Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 76,385   Posts: 1,683,156   Online: 956
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 36 of 36
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Med. Format RF

    Re: medium format prism camera shooter (Pentax 645 vs Rolleiflex)

    I'm playing with Pentacon six tl and (don't laugh too hard) Kiev 60. With a bit of luck and some reseaech, you can find a good one and using those Carl Zeiss Jena lenses with P6 mount, there's not that much left wanting.


    Verstuurd van mijn GT-P7510 met Tapatalk

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Medium Format
    Quote Originally Posted by Alan Gales View Post
    I have owned the Pentax 645 and the N and Nll.

    You want the N or Nll. The original camera has a goofy electronic shutter speed button selector and a dimmer viewfinder plus it is strictly manual focus.


    The lenses to buy are the 150mm, 75mm and the 35mm. The macro lens is also nice (I forget the focal length). Buy the 75mm and 150m with autofocus. Save your money and buy the macro and 35mm with manual focus.

    The Macro is the 120mm. Manual or autofocus, same optics. Indeed a lens that is incredibly sharp, but has a bit harsh bokeh. Still, the images are truly good.
    The bokeh of the 150mm is excellent, that of the 75mm is good as well (it has never disturbed me in any case unlike other lenses). You might also consider the 135mm.
    The 45-85mm FA zoom is a good alternative for the 35mm/75mm combo. This zoom is sharper than the 45mm/55mm primes.

    I agree that the 645N is a much nicer camera than the 645, having had both, still having one 645N (next to a Rolleiflex 2.8C). Only thing that I did not like about it is the winder noise. Otherwise very dependable, and ergonomically it is (for me) the best camera I ever held. Lenses certainly hold up well in comparison to the TLR. The 645 lenses are very very good, only the 45mm is a dog they say (I never had one myself).
    The 35mm FA is said to be sharper on film than the 35mm A—and known to be better than the Hassleblad or Mamiya 35mm—, but oddly, on digital is the other way around. Go figure. I have the A version and I'm very happy with it on film, although I do not use it all that often—I'd sell it were it not that I secretly hope I'll lay my hands on a 645D one day!

  3. #33
    Pioneer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Elko, Nevada
    Multi Format
    The lenses noted above are all quite good.

    Even the 45, although it isn't the best choice for certain types of work like architecture, can still come home with some good shots like this one taken on Delta Pro 100.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Salt-Lake-Beach.jpg 
Views:	17 
Size:	372.8 KB 
ID:	60606

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    St. Louis, Mo.
    Large Format
    I owned both versions of the 120 macro. It was a great macro lens but I didn't like it for portraiture. I sold the autofocus version because I always focussed it manually and the manual focus lens was much cheaper.

    The 35mm that I had was really sharp and I prefer manually focussing a wide angle. I never owned the autofocus version to compare to it for sharpness. I never heard that the FA was sharper. You learn something new all the time!

    The manual focus lenses do seem to be better built then the FA versions.

    I did own the manual focus 45mm and 55mm lenses and also the 400mm FA but I flipped them and never shot film with them. I also owned both zoom lenses. I didn't like them because of the weight. I'm not really a zoom guy although I do own one for my digital camera for shooting sports.

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Quote Originally Posted by revdocjim View Post
    I would love to own the ETRSi too, but do you think mirror lockup is really necessary given the leaf shutter lenses?

    With regard to the AE-II vs. AE-III, the latter uses an LCD screen and thus has significantly lower power consumption and increased battery life.

    Interesting note about the respective prices. In Tokyo the Pentax gear is generally cheaper or about the same. Old beat up 6x7 bodies are under $50 and with a little love and care they generally work well. Lenses are almost all under $100 if you are willing to settle for the Tak series. The 645 bodies are about $100 for the original, $300 for the N and a lot more for the Nii. Lenses are very reasonable too if you are ok with the A series. A used ETRS or ETRSi in decent condition with a standard lens will also run about $400. Fujiya has two of them listed today!
    I'd expect it to still make a difference - there surely isn't enough of a gap between the mirror going up and the shutter firing for any shake to settle down? I've only used it a couple of times for long exposures, the choice of an ETRSi over an ETRS here is really a case of "if you can find the later model for the same money...".

    I've paid £20 for a "spares or repair" ETR, then the same again for an ETRS body as I enjoy getting cheap and allegedly broken kit working again. The former was absolutely fine (the multi exposure lever was missing, and I don't think the seller understood that it won't fire without a film loaded unless you turn this). The ETRS had a weird problem with the lens release mechanism which wasn't too hard to sort out (I studied it for a bit, compared it to my good ETRSi, then used a small screwdriver to pop the part which had skipped out of sequence back in). Also now fine, so I have two spare bodies! Both have been film tested and seem fine, the ETR is kitted up with a plain prism and speed grip which looks brilliant with the 200mm f4.5 on! The ETRSi is more subtle with the WLF and shorter lenses.

    I regularly see usable body/lens/120 back/WLF kits for £200 or less here, usually ETRS or Si. 120 backs are around £30-£40, lenses vary. I've seen the MC 150mm for £60-£70 up to £300 or so for a PE 40mm f4. I was lucky enough to find an MC 50mm for £60 a while ago.

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Multi Format
    Quote Originally Posted by revdocjim View Post
    I would love to own the ETRSi too, but do you think mirror lockup is really necessary given the leaf shutter lenses?
    Whatever vibrations come from a focal plane shutter or otherwise are overshadowed by that humongous mirror slapping around. Leaf shutters are not a substitute for mirror lock up.

    I own an ETRS without mirror lockup.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin