Hi,

I just talked to my local camera dealer about the P67 lenses. The salesperson told me that although he is using Blad gear (because he likes the square format) he can not tell the difference in term of quality/sharpness/contrast between 2 same pictures (enlarged at 14x17), one taken with Pentax 67 lens and the other with blad lens.

Has anyone of you made this kind of comparison ? I am just curious, if Pentax lenses provide the same quality, why would people pay a fortune to buy Blad lenses ?

Thanks, SH

-- Sieu-Hoa Thoi (sthoi@yahoo.com), March 10, 1999

Answers

When comparing the optical cross sections between German and Japanese optics, it becomes clear that the Japanese are no longer followers but have become leaders in design. The performance difference that existed 25 years ago is no longer in place. There are Leica APO telephotos that are nearly identical to the P67 400mm ED. The P67 200mm, new version is the same basic design as the Leica 180mm Elmarit-R. Hassy and everyone else is using the same design strategies now, so the differences are small. German glass is overpriced and that's why I own the P67. To be fair, I also own a Leica SL.

-- Steve Rasmussen (srasmuss@flash.net), March 11, 1999.

Just to add a bit to what's already been said, there are companies that develop their own glass and do much R&D work to create the ultimate in optical performance. Much care is taken in the assembly process of each lens and in the machining and inspection of lens barrel internals. This attention to detail does pay off but is expensive. I feel Leitz still has a slight advantage in optical precision over Pentax for the above reasons. My opinion about Zeiss is not nearly as good. All reports I've read show no difference between Hassy(Zeiss) and P67 optics.

-- Steve Rasmussen (srasmuss@flash.net), March 13, 1999.

Max; the lenses in question, 45, 75, 135 and 200, I have experience with all except the 135. There is no vignetting with any of these three. With a seven layer multi coat, you can expect good contrast and retention of delicate pastel colors. Of the three, I feel the 75mm is the sharpest. I will not get into your difference between tack and pin sharp because it is just too subjective. The 45, 75 and 200(new version) are all sharp enough at two stops down to satisfy any potential buyer. I doubt you will have any complaints at f/5.6 either. The limitation of the system is not in the optics but in the huge focal plane shutter. This shutter raises havoc with the telephotos by creating a harmonic in the tripod. Very large tripods become necessary with the 300mm--1000mm lenses. The 200mm only requires a seven to eight pound tripod. The normal to wide angle lenses can get by with light tripods. SR

-- Steve Rasmussen (srasmuss@flash.net), March 21, 1999.

As user of CZ lenses (50, 180 mm) for 3 years, I must say I have no complaint about open aperture performance in terms of contrast and resolution and illumination. However, when compared with Nikkor glass,CZ lenses are marginally able to produce PIN POINT SHARP image(condn: MLU,solid tripod, f/11,utimate)which Nikons are capable enough just with 2 stops down. I usually qualify a lens pin point sharpness by examinating EYE WHITE areas in a group of people; to be specific, 2mm head width, 5X7 inch prints --> Pin sharp. Whereas 3mm-4 mm head width --> only tack sharp. Anything less than these --> Buy another lens instead. As for color rendition, CZ lenses are different from Nikkors'. I guess CZ lenses are excellent in picturing people and realistic landscape, where smooth color tone and medium-to-high contrast are desirable. But nikkors are highly claimed to be very contrasty and pin-point sharp. That is, very high contrast, supersaturated color, when judged in slide; this is favourable for landscape pictures. Hence, that is why I have been disapointed a bit with the group shots. And I am very pleased with the early morning shots taken in Nakuru lake in Kenya, where the misty atmosphere and pre-sunrise yellow tone are rendered realistically. To conclude, choice of Hasselblad system is a matter of taste at some expense mentioned.

Right now I am thinking of changing my camera system to Pentax 67II because of the format and camera (many faults in Hasselblad). But I am very curious about the optics. As for 45/75/135/200mm, please COMMENT on the open aperture performance,i.t.o. Illumination, Resolution and Contrast. Are they Pin sharp or tack sharp? I presume Japanese optics are of high contrast type. That is good for landscape.

P.S. I learned that some CZ glass fans put CZ lenses into Pentax 67 cameras at expense of USD 600-1000 although I do not recommend the mount surgery.

-- max (maxplanet@yahoo.com), March 20, 1999.

Hi!

Thank you all for your answers.

SH

-- Sieu-Hoa Thoi (sthoi@yahoo.com), April 07, 1999.