A review of the heralded Pentax 105mm F2.4 RGB light used - amzn.to/3n06TRC For business enquiries: barneymaguire@hotmail.com barneyarthu... Music by @ProdRiddiman
Really sorry to hear about the redundancy mate, wishing you the best of luck in these difficult times. Great video, and I love your energy and authenticity
Another great video mate, I’ve been putting my 67 on the shelf for a while but watching this made me eager to shoot it again! Also there is something really soothing about your voice, very pleasant to listen to!
I hope everything works out for the best regarding your recent news. I’m loving your work so much and I’m stoked that your going to be putting out more content. The photography world needs it. 🤘
Glad to see you back and active uploading! Your portraits are absolutely amazing and I hope to at least use them for inspo while on 35mm until I can afford a medium format camera. Keep it up!
I loved my Pentax 67 when I had it. I had to sell to fund a new laptop, but perhaps one day I’ll grab another. Your photos are great -love the vibe in them.
your such a geezer Barney! so informative...and a breath of fresh air mate..... and an absolute problem behind the lens!!!! infinitely inspired....and as I have my very own baby on its way in from Japan right now, im grabing the no1 now thanks to you. eternal success bro
Thanks for the inspiration. I love your photo at 3:03, the subject's closed eyes, the way the light glows across his face but falls off so quickly on the left side of the frame. Cheers from CA!
You deserve way more subs- keep up the good work. Your portraits are really good man, Its hard to find talented photographers on RU-vid... lots of great gear reviews but not much talent wise. You are an exception. Maybe losing your job is a blessing in disguise- you have the talent to make $ from photography for sure. Subscribed!
Sorry about the Job loss man. I hope you find something good sometime soon! Love the videos as always. I've never shot with the Pentax 67, but I used to clean, post, and sell them for my old job here in California. That lens is beautiful and the images you get from it are amazing.
Yup, can't argue with that. I think I have the first Takumar version that came with the 6X7 MLU body. Love that lens so much. You probably get a blurrier background with the 200mm F4 or the 165mm F2.8 (both very good) but there's just some magic about that 105mm for sure. Some stellar shots here btw! Great work!
Very Nice Video Barney! I shoot with the Hasselblad 500cm and 80mm f/2.8 and that is also remarkable for Bokeh. I love the Pentax glass though and agree, you can create some beautiful dreamy images with it. Thanks for sharing!
As a student, I just wanted to drop a comment to say how interesting your videos are, keep it up man I really dig it. Also really sorry to hear about your job :(
Great info in this Barney. Shallow DOF with 50mm equiv lens is just such a flexible setup. I love the 80 f2.8 on the m645 for that reason although it’s not quite as shallow as 6x7 obvs -Shane
Thank you Shane, yeh I feel like having the slightly wider field of view compared to the standard 85mm for portraits can be quite refreshing especially when it displays the same amount of subject separation. Never used the Mamiya 645 but am always impressed by the quality of Mamiya glass.
I love that camera+lens combo too, and we have it here too, but you can get the same field of view and speed with full frame too: any ff camera, and the mitakon 50mm f/0.95 or voightlander f/1.2 EF lenses. Full body photography with shallow depth of field is possible with ff too in that field of view.
Barney Arthur I put one roll through a friends and I was hooked. instagram.com/p/B8aNZLhDrQu/?igshid=ay2drpabsae4 that lens is up there with the best. The Zeiss Planar 2.0 for the Contax 645 is my all time favorite though. Will be fun to compare the two side by side.
First of all, sorry to hear abour the job situation mate. Hopefully that will translate in you having more time and focus to produce more awesome content!
Love this man! Just tempted me to get the older Takumar even more! Also, which of the tubes should I buy for the 105 for close-ups because there’s like 3 tubes that come in a package? Btw missed your sick videos man! Keep ‘em coming!
You should try the Mamiya Press 100mm F2.8. This is a copy of the Carl Zeiss 100mm Planar. Resolution about 95 lines/mm with good bokeh. Covers 6x9 frames. Great for astrophotography. Price is $350 to $500 used. One of the fastest medium format lenses for 6x9 backs. All metal and glass.
Man, you have skills ! Keep the faith. Sorry you lost your job - get out and shoot and I hope you don't have to sell your gear. You have talent. Good luck to you fella.
Can’t wait until I get my hands on one! A dream camera and a great lens! Just started watching the video. : ) Edit: finished watching the video, great one as always! Thanks for it and looking forward to the new videos. Keep it up and stay awesome! 💪🏻🔥
The 105 renders beautifully for sure, but Mamiya 7 glass is still gold standard when it comes to medium format film :) the Hasselblad 100mm f3.5 CFi is also stunning
Great videos and great photos man! Just got the Pentax 67 but I'm still thinking about getting a 75mm f4.5 and 165mm f2.8 (both are the last SMC Pentax 67 versions) for about $400 or the 105mm f2.4 for about $800...
I think the late model 67 SMC 90mm f2.8 (not the leaf shutter version) is the best all around lens in the lineup. It's light, compact, super sharp, and renders nice color and contrast plus the bokeh is nice too. The bokeh isn't as unique as the 105 but it's still nice by any lens standard and you can get this lens in almost new condition for 1/2 the price of the late model 105 that sells for around 1000usd. The 75mm f4.5 is a great deal and very sharp I see them for around 250$ which is totally worth it. Another lens that is amazingly sharp is the late model 67 SMC 55mm f4 which many consider to be one of the sharpest of all pentax 67 lenses. Personally I prefer to spend a bit more and get all late model lenses because they don't yellow and they are built a bit lighter so it helps with an already heavy system.
Amazing shots man love those lomochrome frames. Question for you- which extension tube do you use with the 105? From what I understand there are 3 all numbered #1 #2 and #3.
I love your work so much dude and I’m real sorry about your job but with your talent and skill I know you’ll bounce back stronger! So happy to have found your videos today. Just got into 35mm through a spotmatic f and a canon a1 and now I just want to buy a 6x7!!! 😭😭😭 gonna just sell my 6D and buy the 6x7 lol
I agree, the faster lenses are the only reason one can enjoy the Pentax, not that much else. I still prefer the Hasselblad, though, and I can shoot with the Planar 110 mm f2
Hiya Barney, excellent video once again. I recently bought #1 extension tube and am having a hard time with focusing, telling how far away to stand from the subject, meter compensation. Any advice? Do you also plan for your head shots after you’ve done all your full body shots so you don’t have to remove the extension tube and swap to you 105mm half way through shooting? Lol..should you even do that or are you at risk of exposing your roll? Sorry for all the questions, kinda new at this :) love and appreciate your work B!
Domonique Elliott in terms of compensation for the tube I tend to just add 1/2 stops of exposure and this seems to be spot on. The focal range with the tube added it’s pretty slim but it’s quite close to the subject - I usually shoot all the full body’s at the start then mix in some mid range at the min Focus of the lens then with the last couple frames of the roll will add the extension tube for the headshots. This then means I can remove the tube whilst changing film and am not wasting too much time.
great shots! the dof on the 105 looks amazing. but I've heard bad things about focusing on the 67. is this so? is it difficult? do you find many of your pictures turn out to be off-focus? I also wonder if you have tried the 105 with strobes? I wonder if the 1/30 sync time is as shaky as some claim.
A steobe freezes movement whether the sync time is fast or slow. Mine works well with a strobe at least. When it comes to focusing, I tend to get some unfocused shots. Might just be becauae I haven't been able to practice enough
Do you really use the 2.4 aperture for your environmental portraits? Or do you stop down at least 2 stops (f4) to get the entire body sharp while having that great bokeh on the background? Thanks ✌
Bro throw in as many Ads as you like! Keep em, you gotta eat! And we want you to be able to create content for us and even if youd be able to secure a sponsor my support is guaranteed :) Great content as always ♥
Do you recommend a particular ND filter to keep the aperture so wide? Similarly, do you usually try to shoot on low iso film to maintain that wide aperture?
Question: When you use this lens with extension tube #1 do you find that you need to stop down to f/4 because the depth of field becomes so narrow or do you like to keep it at 2.4?
Ahaha absolutely stop down, 2.4 with the ext tube is a myth ahah even f4 is super shallow. That’s the only caveat, needs more light cos the tube takes half a stop anyway and then need to stop down 2 stops min
I just got the newer version of this lens off of eBay for 450 euros. Got it because I didn't want to fuck with the radiation too much and it's lighter supposedly, I'm all about going light. What would the biggest difference in character between the older and newer version be? It might be the deciding factor as to which one I'll be using as well if it's significant!
That’s a great price. Not a huge deal of difference, a lot of people might not notice but the older one just has more of a swirly characteristic but the newer is sharper and cleaner
@@barneyarthur4615 Yeah I got lucky someone put it up for auction instead of a fixed price, they usually go for 700 so definitely not complaining. So difference in color will not be a thing? By swirl you mean the way the bokeh behaves?
do you develop / scan your own photos? Any info on this part of the process? Love your stuff. Was considering getting one of these for a while and ended up pulling the trigger recently
i've been looking for a new camera to commit too for a while now. Im a big fan of the shallow depth of field and the subject being singled out within a scene. Although these are two qualities I admire I don't know if a medium format camera will be the best suited for photography based around lots of travel. If i'm looking for a more versatile camera would it be a mistake to get a 6x7
Hmm yes possibly, any 6x7 offering is going to be a slow workflow as they are all manual focus however something like the Contax 645 with the 80mm f2 will still give you that medium format look in terms of subject separation but you have the option of autofocus, continuous shooting and 15 shots which makes it much more ideal for travel / faster paced shooting
Can those extension tubes (ET) use for normal focus range situations? Like..if you want a close-up shot, then you equip ET on the lens. But, you don't have to remove it for any range further than that right? Thanks for the great video btw. Keep it up :)
hey mate, sick video bro ! Do you scan your negatives with glass to give the sharpest image ? Ive been scanning with the v600 but still find the images to be slightly blurry because the negatives are against the glass so well
@@barneyarthur4615 Thanks for the quick reply mate ! As in the film holders that come with the scanner ? I didn't think they come with glass ? Mine didn't with the v600 perfection scanner ?
really nice shots, there is something with the telephoto compression but normal 50mm focal length that only med format gives! i just received the canon nfd50mm f1.2 that i would be curious how it could compare since it s the same thing when crop factor applied
there's no such thing as telephoto compression. fstoppers.com/originals/lens-compression-doesnt-exist-147615 - you could get similar results with a modern canon 1.2. - the FD will certainly be softer wide open as its an older lens that just cant compare with medium format lenses. The gap between medium format film and modern full frame digital is pretty small, you just do get a certain look with those medium format lenses along with film.
@@Humungojerry totally agree! i have debated mysellf about the medium format but every time i tell my self that i have a digital camera ( for the resolution) and i can t lift those camera all day loll. the only thing there is to this med format is the look..... nothing comes close. i ended up with the 135 format because of the portability and use.. ( althought my brass/metal made canon F1n+fd50mmf1.2 combo is getting heavy)
Barney Arthur Thanks for the tips! Sorry about your job but I hope you don’t have to sell your lens, the Pentax videos are what got me into you! You should sell some prints, I know I’d buy one for sure!
I wonder how the 105mm F/2.4 would compare to a 50mm F/1.2 or F/1.4 on full frame format, since they should be around the same focal distance and F-stop, comparatively. Also, @5:30 : Keep in mind that one F-stop is equal to twice the amount of light! So 2.4 vs 2.8 makes quite a bit of difference even in terms of physics.
@@JM-cd1es Yeah, so 50% more light, a much larger difference than a relatively small numerical difference of 0.4 would suggest. Our minds are not good at dealing with exponential scales, that's what I meant, and that's why you might think it's not a large difference at first glance.
@@JM-cd1es Actually, it's more like one-third of a stop more than 2.8, as the numerical progression of light transmission is not linear. In terms of depth of field and light transmission, the functional difference is almost trivial. Now if you make the 105mm lens stand on its own two feet, so to speak, before being hyped to death, it sold for around $125-150. Now it sells for $650-700. Yet in terms of resolution, contrast and lack of optical aberrations, it is the least capable lens of those generally considered to be a "normal" focal length for the Pentax 67 system. It's not a bad lens, but it is far from the best your money can buy.
@@waveril5167 Among the lenses of a focal length that most folks would consider "normal", the 90mm 2.8 (not the LS version) is likely the least expensive, if not the cheapest lens in the inventory. Small and light as they go, about equal to a 45mm in 35mm format terms. If filling out a several lens kit on a budget, the 75mm 4.5 is optically superb. The 165mm 2.8mm is said to be quite good. (I own it but haven't used it enough to have a personal opinion. It was a second generation lens introduced to replace and improve on the older 150mm.) The 135mm 4.0 is a surprisingly useful lens with a 1:3 close focus ability. All of these lenses sell far below their optical capacity. I haven't checked current ebay prices (sold prices), but when I was acquiring lenses for my system, any of these in decent condition could be had for $150 if you shopped a bit. As you go wider or longer, prices go up accordingly. If you can afford more, the 55mm 4.0 (either of the last two versions) is one of the best lenses made for the 67 system, really a necessity if you shoot landscapes. If you are going for a two lens kit, odd as it may seem, I'd recommend the 75mm 4.5 and the 135mm 4.0. If I could still buy a nice one for $125, the 105mm would be on the list of bargains, but at $650+, the phrase "There's a sucker born every minute" is the only thing that comes to mind.
