to consider regarding the Pentax 645 is that Pentax just/finally released their 645D (digital) camera and I've read on another forum that the older 645 lenses have virtually disappeared from places like KEH. Like the Pentax DSLR's, this camera will accept all of the older lenses, including the 67 lenses, with an adapter.

 

[Pete H]

I use a Contax 645 and the 120 mm macros is probably my most used lens. Stunning for macro work, but I recommend getting a separate focussing rail rather than using the lens itself to focus if you want to shoot macro.
The only problem I´ve had with it was when I was out in driving rain. I think water got onto the lens-body electrical contacts. It stopped working completely. After I dried it out there haven´t been any more problems, but I haven´t taken it out in such horrible conditions. No problem with it working at -18C in dry conditions.
If you use the autofocus a lot the battery doesn´t last long. I generally use MF anyway, so it isn´t a problem, and the 120 mm Macro lens doesn´t have AF.

Pete

 

[ath]

Now - I would love to hear more about the Pentax. I have read that the mirror on the 645NII is very well damped - how is it with the 645 and 645N? What are the real life differences between these 3 modes? What are the ready-to-shoot weights?

Matus,

when I decided to buy a 645 I checked the possible candidates and ended up with the Pentax 645N. Avoid the plain 645, the controls are limited and akward. The NII added a little more features but my understanding is that the hardware is the same as the N.
I shot Makros with the 645N on a tripod (comparable to Manfrotto / Bogen 190) and the pictures are sharp (Acros).

You can get manuals for in depth comparisom at http://www.butkus.org/chinon/pentax.htm

 

[Matus Kalisky]

- MattKing -
thank you for the point about leaf shuttered lenses in the Mamiya system. Should I decide to go that way I will check out the details.


- Pete H -
I completely agree on the separate focusing rail for a macro photography. I have made a few close up shots with my 4x5 Tachihara (which being a simple field camera provides only front standard focusing) and once I reached 1:2 reproduction ratio the focusing became a exercise in confusion and patience at the same time.

Now - more onto the Contax. As it is not being developed anymore - how is the compatibility to different 645 digital backs? It is quite improbable that I would ever get one, but out of sheer curiosity - what can be attached and is the camera still compatible with the more modern backs?

 

[peri24]

http://www.phaseone.com/en/Digital-Backs/P65/P65-Tech-Specs.aspx
the one and only first full frame digital back (645) is compatible only with mamiya afd and contax 645, that should give you a nice idea of contax strongness as a system for actual digital companies. (mamiya and phaseone are business partners)
If you look on the net you will find good info on contax with digital backs but we are reaching boundaries in apug now...
go to partner site or try www.luminous-landscape.com.

 

[Q.G.]

http://www.phaseone.com/en/Digital-Backs/P65/P65-Tech-Specs.aspx
the one and only first full frame digital back (645) is compatible only with mamiya afd and contax 645, that should give you a nice idea of [...]

It rather is that PhaseOne only offers that thing for those two, because they don't make one of that size themselves.
You can get the same size sensor on, say, a Hasselblad H4D.

That should help adjust that nice idea to reality.

 

[lxdude]

- lxdude -
Yes - the leaf shutters do have an appeal - I actually to here and than some shots with studio flash where faster sync is an advantage (one does not need to be so picky about the background lights). So you say that the mirror is not itself a limitation for handhold shooting? Built in Flash TTL is nice too - I did not know about that.

It seems like most people who go to MF from 35mm, like I did, find that the lack of an instant return mirror isn't the issue it might have seemed. I'm not sure why; I guess it's just the way of working is different. From what you said about your intended use and your having used 4X5 I don't think it would be a problem. The Pentax and Mamiya 645's do have instant-return mirrors.

BTW, the TTL flash metering in the ETR-Si is off the film, using a backwards-looking meter cell on the side of the mirror box.

The mirror on the ETR-Si seems nice and soft, i.e., fairly quiet and not a lot of vibration. I tried an early (all metal body) ETR-S and it had much more noise and vibration, though that could have been due to condition. So I would consider the ETR-Si to be refined in that department. With mirror lockup it is very nice, of course.

I mentioned before how the Speed Grip makes it handle similarly to a big 35mm. I forgot to mention that with the grip on, the release on the body can still be used. Normally I lock it and use the one on the grip, but there are times when it's better to use it. Verticals are easier for me that way. I position the grip on the bottom, with the lens cradled in my left hand, and trigger the body release with a finger on my right hand. Works well.

I bought a Bronica because I wanted to try medium format, and it was inexpensive, both body and lenses. I liked it enough to stick with it. I now have another body and most lenses.
I considered Mamiya, but found all the different models a little confusing, so before I got around to sorting it all out I came across an ETR-Si on the bay for less than $150 with 75mm EII lens, 120 back, plain prism and Speed Grip. For that it's hard to go wrong. I figured if I didn't like it I couldn't lose much. If I found I hated not having an instant-return mirror, then I knew that say, a Hasselblad was also probably not in my future.

I have noticed that with the introduction of the Pentax 645 digital, there's been a run on lenses. KEH is almost cleaned out compared to just a week or so ago, especially the most desirable ones. So if you choose Pentax, acquiring lenses may be a little more difficult or expensive now.

What's interesting is how it's always a voyage of discovery. I've always liked the 2:3 ratio of 35mm, and find I'm not all that crazy about the 4:3 of the 6X4.5 format. At the same time square format, something I never cared for before, is starting to interest me. So I expect to go to either go to 6X6 and crop or use a 645 back when I don't want square, or go to 6X7 and use it with a 6X6 back unless I want full frame.

Regarding digital backs: Leaf backs for Hasselblad can be adapted to the Bronica 645 and 6X6. The adapter setup is crazy expensive new, maybe considerably better used.

 

[peri24]

It rather is that PhaseOne only offers that thing for those two, because they don't make one of that size themselves.
You can get the same size sensor on, say, a Hasselblad H4D.

That should help adjust that nice idea to reality.

i'm not really into digital stuff and you can correct me but....
to define even more the real reality, is that hasselblad thing a proper digital back or just a simple but big digital camera system without any more back attachment option than a digital one??

 

[Q.G.]

Wildly off topic, but i risked it before so... the back comes off and can be attached to other things (like view cameras).

The thing about PhaseOne's limited offering is because that market has been closed firmly. Long gone are the days that you could select a digital back, and decide at leisure what camera you want to use it on.
Nowadays, PhaseOne and Mamiya are to be considered as one entity, as far as marketing is concerned.
The market for their product is probably too small, hence the offer to put this thing on a camera that you can't buy anymore?

So the fact that a maker of digital backs offers their product for a dead system says not a lot about that dead system. Lots more about the digitalmarket.
The believe that the dead system is "the one and only first" to use a fullframe 6x4.5 sensor is simply mistaken.

 

[Matus Kalisky]

thanks. But I guess that before this thread will be closed and the first poster banned we should move back to analog world

Now - let me come up with a bit different questions: If there are some among you that have used also a MF rangefinder with interchangeable lenses (like Bronica RF645, Mamiya 6 or 7) - how would you find it to compare to a 645 SLR in terms of handling (focusing, hand hold shooting). Sure the RF are lighter and smaller - but what are the practical impacts on the shooting itself? Did you ever take the SLR over the RF to a trip even though the SLR was heavier and more bulky? How do you feel about theses two different worlds?

 

[Matus Kalisky]

As the Contax and Pentax seems to be the lightest guys of the bunch (that is when comparing cameras with AE prism and motor winder - correct me if I am worng) - how does the Pentax 645N (645NII) compares to the Contax? I mean viewfinder, functions, noise, shutter lag (I have hear of some 250 ms for the Pentax) etc ..

Also for the Pentax - how do the MF lenses compare to the AF (FA) ? Any differences (I recall something about the 35/3.5, but would love to hear more)

Up to which focal length do you find your 645 SLR to be hand-holdable?

 

[yurihuta]

I have a Pentax 645 kit. I have a couple of 645N bodies and ten lenses, from FA 33-55mm zoom to FA 400mm. If you like wide angle, then consider the Pentax FA 35mm f/3.5 - it is a stellar performer. It took me a couple of years to find my copy, as they are in demand and used by DSLR shooters for stitching panoramas. Of course, ever since Pentax announced the 645D body last week, there has been a run on lenses and the prices have already shot up, so it is no longer the quiet bargain it was two weeks ago. FA lenses are the autofocus series, and the A lenses are the manual focus version. If you get a 645N or 645NII body, there is focus confirmation in the viewfinder and an audible focus confirmation option too, so A lenses can be manually focused with camera confirmation.

As pupfish mentions, the manual focus lenses are very rugged and the two I have are nice and sharp. I have the A 35mm (yes, in addition to the FA 35mm and the FA 33-55mm) and the A 55mm and am very happy with both. I am hoping to find some time to compare the three wide angle lenses to see how they do against each other.

I like the 645N bodies because of the bright viewfinder, it handles like a traditional 35mm film camera, it has a nice metering system (dual, six zone matirx) and I have the mention that big, bright viewfinder again. I don't care for interchangeable film backs - this can be a deal breaker, so consider this feature.

The lenses are sharp and contrasty, heck, people use them on their DSLR bodies and given the demand for the FA 35mm f/3.5, you can rest assured it is sharp if it stands up to the resolution rigors of full frame DSLRs.

So, why Pentax 645? I like using the system, I liked it better than the Bronica SQAi kit I had. It works for me.

 

[Matus Kalisky]

- yurihuta -

Even not as the first lens - but I will definitely be interested to get some 35mm lens for 645 SLR at some point - so I am interested to hear more. Should you make some comparison AF and MF versions of this lens I would love to know your opinion (AF is not that crucial so MF version would be indeed an option). I seem to recall that the MF version is heavier - is that the case?

But as you own the 33-55 zoom - would you mind to comment on this lens? How do you find the handling, image quality and distortion?

I guess you also have the 120/4 macro - how is it? My 3 lens set up would definitely include a macro lens of about this focal length (depending on the camera of course)

How does the 55mm lens compare to 75mm one? I quite like 35 - 40mm lenses with small format (or their counterparts in larger formats - Fujinon 125/5.6 CM-W is my favorite lens with 4x5). As both have the same speed the decision is not so obvious as with Contax 645 (the 80/2 seems to be lovely indeed).

I do not care too much about the interchangeable backs so Pentax 645N is an interesting option (in fact Pentax and Contax would be the main candidates if I were buying now).

And once I am at it - could anybody comment on the Pentax - versus - Contax concerning the AF (speed, noise, accuracy)?

 

[yurihuta]

Hello Matus,

The FA 33-55mm is an interesting lens. The range is amazing - equivalent to a 20-35mm in 35mm (24x36) format. I am waiting on a part (rear lens assembly) for this lens before I test all three superwides for the Pentax 645. Handling is very nice and it is reasonably sized lens. I will photograph them all together from different perspectives to give a better idea of size. If you look at the lens review on pentaxforums.com, Pål Jensen gives his impressions of this lens - http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-FA-645-33-55mm-F4.5-Zoom-Lens.html. He has created some stunning photographs with this lens - http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5030363.

The A 35mm is a very solid lens. I really like its feel and so far the images I have taken with it I am quite pleased with (handheld family photos). I am trying to find some time when the weather is good and get this on a tripod (along with the FA 35mm and eventually the FA 33-55mm) to give a real workout to see what the differences are for my type of shooting.

The A 120 macro is great and I regret selling mine. But now I am waiting for an FA 120 macro I just purchased this morning. The A 120 macro was really nice in terms of sharpness and build quality.

My A 55mm is a better built lens than my FA 75mm. It feels very solid and has 'heft' (mass) to it compared to the FA and the A 75mm lenses. It is quite sharp, although I have not noticed that my FA 75mm is soft.

 

[yurihuta]

Some more information from a photo.net discussions on this lens - http://photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/00AxtM - http://photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/005itC

 

[Matus Kalisky]

- Youri -

thank you. I have checked the links you posted. I have to admit I was surprised to hear the both zooms (33-55, 45 - 85) were reported to be sharper than the 45mm. How do you find the quality of this lens?

For the macro lens - is the new (FA) version an autofocus lens or not? Is there any difference in optics? Let us know how it compares to the A version once it arrives.

I am happy to hear that the A 55/2.8 is a nice lens as it is probably my most preferred focal length and 35/55/120 would make a nice combo ...