67 Lenses on 645 using adapter?

Add Comment

Back to Forum

582 posts

18 years
Bedfordshire

Link Posted 15/06/2005 - 13:08

Hi all,

Just after some advice, I've recently chopped in my Mamiya 645 system in favour of the Pentax 645NII... The one major omission from the lens choice is a shift lens and this was something I loved using on the Mamiya.
Does anybody have experience of using any of the Pentax 67 lenses on the 645 by using the adapter - are there any issues/limitations that I'd need to be aware of before I fork out for the 67 shift lens and an adapter?

Any advice greatly received...

Thanks,

Will

Spirit_of_will

Fan and user of quality Pentax Shiny Kit

WEBSITE www.willbartonphotography.com & www.inspiredlightimages.com

Will Barton Photography: Landscapes, Cityscapes
My Flickr
Follow Will Barton Photography on Facebook

spirit_of_will

Member

582 posts

18 years
Bedfordshire

Link Posted 20/11/2006 - 18:56

Just thought I'd rekindle an old thread that I started but nobody responded to - I still have the same issue and other than splashing out the 'god knows how many' £££'s to try the 67 shift lens for myself I haven't found an answer...

A slightly simpler question - if I did decide to go for the 75mm 67 shift what focal length would it behave like using the 645 to 67 adapter?

Also - does anyone have any experience with the AF zooms - 45-85mm & 80-160mm? How do they compare with the primes?

Grateful for any advice...

Ta!

Will

VelviaPete

Member

16 posts

16 years
VelviaPete

Link Posted 23/11/2006 - 09:20

Have you bought the adapter Will? I'd be very interested in the answers your questions - I'm guessing that a 6x7 105mm = to a 50mm on a 35mm camera will behave as a approx 50mm on the 645NII (the aspect ratio is just different?). If I'm right, then the 6x7 75mm Shift lens would be approx a 38mm'ish lens equiv in 35mm film format... I have a headache now

Always use protection - a lens hood

spirit_of_will

Member

582 posts

18 years
Bedfordshire

Link Posted 23/11/2006 - 11:28

Hi Pete,

I've got an adapter but not the shift lens or indeed any other 67 lens to use on the 645... One of the things that had been putting me off buying was trying to work out what focal length the 75mm 67 lens would behave like with the slight extension caused by the adapter. If it ended up not being very wide it's not as worthwhile buying it...

I might just have to bite the bullet when I can find one of the shift lenses cheap enough...

Will

antonius

Member

8 posts

17 years
South Shropshire

Link Posted 26/11/2006 - 17:12

I'm not 100% sure, but I believe 67 lenses when used on a 645 keep their nominal focal length: a 67 135mm will have a focal length of 135mm when used on a 645 via an adapter.

Tony

VelviaPete

Member

16 posts

16 years
VelviaPete

Link Posted 28/11/2006 - 09:11

I agree that the 67 lens should maintain it's perspective when using the adapter to fit on to a 645 (the coverage will be cropped at the 4.5cm width by 2.5cm, or put another way the 645 will be 64% of the 67 width... I now have another headache

)

There is nothing quite like trying it though, or someone here perhaps confirming any assumptions..

Perhaps call a rental shop and ask them?

Always use protection - a lens hood

spirit_of_will

Member

582 posts

18 years
Bedfordshire

Link Posted 17/12/2006 - 18:02

Have managed to answer my own post... 67 shift lens arrived earlier this week. Can fully confirm that it maintains the exact same angle of view as the regular 645 75mm lens when used with the adapter. It's a seriously chunky slice of glass and almost obscures the lens release button. Stop down metering only of course... looking forward to trying it out properly...

Will

spirit_of_will

Member

582 posts

18 years
Bedfordshire

Link Posted 16/01/2007 - 18:36

Tried the shift lens at the weekend whilst in London - gutted that it's not that wide at all... 75mm on the 645 is only equiv to 50mm in 35mm.

Just need to wait for the slides to find their way back to me and I'll post some results.

spirit_of_will

Member

582 posts

18 years
Bedfordshire

Link Posted 13/02/2007 - 20:26

Got the results back from my first try with the 67 75mm Shift on my 645 - definately some lessons learnt. I understood that at full shift I would need to increase the exposure to compensate for the light fall off - the instructions stated that this should have been around an extra 1 to 1.5 stops. Seems this doesn't apply quite so much on the 645 as it's not using the full image circle or maybe affecting the metering in a different way...? I've had to rescue this shot in PS by tweaking the levels as it was well over exposed.

The good news is that it's nice and sharp! Quite how useful a standard 75mm shift lens is going to be everyday is questionable, if it was 35mm or 45mm it would be a different story... ho hum!

Will

travel67

Member

23 posts

16 years
Okinawa, Japan

Link Posted 14/02/2007 - 01:02

I have the 75mm shift lens (the most recent lens I purchased) I have only used it a couple of times so far - trying to get a lighthouse to stand upright rather than slouching into the middle of the photo.

I have used my 67 lenses on a 35mm camera using the adapter which works if you meter with the lens fully open.

The guy at luminous landscape used to use a 645 camera as a backup for his 67 and he also used the adapter - he talks about it on his website and should answer most of your questions.

The magnification issue of 67 lenses on a 645 will be an advantage when shooting wildlife. I am waiting for the 645 digital, I will then get the adapter and stick my 400mm lens. My plan is then to spend a week or two in the very North of Japan taking photos of the red capped cranes dancing.

Chris

P.S. I put up some new photos of Kobe on my website - please check them out

Chris Willson
www.travel67.com

Daniel Bridge

Member

3,458 posts

17 years
Billericay, Essex

Link Posted 14/02/2007 - 18:46

travel67 wrote:
The magnification issue of 67 lenses on a 645 will be an advantage when shooting wildlife.

There you go Will - perfect for Giraffes!

Dan

P.S. Being really super picky (and bearing in mind it was your first try-out with the lens), did you give it a bit too much shift? The right hand tower looks as though it's leaning outwards.

spirit_of_will

Member

582 posts

18 years
Bedfordshire

Link Posted 14/02/2007 - 19:01

Can you over shift a shift lens?

Would have thought that so long as the film plane is parallel with the subject the shift mechanism just makes sure that you can fit the top of it in the pic without any lean...

Perhaps it's not me or the shift lens - need to find the architect and have a word about sloppy workmanship

LiamD

Member

931 posts

17 years
Bracknell Berkshire

Link Posted 14/02/2007 - 19:17

At last, a place to use one of my useless facts..

If you're taking a picture of the Humber bridge, you have to remember that the tops of the two pillars (if that's the right word) are 1 1/2" further apart than the bases, because of the curvature of the earth.. which will result in the same thing happening..

Sorry..

I'm never going to that into a related conversation again in my life, so have to use the chance wisely..

Cheers

Liam

Liam

"Make your hands respond to what your mind demands." Jesse James

Best wide-angle lens? Two steps backward. Look for the 'ah-ha'. Ernst Haas

Daniel Bridge

Member

3,458 posts

17 years
Billericay, Essex

Link Posted 14/02/2007 - 20:55

Will, you're absolutely right. So it's either an optical illusion, or Victorian engineers miscalculated the Earth's curvature, or perhaps the camera was tilting down a bit?

I'm guessing you're more than capable of using a spirit level (those panoramics could be disasterous without one

), so I had a check on those verticals in photoshop and guess what? You're spot on - so the answer is a) it's an optical illusion (although perhaps only to me!

).

I didn't realise the towers get bigger as they go up, and I think that, combined with the lack of converging verticals, made me think that the towers were leaning outwards.

I'll keep my mouth shut next time!

Dan

spirit_of_will

Member

582 posts

18 years
Bedfordshire

Link Posted 14/02/2007 - 21:40

I'm new to these things too Dan and after you'd mentioned it I started to think that you were right in that the far tower was on the p**s... It certainly looks that way!

I kinda like Liam's theory... either that or those spirit levels don't work all that well... sometimes with the pano I have four spirit levels in use, one in the tripod, one in the tripod head, one built into the camera and an extra hot shoe level sat on the camera as well - murphy's law always dictates that none of them agree!!!

Still... it was early when I took the shot and the camera being on the tilt does seem like a very plausible option

Add a Comment

You must be registered or logged-in to comment.

Back to Forum