Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,498   Posts: 1,543,114   Online: 1039
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    105
    Images
    14
    I have the 135 4.0 and the 165 2.8. For me, the difference between 4.0 and 2.8 is significant, especially when the light is low or I want less depth of field. I use the 165 2.8 with the shortest extension tube from the 67 auto extension tube set for tighter head shots, 3/4 portraits work fine without the extension tube. I don't lose a stop of light with the short extension tube, it's more like 1/3 stop. I make almost exclusively black and white portraits and, when I use the in camera meter and the short extension tube, no adjustment is needed for exposure. I occasionally make adjustments for exposure when I don't use the in camera meter. You will have to check the exposure issues out carefully if you plan to use color slide film and an extension tube. I bought the 165 2.8 for portraits because the 135 portraits I tried made faces looked more distorted than I wanted when I got up close for tight head shots. Some people like the distortion or don't notice it, others sometimes really don't appreciate the way their face looks with the 135mm. I have used the 165 2.8 hand held and tripod mounted with no problems. There have been many occasions when I wanted to use this combination in low light and I was able to make the shot work with Delta 3200 and the 2.8 lens but wouldn't have been able to with a 4.0 lens like the 135mm or 200mm. This usually happens when I am trying to hand hold the camera or my portrait subject is not so good at remaining motionless. I haven't tried the 150mm lens. The 135mm lens can work for group or environmental portraits without out introducing distortion issues, or you can back off a little when you take the photo and crop the negative when you print it.
    Good luck,
    Doug Webb

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    michigan
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    15
    The interesting thing is that Dennis' portraits are first rate...
    And the discussion was a lens length for 6X7...
    And the portraits are all square...

    denny - old TLR shooter...

  3. #13
    dpurdy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Portland OR USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,048
    Images
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by k8do View Post
    The interesting thing is that Dennis' portraits are first rate...
    And the discussion was a lens length for 6X7...
    And the portraits are all square...

    denny - old TLR shooter...

    The links I gave as examples were rectangle full frame pentax 67 shots but if you poked around and looked at more stuff you will find that I use a Rolleiflex as well as 8x10 and 4x5. I never said everything I shoot is P67. And the only person allowed to call me Denny is my Grandma and she is dead. (not for calling me denny) I do find using a Rollei the most pleasurable of all cameras though it is more limiting than the P67.

    Dennis

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Dedham, Ma, USA
    Shooter
    Med. Format Pan
    Posts
    625
    Quote Originally Posted by dynachrome View Post
    .....I only have the 100mm focal length. For portraits I think I'd like to have a 200 but the 200 is more expensive, heavier and slower than a 150.
    I'd go for the 200 (best perspective for close portraits), my ideal portrait lens is the 180mm for 6x7 format (different camera), I use a 250 for close portraits. Remember, the expression the subject gives you is sometimes a function of how close you are with the camera/lens. Close is intimidating; setting back further is more comfortable for the subject being photographed.
    "Pictures are not incidental frills to a text; they are essences of our distinctive way of knowing." Stephen J. Gould

  5. #15
    craigclu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    NW Wisconsin, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    768
    I've had a number of P67 lenses go through my hands over the years and found that the 150, 165's and the 200 all functioned well for portraits. I don't tend to crop real tight and don't recall close focus issues hampering me with any of these. My 135 has an "edge" to it that isn't always complimentary to middle-aged folk, the 150 is softish, the 165 LS I had was a bit soft, the 165 2.8 is sharp but somehow looks good in portrait duty and the 200 is sharp and the one that I use most often because of my lighting/background issues.

    If I've got a problem with the P67 in portrait duty it's that the noise and commotion give too many blinks in my results. Recently, I've been using a 150 on an RF system with better success, even though this isn't accepted practice by most people. I like seeing the eyes during the exposure and can easily see if I captured what I intended.
    Craig Schroeder

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    27
    I've been lookinf flickr over for examples...mostly I'm seeing that I'd like to have several lenses...which may mean I'll be happy with any of them.
    I'm still sorting out some problems with my ttl finder. After that, I buy a lens.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    10
    You will enjoy the 150/2.8. Very sharp and affordable. A no-brainer. It is wide enough to step back and get some air around the subject but you can get close too and fill the frame with head & shoulders. If you want nose-hairs & pores, it'll be the 165/2.8.

    Consider the 165/4 LS if you want to use flash, as it is a leaf shutter lens and will sync at a variety of speeds.

    Any one doing a lot of portrait work would be justified having all three.

  8. #18
    jeroldharter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,958
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel West Hiser View Post
    ...

    Consider the 165/4 LS if you want to use flash, as it is a leaf shutter lens and will sync at a variety of speeds.
    ...
    How do you manage the cable release when using the leaf shutter and flash with the 165/4 LS?
    Jerold Harter MD

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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