Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,916   Posts: 1,521,907   Online: 1073
      
Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    John cox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ontario Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    52

    Pentax 67 lenses

    I know there are several generations of lenses for the Pentax 67. Is the most recent the only ones worth having? Or are the SMC Takumars a good investment too?

  2. #2

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    496
    What are you looking to get? I have eight lenses from 45mm to 200mm and they are a mix of new and old. My opinion, for what it's worth, is that they are just like women in that they are all good, but just somes a little better than others. My 75mm, 135mm and 200mm are the older version and I find no reason to do any upgrading for any of those. Likewise for my 55mm! I have the second version and find it all the lens I could ask for. My 45mm is the newest along with my 165mm LS lens, but I find my 45mm lacks a little in the contrast/sharpness range until I get to between f8 and f11. It's still one mighty fine lens regardless. Like I said in the beginning, "They are all darn good"!

  3. #3
    John cox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ontario Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    52
    I'm looking at getting 55, 75, 105, and 200, SMC takumars. Possibly a 135 macro, and possibly a 45 replacing the 55.

  4. #4
    timhenrion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Boston, MA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    19

  5. #5

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    South Africa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    454
    Images
    14
    I have a mixed set of old and new, consisting of 45, 75, 90, 135 and 400/4. The 75 and 400 are old type, the others new. I cannot really see much wrong with the older lenses, and handling wise they are all the same to me as well. As others have said, these are mighty fine lenses. I plan on getting 200/4 and maybe 300/4 lenses eventually. What I need first is a set of extension tubes. I suggest you get that as well, as the minimum focus distance on the macro (and all the others, for that matter) can be a bit limiting.

  6. #6
    dpurdy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Portland OR USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,038
    Images
    38
    I also have a mix. new.. 55, 135, 165 and old 90LF, 75, 105. I think the new lenses are lighter. My old 105 has yellowing from that radioactive glass but is still great.
    Actually the newer 135 and 165 lenses I have are the two I have most doubts about regarding sharpness across the range of fstops..
    Dennis

  7. #7
    John cox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ontario Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    52
    Quote Originally Posted by timhenrion View Post
    Am I right then to assume that as long as I get a SMC Takumar for the mentioned lenses I am getting the latest formula and coatings?

  8. #8
    Poisson Du Jour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SE Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,512
    Images
    15
    SMC Pentax 67 lenses have a higher degree of refinement (coating and element design) over the Takumars, even though they are based on old Biogon and/or Distagon optical layouts. A few are true stellar performers and still command a big price (and weight). There are maybe only two Takumars that really surpass the later designs of the SMC Pentax varieties. Pentax was on a winner with most of the lenses and limited only by the technology of the time.

    I cite the 45mm, 55mm, 165mm, 105mm and 90mm SMC Pentax 67 (the modern naming for the lenses that came out from 1989-1990 onward) lenses as examples of the best of the best. They are regularly found at auction or pro-level second hand dealers, but should ideally be inspected by hand for faults such as dust/dirt, scratched rear elements, bent or broken aperture coupling lever, deep scours of the mounting flange, jammed aperture ring, damaged front filter threads (or bayonet filter engagement nibs) and fungus — a lot of these things can be found during routine inspections; rough treatment by professionals is usually par for the course for these big and very well built lenses, but a surprising number I have seen have been in terrible condition (and advertised as "Mint –"!!). My favourite lens is the squat and easy handling 45mm; I really should be getting prints around 1m across from it, only that the budget doesn't extend that far...

    I wouldn't necessary shy away from the old Takumars, apart from my dislike much earlier on of the rather unfriendly knurled feel to them. A number of lenses also had thorium rear elements which should liven up your conversation if you start talking about a pale yellow tinge!
    .::Gary Rowan Higgins

    A comfort zone is a wonderful place. But nothing ever grows there.
    —Anon.






  9. #9

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    South Africa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    454
    Images
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Poisson Du Jour View Post
    My favourite lens is the squat and easy handling 45mm...
    +1. Can't argue much with that. I paid $250 for mine, in absolutely excellent shape. They are out there, if you can wait patiently.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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