This topic is in the 2010 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2010Is the 150/3.5 N a good lens?
p.1 #1Is the 150/3.5 N a good lens?
This lens sometimes be had at very cheap prices. Sometimes even less than the 80/2.8 N. In fact, both are the cheapest N lenses.
http://www.keh.com/Product-Details/1/MS0600002050005/MS06/FE.aspx
In the case of the 80/2.8 N I understand that it is the 50/1.8 equivalent of the 35mm world but the 150 is almost double the FL, just half stop slower and is still incredibly cheap. I was always taught that TANSTAAFL and have seen it to be true in many cases. Question is, what am I missing?
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
http://www.keh.com/Product-Details/1/MS0600002050005/MS06/FE.aspx
In the case of the 80/2.8 N I understand that it is the 50/1.8 equivalent of the 35mm world but the 150 is almost double the FL, just half stop slower and is still incredibly cheap. I was always taught that TANSTAAFL and have seen it to be true in many cases. Question is, what am I missing?
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Feb 23, 2010 at 03:26 AM
p.1 #2Is the 150/3.5 N a good lens?
Interesting. I thought that at f/8 the differences would be indistinguishable. TANSTAAFL works like charm, isn't it? 
BTW, what does A stand for? APO? And what about S?
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
BTW, what does A stand for? APO? And what about S?
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Feb 23, 2010 at 05:39 AM
p.1 #3Is the 150/3.5 N a good lens?
A means ULD glass, like the 120/4 A macro vs a true "APO" white (in MF 645) lens like the 200mm, 300mm and 500mm APOs.
People often refer to the 150/2.8 A and 120/4 A as "APO" and while they do an excellent job at CA control, they are not technically an APO lens - at least as Mamiya (vs 1001 armchair experts) defines it. Owning the 150/2.8A - I'd agree with JC - it is a VERY nice hunk of glass.
People often refer to the 150/2.8 A and 120/4 A as "APO" and while they do an excellent job at CA control, they are not technically an APO lens - at least as Mamiya (vs 1001 armchair experts) defines it. Owning the 150/2.8A - I'd agree with JC - it is a VERY nice hunk of glass.
Feb 23, 2010 at 06:02 AM
p.1 #4Is the 150/3.5 N a good lens?
The 150/3.5 is a brilliant lens for what it's designed for. Which is portraiture. The A 150/2.8 is definitely sharper (as well as a 20 year newer design)
Feb 23, 2010 at 08:08 AM
p.1 #5Is the 150/3.5 N a good lens?
20 year newer design? No wonder it is better.
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Feb 23, 2010 at 08:20 AM
p.1 #6Is the 150/3.5 N a good lens?
mawz wrote:
The 150/3.5 is a brilliant lens for what it's designed for. Which is portraiture. The A 150/2.8 is definitely sharper (as well as a 20 year newer design)
+1
The 150/3.5 is a brilliant lens for what it's designed for. Which is portraiture. The A 150/2.8 is definitely sharper (as well as a 20 year newer design)
+1
Feb 23, 2010 at 11:55 AM