Those four lenses you listed are a great start!
When I'm doing my nature thing, they are part of my "basic pack." But most times I use the 55mm instead of the 45mm. I never shoot off-tripod, and always lock up the mirror before exposure. The 135mm is super sharp for close-ups at f16, and even f22, if you keep the edge to edge area nice and flat to the focal plane.
Tons of stuff on ebay for this system.
Good luck and enjoy!
Long live Ciba!!!
55, 90, 200 and will probably get a 135 eventually because they're so damn inexpensive used, and my wife wants the macro capability. (Actually, the 135 was the first lens I bought, and it was promptly stolen the first day I used it. I set it on a backpack on the ground behind me in a park in Westchester and never saw the thief. Boy was I upset!!! Stupid and angry at the same time.)
The shutter vibration has only affected one set of negatives in all the years I've used my P67 and they were long exposures (45 seconds or so) made at night from the roof of an apartment building in NYC. There are double images of point source lights that are only visible...and up close at that....in 11x14 prints.
Love that camera system!
I have a couple of P67 bodies and the the 75/2.8,105,165,and the 300 (older version). Plus some extension tubes and a couple of adapters that let me use some older brass lenses on the body. Right now, I can use Voightlander Heliar, and some older Dallmeyer Patent brass lenses on the P67 and they create some really special images. I have to say the 75/2.8 is the sharpest of the lot.
Oh yes I forgot, the extensiontubes. I have all three of them. They work great with my 75mm, but the lightloss.........
I noticed that a lot of you use the 55mm and not the 45mm. Same thing with the 6X6 cameras. People tend to use the 50mm instead of the 40mm, why ? Especially when talking 6X7, why ? Is it the price ? Angle of view ? When it comes to the square format I'd recon it's the difficulties controlling the amount of sky in the pic but in 6X7 it's not that much of a problem, is it ?
Or is it the static format vs the dynamic perspective of the lens
Send from my Electronic Data Management Device using TWOFingerTexting
Technology distinquishable from magic is insufficiently developed
Another Pentax 6x7 (without MLU) user. The format works great for me (although the Fuji 645 is a good companion too!). Very fond of the 105 Takumar lens, but I also have the 75 shift lens and the 55 mm lens. I'm so attached to the format so I have even modified a Holga to become 6x7 toycam.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I just like the view with the 55mm better!
Originally Posted by Soeren
It wasn't a choice made on technical comparisons for me. There was this beautiful new 55mm lens on the store counter, and this money in my wallet,....
I haven't seen the angle of view with the 45mm, but I suspect it may be too much for me. I seldom go below 28mm on a 35mm system.
"I bought a new camera. It's so advanced you don't even need it." - Steven Wright
P67II with 55, 90, 135macro, & 165. Ext tubes. A very capable camera and lenses are 'cheap'. I use it when the Mamiya 7 isn't right.
I'd like to get a diopter lens. Anybody use these?
My 55 is my least used lens (as was my 28 for the 35mm). Wider would probably never be used at all. It's hard to manage that large a field of view and have all the elements count for something in the photograph. Perhaps in the western wide open spaces it's different, but not here in the east for me.
I've have a couple of the older 6x7 MLU bodies. I use the 105mm f2.4 as my normal lens. I also have a 165mm f2.8 and 55mm f3.5 lens. I really like the 55mm lens as it's very sharp. My 105 has started to yellow so it's currently sitting on the window sill wrapped in aluminum foil!