After some years with the Pentax 6x7 system i'd think i should start a discussion on the lenses, I see there's no thread dedicated to them. Just to know where i'm coming from, i was a guy who raved about the RB67 (had many cameras and lenses) and C330/C220, only to later sell all stuff and replace them with P67 and Bronica ETRSi, respectively.
I see lots of information on the 'net about the lenses but I would like to give my own take and open discussion. This is based on lenses i own or that i've used.
Pentax 67 SMC 45/4 (82mm filters). Introduced 1980.
Short review: Essential for wideangle lovers.
This is an extremely compact lens with angle of view wider than a 24° lens on FF. I would say it is between 20-22mm on FF equivalent regarding angle of view.
It exaggerates the perspective, as an extreme wide angle should do, it's relatively light and very compact, and really one of the better lenses available on the system. I would say this is a "must" if you are a wideangle enthusiast.
Pentax 6x7 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 55/3.5 (100mm filters). Introduced 1970 (Super Tak)
Short review: Bodybuilding is good for you.
Somewhere in Tokyo in 1968 or 1969, at Asahi Optical Co, they were reunited pondering which lenses to create for the 6x7 system. A young lens designer said: "You know, Kazamaki-san (Tomokazu Kazamaki) recently designed this 28/3.5 super-takumar which our Spotmatic users are raving about and are making our competition green with envy. It is more compact than Nippon Kogaku's 28/3.5 and has less vignetting and better corner performance. Why don't we scale that lens to 6x7 format?"
"but... but... this would mean a huge lens! The 28/3.5 has a 49mm filter thread, your proposal would have a 100mm filter thread! Remember, the forthcoming RB67 will be a huge machine and our product needs to be nimbler."
Then Asahi Optical's man in charge of the Pentax 6x7 project banged the table and said "We are Asahi Optical, greatest optical company in the world! Mamiya is run by little girls. Our wideangle must outperform their wideangles. They only have the 65/3.5 on the C33 system, an outdated retrofocus that isn't as wide. Our 28/3.5 is state of the art, thus, scale it and tell people who complain about the size to man up and stop being Soshoku-kei danshi. "
This lens, having 100mm filters, is usually called "a monster", "really big", and also "inferior to the later lenses" by people who haven't used them. I can definitely say this is one of the most beautiful lenses for this system. It is a joy to behold. It feels "big" only because of the front element, the barrel being of similar size to a 75mm lens.
This is a wide angle that doesn't feel exaggerated, it's really a general purpose wideangle. It also gives very pleasant narrow DOF effects, and pleasant bokeh, so it is also useful for portraits, believe it or not. It also gives interesting flare effects, if you like this kind of stuff. I say this is one of the most "general purpose" lenses on the system.
It is heavy at 920g, and the camera feels heavy with it, but the funny thing is, it feels perfectly balanced with the P6x7 and it is so far the lens that minimizes the mirror shock the best. The push-on cap (a must!) is easier to use than the bayonet caps of most pentax lenses.
Pentax SMC 6x7 55/4.0 first version (not SMC 67 but SMC 6x7) (77mm filters), Introduced 1979.
Short review: The choice of the reasonable, undaring photographer.
More compact than the former but still feels like a big lens. I had no complaints but for some reason I didn't like it. You see, it is still a big lens but it doesn't scream "i'm a pro photographer who doesn't care to carry a big lens if this is what it takes to get great results" like the 55/3.5 does.
Still, I would recommend this lens for somebody looking for a more compact and lighter alternative to the 55/3.5. Is has better flare resistance than the former lens, and uses common 77mm filters.
Pentax 6x7 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 75/4.5 (82mm filters). Introduced 1969 (Super-tak)
Short review: Should you have only one lens and tight budget, start here.
This lens has an angle of view very similar to the 90/2.8, the 90mm is smaller, lighter and faster so I sold my 75mm.
The 75mm feels like a big lens, even though it isn't heavy. It is also ugly as hell, its ugliness being proportional to the beauty of the negatives you get.
This is a scaled-up version of the 35/3.5 Super-Takumar lens for the 35mm system, a lens with a really good reputation.
It's a great, cheaper, alternative to the 90/2.8. At f4.5 it still can achieve good narrow DOF effects when closing in (for portraits). Bokeh is good, uniform, nice. Just don't expect it to render pictures like a "wide angle" because it's really about a 38mm-40mm lens in FF terms, so it is a slight wide angle lens. Optically it can be called "flawless".
Thus, i'd label this one as "General purpose" lens.
Note: look for examples free from haze. The last group is two cemented elements and can suffer from haze.
Pentax SMC 6x7 90/2.8 (non leaf shutter) (67mm filters). Introduced 1980.
Short review: The general purpose lens and travel lens. But still overpriced.
This is the quintaessential general purpose lens, having an angle of view similar to 43-45mm on FF. Equivalent to a 45/1.2 - 45/1.4 lens on FF terms. Coming from the RB67 system, i was used to 90mm as the standard focal length.
Compact, light, close focusing, sharp even wide open, contrasty. No complaints at all except that bokeh can vary from superb to nervous depending on the conditions (i.e. distance from the main subject).
Sadly it is now more expensive than a 105/2.4. So, overpriced.
Pentax 6x7 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 105/2.4 (67mm filters). Introduced 1969 (Super-tak)
Short review: The lens for people oblivious to the fact that Pentax made other lenses beside the 105. Most overpriced 6x7 lens.
I'm going to put my flameproof suit on.
I had the chance to use this lens twice, being lent from a friend so i could compare with the 90mm. This (105/2.4) is no doubt the most overpriced and overhyped lens in the whole Pentax 6x7 lineup. It is heavier than the 90/2.8, bigger than the 90/2.8, doesn't focus as close as the 90/2.8, and is often found with haze problems or with yellowing problems. Even the "de-yellowed" lenses still are slightly warm. Haze often appears on cemented elements, which means it can't be "cleaned".
The reason to hype this lens is that it is said to be "perfect for portraits". However, this is equivalent to a 55/1.0 - 55/1.2 lens on FF terms. I have many 50mm lenses for 35mm (and 75mm lenses for 645) and I would never use such focal length for portraits if i have a longer lens available (to get better facial features) or a shorter lens available (to include and feature the environment as well as a subject).
In my view, you use a standard lens (i mean, a 46° field of view lens) for portraits only if this is the only lens available in your arsenal. Otherwise, for portraits, the 135, 150, 165, and 200mm lenses would be a better choice, and most of those are substantially cheaper. For a general purpose, "carry it at all times" lens, the 90mm, 75mm and 55mm lenses are a better choice. The latter two are far cheaper as well.
Pentax 6x7 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 150/2.8 (67mm filters). Introduced 1969 (Super-tak).
Short review: Standard portrait lens.
This one, and the 165mm lenses, are the definitive portrait lenses for the 6x7 system.
Equivalent to about a 80/1.2 - 80/1.4 lens on FF terms.
Get a hood and a filter: the front element is very exposed to the front.
The out of focus rendering is really good and at the same time different to the one obtained with the 165/2.8 lens. The 150mm has a "vintage, aged like fine wine" rendering and the 165/2.8 has a "modern Canon L-series" rendering. Choose your flavor.
I would say this is a must, if you don't own a 165 or 135 lens (the 135 has a very similar angle of view).
Pentax 6x7 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 200/4.0 (67mm filters). Introduced 1969 (Super-tak).
Short review: The poor man's portrait lens and a great value.
This one is right now the cheapest 6x7 lens available.
It is pretty handholdable, doesn't feel too big, has good flare resistance, good contrast. Simple 4 elements in 4 groups design so it won't suffer balsam separation or incurable haze.
I haven't really used it much. From samples i've seen online, it has beautiful bokeh and it is sharp stopped down.
The minimum focus distance is too long (2.5 meters), however this is easily solved by fitting an extension ring, so it's no problem, really.
If i didn't have the 150mm lens i would be perfectly happy with the 200mm. It certanly has more compression than the 150. I think its low price status make people underrate this lens.
Extension tubes
Are very cheap and are a must!
I see lots of information on the 'net about the lenses but I would like to give my own take and open discussion. This is based on lenses i own or that i've used.
Pentax 67 SMC 45/4 (82mm filters). Introduced 1980.
Short review: Essential for wideangle lovers.
This is an extremely compact lens with angle of view wider than a 24° lens on FF. I would say it is between 20-22mm on FF equivalent regarding angle of view.
It exaggerates the perspective, as an extreme wide angle should do, it's relatively light and very compact, and really one of the better lenses available on the system. I would say this is a "must" if you are a wideangle enthusiast.
Pentax 6x7 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 55/3.5 (100mm filters). Introduced 1970 (Super Tak)
Short review: Bodybuilding is good for you.
Somewhere in Tokyo in 1968 or 1969, at Asahi Optical Co, they were reunited pondering which lenses to create for the 6x7 system. A young lens designer said: "You know, Kazamaki-san (Tomokazu Kazamaki) recently designed this 28/3.5 super-takumar which our Spotmatic users are raving about and are making our competition green with envy. It is more compact than Nippon Kogaku's 28/3.5 and has less vignetting and better corner performance. Why don't we scale that lens to 6x7 format?"
"but... but... this would mean a huge lens! The 28/3.5 has a 49mm filter thread, your proposal would have a 100mm filter thread! Remember, the forthcoming RB67 will be a huge machine and our product needs to be nimbler."
Then Asahi Optical's man in charge of the Pentax 6x7 project banged the table and said "We are Asahi Optical, greatest optical company in the world! Mamiya is run by little girls. Our wideangle must outperform their wideangles. They only have the 65/3.5 on the C33 system, an outdated retrofocus that isn't as wide. Our 28/3.5 is state of the art, thus, scale it and tell people who complain about the size to man up and stop being Soshoku-kei danshi. "
This lens, having 100mm filters, is usually called "a monster", "really big", and also "inferior to the later lenses" by people who haven't used them. I can definitely say this is one of the most beautiful lenses for this system. It is a joy to behold. It feels "big" only because of the front element, the barrel being of similar size to a 75mm lens.
This is a wide angle that doesn't feel exaggerated, it's really a general purpose wideangle. It also gives very pleasant narrow DOF effects, and pleasant bokeh, so it is also useful for portraits, believe it or not. It also gives interesting flare effects, if you like this kind of stuff. I say this is one of the most "general purpose" lenses on the system.
It is heavy at 920g, and the camera feels heavy with it, but the funny thing is, it feels perfectly balanced with the P6x7 and it is so far the lens that minimizes the mirror shock the best. The push-on cap (a must!) is easier to use than the bayonet caps of most pentax lenses.
Pentax SMC 6x7 55/4.0 first version (not SMC 67 but SMC 6x7) (77mm filters), Introduced 1979.
Short review: The choice of the reasonable, undaring photographer.
More compact than the former but still feels like a big lens. I had no complaints but for some reason I didn't like it. You see, it is still a big lens but it doesn't scream "i'm a pro photographer who doesn't care to carry a big lens if this is what it takes to get great results" like the 55/3.5 does.
Still, I would recommend this lens for somebody looking for a more compact and lighter alternative to the 55/3.5. Is has better flare resistance than the former lens, and uses common 77mm filters.
Pentax 6x7 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 75/4.5 (82mm filters). Introduced 1969 (Super-tak)
Short review: Should you have only one lens and tight budget, start here.
This lens has an angle of view very similar to the 90/2.8, the 90mm is smaller, lighter and faster so I sold my 75mm.
The 75mm feels like a big lens, even though it isn't heavy. It is also ugly as hell, its ugliness being proportional to the beauty of the negatives you get.
This is a scaled-up version of the 35/3.5 Super-Takumar lens for the 35mm system, a lens with a really good reputation.
It's a great, cheaper, alternative to the 90/2.8. At f4.5 it still can achieve good narrow DOF effects when closing in (for portraits). Bokeh is good, uniform, nice. Just don't expect it to render pictures like a "wide angle" because it's really about a 38mm-40mm lens in FF terms, so it is a slight wide angle lens. Optically it can be called "flawless".
Thus, i'd label this one as "General purpose" lens.
Note: look for examples free from haze. The last group is two cemented elements and can suffer from haze.
Pentax SMC 6x7 90/2.8 (non leaf shutter) (67mm filters). Introduced 1980.
Short review: The general purpose lens and travel lens. But still overpriced.
This is the quintaessential general purpose lens, having an angle of view similar to 43-45mm on FF. Equivalent to a 45/1.2 - 45/1.4 lens on FF terms. Coming from the RB67 system, i was used to 90mm as the standard focal length.
Compact, light, close focusing, sharp even wide open, contrasty. No complaints at all except that bokeh can vary from superb to nervous depending on the conditions (i.e. distance from the main subject).
Sadly it is now more expensive than a 105/2.4. So, overpriced.
Pentax 6x7 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 105/2.4 (67mm filters). Introduced 1969 (Super-tak)
Short review: The lens for people oblivious to the fact that Pentax made other lenses beside the 105. Most overpriced 6x7 lens.
I'm going to put my flameproof suit on.
I had the chance to use this lens twice, being lent from a friend so i could compare with the 90mm. This (105/2.4) is no doubt the most overpriced and overhyped lens in the whole Pentax 6x7 lineup. It is heavier than the 90/2.8, bigger than the 90/2.8, doesn't focus as close as the 90/2.8, and is often found with haze problems or with yellowing problems. Even the "de-yellowed" lenses still are slightly warm. Haze often appears on cemented elements, which means it can't be "cleaned".
The reason to hype this lens is that it is said to be "perfect for portraits". However, this is equivalent to a 55/1.0 - 55/1.2 lens on FF terms. I have many 50mm lenses for 35mm (and 75mm lenses for 645) and I would never use such focal length for portraits if i have a longer lens available (to get better facial features) or a shorter lens available (to include and feature the environment as well as a subject).
In my view, you use a standard lens (i mean, a 46° field of view lens) for portraits only if this is the only lens available in your arsenal. Otherwise, for portraits, the 135, 150, 165, and 200mm lenses would be a better choice, and most of those are substantially cheaper. For a general purpose, "carry it at all times" lens, the 90mm, 75mm and 55mm lenses are a better choice. The latter two are far cheaper as well.
Pentax 6x7 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 150/2.8 (67mm filters). Introduced 1969 (Super-tak).
Short review: Standard portrait lens.
This one, and the 165mm lenses, are the definitive portrait lenses for the 6x7 system.
Equivalent to about a 80/1.2 - 80/1.4 lens on FF terms.
Get a hood and a filter: the front element is very exposed to the front.
The out of focus rendering is really good and at the same time different to the one obtained with the 165/2.8 lens. The 150mm has a "vintage, aged like fine wine" rendering and the 165/2.8 has a "modern Canon L-series" rendering. Choose your flavor.
I would say this is a must, if you don't own a 165 or 135 lens (the 135 has a very similar angle of view).
Pentax 6x7 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 200/4.0 (67mm filters). Introduced 1969 (Super-tak).
Short review: The poor man's portrait lens and a great value.
This one is right now the cheapest 6x7 lens available.
It is pretty handholdable, doesn't feel too big, has good flare resistance, good contrast. Simple 4 elements in 4 groups design so it won't suffer balsam separation or incurable haze.
I haven't really used it much. From samples i've seen online, it has beautiful bokeh and it is sharp stopped down.
The minimum focus distance is too long (2.5 meters), however this is easily solved by fitting an extension ring, so it's no problem, really.
If i didn't have the 150mm lens i would be perfectly happy with the 200mm. It certanly has more compression than the 150. I think its low price status make people underrate this lens.
Extension tubes
Are very cheap and are a must!
Last edited:
Since I'm always on a tripod, the overall weight is not an issue for me.
