I want to buy a Mirex adapter. So I have read all the threads here on the forum, but it’s still not clear for me what to buy. Maybe somebody could help me out here
First of all: Mamiya or Hasselblad ?
Mamiya is 6x4,5 and Hasselblad is 6x6 right ?
So, the image circle of Hasselblad Lenses would be better for T/S
What Lenses are better ? sharper ?
Are they better in comparison to Canon L glass ? (also TSE)
How does it work / What do I need to use Hasselblad lenses with the Mamiya-Mirex ?
(Is the focus range [Infinity Focus] or focal length changing when using an adapter with the Mirex ?)
And last but not least, who has the wider Lenses ?
I only know the 35mm Mamiya and the 50mm Hasselblad.
I mainly do Landscape and Architecture, so I need a wide lens.
The only lenses to avoid are the Mamiya 35mm C, Mamiya 45mm, Mamiya zooms, and early Hasselblad 40mm C. All the other lenses (question mark over the ultimate resolving ability of the late Mamiya N model 35mm f3.5 and poor flare-resistance of the 50mm Shift) are superb: on average better than the Canon TSE versions.
The Mamiya equivalents are typically half the price of the Hasselblad, but give away little in performance. The Blads have slightly bigger image circles which makes them shiftier.
I agree with Lotusm50, that's why I bought the M645 version of the Mirex. You can also use Pentacon 6 lenses with a Pentacon 6 to M645 adapter.
I've owned and used the Mamiya M645 C 35/3.5N, C 45/2.8N, and C 55/2.8N lenses. I find they're all excellent lenses. I recently sold the 45/2.8N because it was redundant, not because it wasn't as good as the others.
There is a M645 24/4 Fisheye, but I wouldn't want to mess with de-fishing a shifted image.
I have the original box, it reads (line for line) ...
645 PRO LENS
Mamiya Sekor C
35mm f/3.5N
I also have the Mamiya 150mm 2.8 A
I'm using an Arax Shift (only, i.e. no tilt) adapter. I got them to play with the shift feature, but found that I really don't use it. I did some testing and saw that going with the shift (10mm) left & right is certainly a better (i.e. flatter) image than rotating on the tripod for a pano. It was fun ... but isn't my style, so it's time to let the 35mm go. (I have a nice Zeiss C/Y 35-70 3.4 for regular 35mm).
The 150 2.8 A could go either way. I should sell it along with the adapter & the 35mm, but there is something about it that makes me hang on to it ... of course a CV 125 or Zeiss 100 would probably change my mind ;-)
If you are interested in a 35mm 3.5 N, mine will be up for sale (just haven't got 'round to it).
@ RustyBug: I´m still not sure about what direction to go ... how much do you ask for the lens ?
@ Lotusm50: What adapter do I need to use Blads on the 645 Mirex ?
What Lenses do you use ?
And there is still the IQ Question ...
How are those Lenses (not shifted/Tilted) compared to Others ? (Canon L Primes or Contax Distagon´s and Leica´s )
Unfortunately, I don't use Hasselblad or Mamiya 645 lenses, but I do have a Mamiya macro bellows -- adapted to Canon and with a Pentacon 6 to Mamiya adapter. I've also been in a similar situation with Pentacon 6 lenses and Contax 645 lenses. So, I am familar with the problem and issues.
You basically need a Hasselblad to Mamiya 645 adapter to go with the Mirex Mamiya adapter. Usually found on ebaY or in various places on the web. Here is one on ebaY: http://tinyurl.com/m6pftl
I got my one of my Mamiya 645 adapters (can't remember which one) from this seller in Hong Kong. He seems reliable, and the adapter I got was good quality and was shipped quickly. His prices are pretty good as well.
Does the Hasselbald or pent 6 larger image circle used with an adpater on the Mamiya Mirex version actually give you more ability to tilt or shift? I thought the limitation was with the adapter? Mirex gives instructions not to use wide open to avoid vignetting. I've never tried it wide open with any lens yet. Perhaps the larger image circle would help.
Mike
Michael Gordon wrote:
... I thought the limitation was with the adapter? Mirex gives instructions not to use wide open to avoid vignetting. I've never tried it wide open with any lens yet. Perhaps the larger image circle would help.
Mike
I had no idea that this was the case.
Are the instructions not to use wide open to avoid vignetting only in relation to the shift movement, as you'd normally stop down anyway?
Are there any issues with using lenses wide open with tilt or with no movements at all?
My printed directions are at home and I will check tonight. I can't imagine there is
any trouble with no tilt or shift. I believe the Mirex directions apply to the tilt as well.
I otherwise would have thought to use the Mamiya lenses wide open on occassion with the tilt. It actually would not take long to do the experiment of course. The experienced Mirex adapter users on this forum would know off hand.
roschko wrote:
I talked to a guy today about MF Lenses on DSLR´s.
He told me that the 35mm lenses are better in resolution and in build quality than MF lenses.
Who was this guy? First, while it is easier/cheaper to make a higher performing 35mm lens and perhaps on average they are better, it is not universally true. The best MF lenses can certainly match 35mm SLR lenses. Second, I don't know what he's looking at or what he's smoking, but most 35mm lenses are made like crap. I would say that in general, MF lenses are clearly better built. From what I've seen, Hassy, Contax, Rollei, Pentax, Fuji and Mamiya MF lens are better made than ANY Canon lens I've seen.
roschko wrote:
So that would mean that MF on 35mm makes only sense for T/S
And for "normal" photography it´s better to use a Contax or Leica
For "normal" photography, many people on list list would say, Yes. It's better to use Contax (or current Zeiss), or Leica lenses. People on the Canon or Nikon forums might disagree. I would say that generally speaking, even if performance is identical, that MF make the most sense for T/S. The lenses are heavier and bigger. Why carry that around if you don't have to? However, some MF have rendering characteristics that some people like and will choose to use them. In addition, if you have a MF lens and don't have a 35mm lens in the same focal length, then, practically speaking, it might make sense to just use the MF lens. You might actually get more uniform performance across the 35mm sensor with a MF lens becuase you are only using center of the lens' image circle.
Finally, I would say that if you are using them on 35mm format cameras, seek out the best MF lenses.
the guy is not listed in this forum.
I currently use L-Glass (16-35 MKII, 24-70, 70-200IS all 2,8).
The 16-35 MKII is much better than the MKI and I don’t know if there is a better alternative Lens (Leica 19mm, Distagon 21mm).
For me it looks like the 16-35 is pretty good. http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/canon1635ii_a/c1635ii_a1.html
I guess, first I try the Mirex with a 35mm Mamiya and maybe some other Lenses.
I don't know if this fits the bill for the Mamiya adapter, but I saw this 90mm 6X7 lens on Craigslist for $40: http://cnj.craigslist.org/pho/1262996549.html
Looks legitimate. I've paid more for shipping on photo items.
If you do panos, it's akin to doing large format in the sense that you have an excess of detail and resolution, which is why it is not so critical to have an ultra sharp/high resolution lens (although I'm not saying this lens is not super sharp, just don't know).
Posted here because people are discussing Mirex/Mamiya.
erichard wrote:
I don't know if this fits the bill for the Mamiya adapter, but I saw this 90mm 6X7 lens on Craigslist for $40: http://cnj.craigslist.org/pho/1262996549.html
Looks legitimate. I've paid more for shipping on photo items.
If you do panos, it's akin to doing large format in the sense that you have an excess of detail and resolution, which is why it is not so critical to have an ultra sharp/high resolution lens (although I'm not saying this lens is not super sharp, just don't know).
Posted here because people are discussing Mirex/Mamiya.
The RB and RZ lenses are a a completely different mount to the M645 lenses. The RB and RZ lenses also have built in leaf shutters which are cocked by a linkage between the camera and lens so unless you butcher the front of a RB or RZ body (which I've seen done some where on the 'inter web') then you can't cock the shutter.
I have RZII body and lenses and they are actually quite nice but irrelevant to this crowd as they can't really be adapted in any realistic way. That's why they are so cheap, no one wants them.
