Cableaddict wrote:
Now that's odd. In another thread, someone wrote that the 80mm Leaf Shutter lens was sharper than even the "N," which made me assume the Leaf was made later than the N.
Could what you are saying here be true of ONLY the 55mm?
The 80 Leaf Shutter is an L/N series lens, concurrent with the 80 2.8 N. It's the only one of the leaf shutter lenses which did not have a C (or L/S) version as it replaced the older 70/2.8 L/S.
There are C and N versions of most 645 Lenses except for the A lenses, which are all N series. The few exceptions include both 70mm's (C only for the L/S and also IIRC for the non leaf-shutter variant) and the 80N/L (No C version).
I kinda' figured this was the case, but then what exactly does the "C" stand for?
BTW, it looks like both of these have the same coating, at least on the front. Is it visually different on the rear element?
IIRC C stands for Coated, original series RB67 lenses lack it and are only single-coated. All M645 lenses other than the A series have the C labeling.
N has updated coatings, but both C and N are multi-coated lenses. You cannot visually differentiate coatings with the Mamiya lenses but they are actually different.
OK, thanks, The fog is lifting a bit. If my head explodes, it's really gonna' be a mess, so more clarification needed:
mawz wrote:
The 80 Leaf Shutter is an L/N series lens, concurrent with the 80 2.8 N. .
So is the Leaf Shutter theoretically the same optical design as the N, or did it have more changes than just the shutter? I'm guessing the former, with Jim's preference for the Leaf version explained simply by sample-to-sample variation. Does anyone know for sure?
----------------------
Also, L/N stands, I assume, for "leaf version of an N-series" correct? Then what is L/S, "leaf version of an S series? - But the "S" is supposedly the same formula as the "N" so...
Is it also possible that the slight negative comments about the 80/1.9 are based on the "plain C" version, and that the "N" or maybe the L/N would be as sharp as the 80/2.8?
(Head threatening to explode once again. Getting out the Bounty towels as I type this.....)
You will always find conflicting information on lens performance and "IQ". After all, many aspects of it are very subjective, and so there will always be different opinions. Even direct measurement of parameters such as resolution are subject to variation due to test methods and (as you said above) sample variation. I think the best you can do is to use information from places like this forum to identify lenses that you think might work for you, and then try one. Most of the alternative lenses have stable or increasing prices, and so you can't go too far wrong with the "buy & try" approach - as long as you don't pay too much at the front end.
I suspect the difference in performance between the plain 80 and the Leaf Shutter version is all in the QC. The plain 80 is a kit lens and likely didn't receive the same level of QC as the much lower production leaf shutter variant.
There is no N/L version of the 80/1.9, only a C and an N version. Both perform well, although my experience is the plain 80/2.8 is optically a bit better. I suspect the mixed reviews are from those expecting the more expensive version to outperform the already superb basic 80, rather than simply offering an extra stop and a slightly different rendering.
Regarding the N/L versions possibly being superior:
Mamiya specifically states that the 55/2.8 N/L is optically identical to the non-leaf version. Yet, the 55/2.8 N'l has a larger filter size than the 55/2.8 non-leaf: 67mm vs 58mm
Perhaps that's just to accomodate the barrel, but maybe the front element is larger, requiring more careful polishing?
