yes, just posted reviews for Pentax 645 75/2.8 and Mamiya 645 35/3.5. Already have results for Mamiya 45/2.8, 80/1.9, 80/2.8, need to format and post it - will happen today/tomorrow.
Cool. I expect the answer to this to be no, but I'll ask anyway: is there any possibility of testing the Mamiya 645 lenses ON a Mamiya 645 body? I guess I'm weird in that I'm using them on the intended body rather than adapting to a Canon DSLR.
I'm using the 1,9/80mm Mamiya Sekor since long with Canon FF bodies.
In my eyes it is one of the very good Mamiya 645 lenses. Microcontrast, resolution, elegant bokeh, extremly low distortion. It easily beats for example the EF 24-105 1:4 L at the respective focal lenght resolutionwise.
Because of the generous light circle I use it with the Zork shift adapter (also for parallax-free stiching).
The other Mamiya lenses to be recommended are the C 2,8/55mm and the C 3,5/150mm.
I also like the A 2,8/200mm APO, but Canons own EF 70-200mm 1:4L and EF 70-200mm 1:2,8L are at least on par in sharpness, contrast, resolution.
claudermilk wrote:
Cool. I expect the answer to this to be no, but I'll ask anyway: is there any possibility of testing the Mamiya 645 lenses ON a Mamiya 645 body? I guess I'm weird in that I'm using them on the intended body rather than adapting to a Canon DSLR.
i'm sure someone can do the test on the native body, but i don't have one (nor plan to get one frankly speaking). check with hubsund - he's done some tests on mamiya zd as i recall.
claudermilk wrote:
Cool. I expect the answer to this to be no, but I'll ask anyway: is there any possibility of testing the Mamiya 645 lenses ON a Mamiya 645 body? I guess I'm weird in that I'm using them on the intended body rather than adapting to a Canon DSLR.
Well, you can always get a film M645, do some shots and scan them. If it has to be digital, you need an AFD and a digital back ( I think older backs will work with the AF also ), but if you ask me, that's just too much cash just for trying them out.
claudermilk wrote:
Cool. I expect the answer to this to be no, but I'll ask anyway: is there any possibility of testing the Mamiya 645 lenses ON a Mamiya 645 body? I guess I'm weird in that I'm using them on the intended body rather than adapting to a Canon DSLR.
? . . . freaky – a Mamiya body, you say?
I've not tried the 80/1.9 (bid on a couple last week, though), so I'd be interested to see that, too. I am in the process of converting my Olympus 35PC into a Mamiya 645 mount so I can use it as a tilt and shift lens in the Mirex adaptor . . . I'm really into that now, and will be acquiring a few new Mamiya mount toys soon.
hubsand wrote:
I'm really into that now, and will be acquiring a few new Mamiya mount toys soon.
Mamiya and to some extent Pentax seem to offer the best bang for the buck these days (the only P645 lens I've tried so far is the lowly 75/2.8, but if other lenses are as good as this no-frills prime, boy I feel I'm gonna end up with a whole bunch of them). I wouldn't mind playing with Hassy as well, but their primes seem to be grossly overvalued...
One thing that I am wondering about Mamiya lenses is this whole nonsense about 'N' and non-'N' lenses. It looks like the only difference is that 'N's have 'improved' coating but are a major step back in terms of build quality. All 'N' lenses I've seen have plastic barrels, while old ones have all metal body. It kinda sucks giving up build quality for new coating...
claudermilk wrote:
Cool. I expect the answer to this to be no, but I'll ask anyway: is there any possibility of testing the Mamiya 645 lenses ON a Mamiya 645 body? I guess I'm weird in that I'm using them on the intended body rather than adapting to a Canon DSLR.
the 80 1.9 is a gem....and for the price, you can't go wrong using it on the 645afd/II.
eosslr wrote:
yes, just posted reviews for Pentax 645 75/2.8 and Mamiya 645 35/3.5. Already have results for Mamiya 45/2.8, 80/1.9, 80/2.8, need to format and post it - will happen today/tomorrow.
Hm, all this talk about the 80 1.9 just seems to drive prices higher. Last one I was tracking on fleabay got as high as $330. Keeping this rate, I will remain only with my 55mm 2.8, that I like very much on the Mirex. Nice clean files from this one, not quite like the Zeiss, but very good for post.
The Mirex adapter is very nice made, and you learn pretty quickly how to operate it. The tilting is somehow friction based, so I wonder how good it is with longer, heavy lenses, but with the 55 it is ok. Didn't get the chance to do some real work with it, mainly playing around with selective focus from handheld shots. One thing I noticed : the microprism ring of my screen gets dark even if the lens is wide open ( f2.8 ) when you tilt it to the max, so this is no focusing aid ( pretty useless anyway if you are driving the focus around the scene ). I will have to put it to good use, otherwise it's a little expensive for just a toy ( even if I got mine used, so a payed a little bit less than the new price ).
slungu wrote:
Hm, all this talk about the 80 1.9 just seems to drive prices higher. Last one I was tracking on fleabay got as high as $330. Keeping this rate, I will remain only with my 55mm 2.8, that I like very much on the Mirex. Nice clean files from this one, not quite like the Zeiss, but very good for post.
they are cheaper at keh.com......although the price has gone up some since i bought mine nearly a year ago.......
regards
Prices - Have noticed over the last year that more folks are getting into alt glass and as a lens is mentioned favorably and/or reviewed well by eosslr and others, supplies drop and prices rise. I just look at KEH's CZ and especially Leica R inventory over the last year and it has dried up like a politicians integrity.
The fact that most US resellers now refuse to buy used Leica R glass and the 1-2 that do sell only on consignment or offer purchase prices that equate to roughly 60% of what you'd buy it from them at until/if they see some activity on an R10 front isn't helping matters.
If (as I suspect) the R10 fails to materialize this Fall or does so in a manner that pisses R users off (e.g. a high-res PanaLeica), Leica R glass supplies will improve and prices drop - but one shooters gain will be another's loss.
I got this lens up on ebay for £69 ($140) about two weeks ago. Had my first chance to test it today, just a snap shot. 1D2, 1/6400sec at f2.8.
It's a bit soft but useable wide open at f1.9.
slungu wrote:
Well, you can always get a film M645, do some shots and scan them. If it has to be digital, you need an AFD and a digital back ( I think older backs will work with the AF also ), but if you ask me, that's just too much cash just for trying them out.
Got a film M645 (645Pro to be specific), that's why I asked. I have the 80/2.8 N on it & it's served me well so far. Obviously there's not a lot of reviews of the lineup--this is the first I've seen & generally backs up the comments I've seen so far of the "C" version of the 35mm not being so great. From what I've gathered the "N" version is supposed to be better in this case, while "C" vs "N" makes little to no difference in the rest.
I am looking to expand the lens lineup for the 645Pro & was hoping to find reviews of lenses to point me in the right direction (i.e., 35 vs 45, 150 vs 210, zoom or no). So...when are the other reviews going to be posted? While not on the same body, it will give me something.
claudermilk wrote:
So...when are the other reviews going to be posted? While not on the same body, it will give me something.
I'll have 80/1.9 and 80/2.8 online today. Also will have updated distortion chart for 35/3.5. 45/2.8 will go online on Sat. I don't have any other Mamiya lenses in the lineup at the moment, since I'm trying to work through a huge backlog of both alt and mainstream glass, but at some point want to test 55/2.8, 110/2.8, 150/2.8, 210/4 and 200/2.8 apo...
