After a small eternity, the adapters are available again. Sadly, they don't have adapters for Nikon (as they would not allow for infinity focus) but just for Canon and M42. Thus, my original plan to use them on both Nikon and Canon bodies will not materialize (I gave up the M42 idea). It's O.K. I can live with it.
The 35mm f/3.5 is the widest M645 rectilinear, manual focus lens. The widest M645 manual focus lens of all is a Mamiya-Sekor C 24/4 ULD FE (fish eye). It has an excellent reputation and a high cost ($800 to $1200 used). I might like to try one, but it would probably be a pain to de-fish a shifted image.
The M645 35mm lens only gives the same field of view as a 21mm lens on a FF DSLR when you use the full 645 film format (or a 1x CF 645 sensor) to capture the entire image. A M645 35mm lens on FF DSLR has the same field of view as any other "35mm format" 35mm focal length lens (e.g. Distagon 35/2.8) on the same DSLR, because the DSLR FF sensor only captures a small portion of the M645 image circle.
Since the 645 and "35mm format" have different aspect ratios, I find it more useful to compare angle of view on the horizontal axis, in which case the 35mm M645 has the same horizontal AoV as a 23mm lens on a FF DSLR.
jcolwell wrote:
No, it doesn't. Some of us are working on it.
I have a great collection of sharp Pentax 645 lenses that I use with adaptor and with Zork for shift. What does it mean that some of you are working on it? I am very insterested in adding tilt to shift with these pentax 645 lenses.
Your knowledge never cease to amaze me. I simply can't thank you enough for all the help I got from you.
I am not into landscape photography but if I will, and if I feel that my 10-22 is not satisfactory (currently it is) I'll surely get an FF body and this 35/3.5.
artguy55 wrote:
I have a great collection of sharp Pentax 645 lenses that I use with adaptor and with Zork for shift. What does it mean that some of you are working on it? I am very insterested in adding tilt to shift with these pentax 645 lenses.
I'm corresponding with two of our colleagues on this Alternative forum who are currently trying to develop a P645 to M645 adapter. Based solely on register distance, it is theoretically possible, as the P645 register of 70.9mm is longer than the M645 register of 63.3mm, and so you should be able to arrange for the P645 lens to mount 7.6mm in front of the M645 body, or adapter.
Unfortunately, the P645 lens mount actually extends quite far into the body, and so interferes with the existing M645 gubbins. I discovered this when I attempted to graft a P645 body mount assembly onto a M645 extension tube 1, which would be close to the right geometry if you could simply replace the M645 flange assembly with that from the P645 - no go.
On the other hand, I think it might be possible to replace the M645 flange assembly on a Mirex M645 TS adapter with a P645 flange assembly. I'm not about to do this, as I'm quite happy with the M645 lenses I'm using. You might consider asking Mirex if they could produce a P645 version. On page 4 of Yakim's other current thread https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/743122, Michael Gordon describes how he obtained a custom OM mount on the small end of a Mirex TS adapter - maybe you could get them to try putting P645 on the big end.
The Zörk (panorama?) adapter that works with P645 is shift only, right? According to hubsand's tests the P645 lenses perform (even) better than the M645's, IIRC.
So I'd think its indeed worth trying to mount P645 lenses on the mirex (if you want/need shift).
Yes, it may be worth e-mailing Mr. Marcus Michelberger at Mirex to see what they can do. The OM mount is on the camera end so I can use the M645 lenses, but I have a Mam to OM converter so I can mount the OM bellows lenses on it as well--no infinity focus of course wiht the OM mount lenses but infinity focus is spot on with the M645 lenses.
Mirex provided self-adhesive foil with a teflon type back to cover the screw slots so they do not shear off the spot metering reset pin on the OM 4T. The bayonet release mechanism is a bit fussy but ingenious --has to be released by reaching into the adapter--only way to get the registration distance correct. They did not provide a pin to communicate with the camera that the lens is wide open---I had to add this. I mentioned it to them but it would have helped if I were fluent in German.
I have not tried the CV 125 macro in OM mount on this as of yet, but perhaps the image circle is large enough at macro distances--cool. Perhaps I won't need the M 120 macro. Whether performance will hold up with all that extension, I don't know.
AhamB wrote:
The Zörk (panorama?) adapter that works with P645 is shift only, right? According to hubsand's tests the P645 lenses perform (even) better than the M645's, IIRC.
So I'd think its indeed worth trying to mount P645 lenses on the mirex (if you want/need shift).
Yes, the zork is shift only. My pentax 35mm FA is a great lens except for CA. Sharp to the edge. So, yes I would very much like to use these pentax 645 lenses with the mirex.
mcbroomf wrote:
Artguy, is that the Manual forcus version you are referring to or an AF?
Thanks
Mike
All FA lenses from Pentax are AF versions. Note that unlike the M645 stuff, Pentax AF lenses for 645 are completely usable on an adapter since they retain an aperture ring and mechanical aperture.
artguy55 wrote:
Pentax has a strange way of designating Auto Focus which is FA. Manual focus version of the 35 is not that great, but the FA or auto focus is stellar.
It actually makes sense if you know the progression of the K mount designs. the 645 lenses get the same designation as the equivalent K lenses (which is A and FA, there are no plain or F series lenses for 645).
