Pentax 6x7 45mm vs Nikon 20mm (for small format)

[Grim Tuesday]

I'm thinking about picking up either the 45mm lens for my Pentax 6x7 or the Nikon 20mm AF lens for my N65. Either one of them would be my widest lens out of all my cameras and fun to play around with for perspective and wide angle shots. The 45mm is generally thought of as a not-that-great lens, but comes with all the advantages of medium format film. The 20mm is faster, has autofocus, is much smaller and lighter and more likely to be taken farther from my home, but of course, must use small format film. I have a Nikon Coolscan 9000 ED which does better with medium format, but I also have a DSLR scanning setup that does better with 35mm than maybe even the 9000 does with medium format so that's a wash. And my enlarger only goes up to 6x6 right now but plan to get a 6x7 one soon as I find that I really like my Pentax 6x7. Price is roughly equal, with a slight edge to the Pentax. Does anyone here have any thoughts on the Pentax, and/or the Nikon, or just medium format vs small format for wide angle in general?

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I like to go bigger format for wideangle. A wideangle lens can take in more information, so it can benefit from more resolution. I think my widest lens currently is a 45mm lens for 4x5" at 109 deg. on the long dimension, but I also have a Noblex 120 swing lens camera, which can take in 135 deg.

CORRECTION: My widest lens is a 47mm on 4x5”. The angle of view on the long dimension is 107 deg.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Hmm, what about if I put the money towards a large format camera? I've always wanted to go large format and this month of lockdown is really making me itch for one...

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I don't know about the Pentax cameras but the wide angle 43mm on my Mamiya 7ii is excellent quality and I have no reservations about the medium format lens apart from remembering to focus correctly which should be less of an issue with the SLR.

 

[awty]

Nikon 20mm AF is a treasure. I never leave it behind when using my AF Nikons. I prefer wides for wide formats. 65mm is as wide as I have for 6x7 format, cant see any reason to go wider.

 

[voceumana]

I haven't found that the Pentax 45 has a poor reputation, but to the contrary most reviews of it seem quite favorable.

As to your decision, I think you have to decide on what format you like using, and then the decision is obvious. Note that really wide lenses in large format are not very common, and those that are available tend to be very pricey. 6x7 provides significant image quality over 35mm, but best technique has to be practiced to get the most out of it: i.e., camera on a tripod, use of mirror lockup, good darkroom technique.

 

[skysh4rk]

I generally prefer to use slightly longer-than-normal lenses, but I've actually quite enjoyed using the 45mm in the two years I've owned it. It's a better lens than I am photographer, so any issues with photographs are down to me and my faults at this point rather than the lens. For me, it provides an interesting alternative to the 105mm and its lighter size/weight (relative to other P67 lenses) is also a bonus.

 

[abruzzi]

I'd probably go with the P67 lens too. Right now my widest is the 55/3.5, but I've never seen a bad P67 lens. Some are better than others, but even one others have poo-pooed can turn out very nice pictures. Plus 6x7 is a lot more real estate for detail.

I'd be a little cautious about jumping to 4x5. It can be well worth it, but it forces you into a very different process for taking pictures that you may or may not enjoy. Plus there are a fair number of other stuff you need to get up and running in large format (beyond camera and lens.) so it is more expensive than you might initially think.

 

[Alan Gales]

Hmm, what about if I put the money towards a large format camera? I've always wanted to go large format and this month of lockdown is really making me itch for one...

You can do it pretty cheap if you buy a 4x5 monorail. I once had an entry level Calumet that only weighed six pounds so the tripod for your Pentax may work. You can use an oversized black sweatshirt for a dark cloth, cheap readers from the drugstore for a loupe, the light meter in your 35mm camera. Used film holders are cheap. Film is going to cost you more though and you are going to burn through a lot of it at first. Also sheet film is a different experience than roll film and not for everyone.

Ask on the forum if there is anyone who shoots 4x5 in your neighborhood. I'm sure someone on here would be happy to show you how to do it if you pay for the beer afterwards. Oh, and after the social distancing is over of course.

 

[Michael Firstlight]

My 45MM lens on my 67II is my favorite lens and tack sharp. I'd give upl any other lens before that one.

MFL

 

[Hatchetman]

4x5 is a whole nuther realm of complication. tried it, not for me. The P67 45mm is an excellent lens.

 

[Pieter12]

Not sure there is a simple equivalent to the lenses mentioned for 4x5. I'm guessing that would be a 75mm lens, not cheap ($500 used?). And you may have to use a center filter, recessed board and wide angle bellows.

 

[Michael Firstlight]

Here's one chart that's pretty close, there are other charts and some disagreements across various charts.
http://lensn2shutter.com/35mmchart.html

Also, here's an Invaluable table on lenses for 4x5: https://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenses/LF4x5in.html

 

[benveniste]

To me, it would depend on which camera I though I'd use more often. While the angle of view along the diagonal is similar, for many landscape shots the 20mm will seem wider due to the difference in aspect ratio.

Personally, I don't find autofocus all that important for wide angle lenses, but I do like the options on perspective offered by a wide-angle zoom. That's one reason why I haven't looked at getting anything wider for my larger format cameras.

 

[SilverShutter]

I think they are widely different lenses in their target use. The Nikon finds good use as a lightweight lens for travel, street and experimental photography. The Pentax has a more reduced use, but certainly if careful wide angle compositions such as landscape or architectural are your thing then it's what you should go for.

 

[ruilourosa]

No 45mm with 109 degrees will cover 4x5...

Pentax 6x7 is a violent camera ... Shutter and mirror slap put to misery its good lenses...

Consider non retrofocus lenses for optimum performance... Mamiya and zeiss have some for MF, large format have a lot...

 

[johnha]

I don't have any Nikon kit but do have a P67 and 45mm, mine is a very good lens. As has been mentioned, it's surprisingly compact for a 6x7 lens and gives an impression of space that's hard to explain. I've always used the dedicated hood with mine.

As for the P6x7 being a violent camera, if you use it enough you'll know whether you agree or disagree. The 45mm is a much cheaper option than a Mamiya or Zeiss plus the camera to use them on. Large format is a completely different ballpark.

 

[ruilourosa]

I cannot imagine a camera being on a different ballpark than other... At least if you do not focus on the tool but on the task ir the end result...

Large format can be lighter, cheaper and more silent than any mf slr...

Seems a lot complicated and maybe it is for some photography and photoghraphers... But its well worth the effort...

Cheers

 

[Michael Firstlight]

If money were no object, I'd say a Schneider Super-Angulon XL72mm f/5.6 f/45 with a 226 image circle @ f22 in a deep recessed lens board with a shutter release cable for the recessed lens board with would be the ideal comparable WA lens for 4x5, but a nice clean one can run $500-600 bucks used. Even better if the 4x5 has a bag bellows that would provide maximum movements if needed.
MFL

 

[Denverdad]

I'll add my voice to the others in saying that 45mm lens for Pentex 6x7 actually has a very good reputation, and I find mine to be an excellent performer. Perhaps you were were thinking of the 35mm fisheye in that series? That one is often maligned for lack of sharpness (see for example, here).

 

[Karl K]

As it is with everything else, size matters.
If you need to print larger than 11x14, then I would opt for the medium format.
Otherwise, the 20mm f/2.8 Nikkor AF is a solid performer....highly recommended.
Don't spend the extra money for the AF-D version....it has no benefit except for some minor flash exposure perks.

 

[narsuitus]

My widest lens for my Leica 35mm rangefinder is a 21mm f/1.4 Leitz.

My widest lens for my Nikon 35mm SLR is a 14mm f/2.8 Nikkor auto focus.

My widest lens for my Mamiya 6x7 SLR is a 50mm f/4.5 Mamiya-Sekor.

My widest lens for my Fuji 6x9cm rangefinder is a 65mm f/5.6 Fujinon.

My widest lens for my 4x5 inch view camera is a 90mm f/5.6 Fujinon.

If I had to choose between a 45mm f/4 lens for a 6x7cm Pentax and a 20mm f/1.8 or f/2.8 auto focus lens for a 35mm SLR, I would pick the 20mm because I need the faster lens speed, the auto focus, the smaller size, and the lighter weight.

Later, I would get the 45mm for the times when I really need the larger negative size and higher image quality.

 

[ruilourosa]

The 72mm saxl is a fine lens, but the recessed lensboard and bag bellows are really camera specific issues... Also, bigger image circle does not mean better quality, i have several lenses from different brands in that focal region, never found angularity as a synonim to quality...
If money is no issue... Buy around some lenses around that focal distances... Then experiment and chose the one you like more...
I chose and kept the others... My bad...

I tend not to use the 72mm xl.... Its big, heavy and fall off is blackening....

The Nikkor or rondenstock are nicer... For my taste...

Cheers

 

[MattKing]

If I am either darkroom printing or scanning from a negative, I prefer the 6x7 negative, so if that is what I intended to do with the result, that would decide the issue for me.
If, however, I intended to project the result, I would choose the 20mm lens, because my slide projector maxes out at 6x6.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

No 45mm with 109 degrees will cover 4x5...

We were talking about angle of view, not angle of coverage, and the angle of view of any 45mm lens for 4x5” is 109mm, if it covers.

But actually that was a typo. The lens in question is the 47mm f:5.6 Super-Angulon XL. A 47mm lens has a 107mm angle of view on 4x5” but the S-A XL covers 120 deg.