This topic is in the 2010 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2010Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
p.14 #1Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
Thanks all for your input. I fully understand:
- that FL is not based on the 35mm format but a physical property of itself.
- that a certain FL is just the 'feeling' that it belongs to 35mm because of almost all of us have used a 35mm body and lenses as reference.
- that it is all about the FOV as very vividly explained by Kent (RustyBug)
Hans
- that FL is not based on the 35mm format but a physical property of itself.
- that a certain FL is just the 'feeling' that it belongs to 35mm because of almost all of us have used a 35mm body and lenses as reference.
- that it is all about the FOV as very vividly explained by Kent (RustyBug)
Hans
May 20, 2010 at 09:23 AM
p.14 #2Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
Khun Hans wrote:
I fully understand
Way Cool.
I fully understand
Way Cool.
May 20, 2010 at 09:34 AM
p.14 #3Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
RustyBug wrote:
I opt for crop ... I think of it akin to having a darkroom enlarger set at a height to project an image large enough for an 8x10 print ...
...
Hope this helps.
RustyBug,
that explanation is a very good one to get people to understand that a change of sensor size does not magically change the focal length of the lens.
Now in practical application there's a factor that complicates matters some: You will want to achieve a certain framing taking a photograph, so the photographer will change his position based on the AOV his lens+camera offers or use a different focal length in order to achieve the framing.
Thus, a shorter focal length lens will be used on a smaller format camera, or the photographer will have to move further away from his subject. This leads to the practical perception that lenses offer larger depth of field when used on a crop body. Of course the physical DOF does not change, just like the focal length doesn't, but practical photographs with the same framing will show more DOF when a certain lens is being used on a crop camera beyause the photographer will move away further from his subject.
I opt for crop ... I think of it akin to having a darkroom enlarger set at a height to project an image large enough for an 8x10 print ...
...
Hope this helps.
RustyBug,
that explanation is a very good one to get people to understand that a change of sensor size does not magically change the focal length of the lens.
Now in practical application there's a factor that complicates matters some: You will want to achieve a certain framing taking a photograph, so the photographer will change his position based on the AOV his lens+camera offers or use a different focal length in order to achieve the framing.
Thus, a shorter focal length lens will be used on a smaller format camera, or the photographer will have to move further away from his subject. This leads to the practical perception that lenses offer larger depth of field when used on a crop body. Of course the physical DOF does not change, just like the focal length doesn't, but practical photographs with the same framing will show more DOF when a certain lens is being used on a crop camera beyause the photographer will move away further from his subject.
May 20, 2010 at 01:03 PM
p.14 #4Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
dcjs ... +1 @ 'framing'
Focal length used to achieve "Equivalent Framing" might be a much better term/phrase than "Equivalent Focal Length" has proven to be.
Focal length used to achieve "Equivalent Framing" might be a much better term/phrase than "Equivalent Focal Length" has proven to be.
May 20, 2010 at 01:24 PM
p.14 #5Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
OK guys, lets get back to posting some pictures 
1.Mamiya 120f4 on 5D http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3458/4625337586_3718cb9098_b.jpg
2.Mamiya 120f4 on 5D http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4016/4624722529_27392ca59e_b.jpg
1.Mamiya 120f4 on 5D http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3458/4625337586_3718cb9098_b.jpg
2.Mamiya 120f4 on 5D http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4016/4624722529_27392ca59e_b.jpg
May 20, 2010 at 03:10 PM
p.14 #6Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
Excellent pics, Jim. So different but both a class of itself. Nr. 1 is 
May 20, 2010 at 03:23 PM
p.14 #7Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
Great work, Jim, thank you! I really like the drawing style of the 120mm images, so apparent in the 2nd shot above. And, you have a very compliant horse there, what a fine model.
The colours are extraordinary, we need more artistic shots here on FM...the blown highlights are a real feature of this image. It looks as though compositions that work best with high contrast, high colour are the playground of the M645 lenses, and the 120mm f4 is a great buy at present.
The colours are extraordinary, we need more artistic shots here on FM...the blown highlights are a real feature of this image. It looks as though compositions that work best with high contrast, high colour are the playground of the M645 lenses, and the 120mm f4 is a great buy at present.
May 20, 2010 at 04:35 PM
p.14 #8Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
Jim Schemel wrote:
OK guys, lets get back to posting some pictures
1.Mamiya 120f4 on 5D http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3458/4625337586_3718cb9098_b.jpg
Beautiful. Thanks.
(a.k.a. "In a horse's eye!")
OK guys, lets get back to posting some pictures
1.Mamiya 120f4 on 5D http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3458/4625337586_3718cb9098_b.jpg
Beautiful. Thanks.
(a.k.a. "In a horse's eye!")
May 20, 2010 at 06:07 PM
p.14 #9Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
Few more with the mamiya 110 on 5D
#1 http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4017/4627604555_08e7d37d10_b.jpg
#2 http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4007/4628211132_b61ea60c13_b.jpg
#1 http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4017/4627604555_08e7d37d10_b.jpg
#2 http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4007/4628211132_b61ea60c13_b.jpg
May 21, 2010 at 06:59 PM
p.14 #10Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
Jim Schemel wrote:
Few more with the mamiya 110 on 5D
Jim, is your 110 an 'N' or the original 110 (they are all Sekor 'C') ? I'm not sure it matters any way as they might be identical optically anyway.
JJ
Few more with the mamiya 110 on 5D
Jim, is your 110 an 'N' or the original 110 (they are all Sekor 'C') ? I'm not sure it matters any way as they might be identical optically anyway.
JJ
May 21, 2010 at 07:49 PM
p.14 #11Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
JJ,
my 110 is the non "N" version
-Jim
my 110 is the non "N" version
-Jim
May 21, 2010 at 08:16 PM
p.14 #12Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
Beautiful images in this thread! I am considering getting the Fotodoix Pro adapter and will need a 1st lens to put on it. What do you guys think the biggest bang for the buck M645 lens is? I was looking at maybe the 80/1.9 N. Thanks.
-Jason
-Jason
May 21, 2010 at 09:37 PM
p.14 #13Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
Very informative thread - perhaps I missed it, although I read someone posted the
Mamiya 80mm 2.8 was really sharp and perhaps the 150mm, 3.5 was not. Thinking about getting an adapter for my 5DMKII, here are the Mamiya-Sekor N lenses I have:
55mm 2.8
80mm 2.8
150mm 3.5
Considering I don't have a 50mm Canon L, nor a 150mm, and ok with manual focus, was wondering what everyone's opinion is on these three lenses. Thanks.
Mamiya 80mm 2.8 was really sharp and perhaps the 150mm, 3.5 was not. Thinking about getting an adapter for my 5DMKII, here are the Mamiya-Sekor N lenses I have:
55mm 2.8
80mm 2.8
150mm 3.5
Considering I don't have a 50mm Canon L, nor a 150mm, and ok with manual focus, was wondering what everyone's opinion is on these three lenses. Thanks.
May 21, 2010 at 09:39 PM
p.14 #14Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
I think the best bang for your buck is the M645 C 80/2.8, N or not (the N has higher contrast). It's relatively small, inexpensive ($45 to $90), and it's sharp, sharp, sharp. I prefer my Zeiss Planar 85/1.4 and Leica Summicron-R 90/2 over the M645 C 80/1.9, and so I sold my f/1.9, but it's a favourite lens for many people on this forum, see https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/881860.
The C 55/2.8N is also a super lens - its performance is right up there with many well-respected 35mm lenses. There's nothing particularly wrong with the 150/3.5, except that it's not nearly as good as the A 150/2.8, and so I also sold my 150/3.5N.
The C 55/2.8N is also a super lens - its performance is right up there with many well-respected 35mm lenses. There's nothing particularly wrong with the 150/3.5, except that it's not nearly as good as the A 150/2.8, and so I also sold my 150/3.5N.
May 22, 2010 at 04:35 AM
p.14 #15Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
I've now ordered a four-position chip for my Mamiya-SonyAF adapter (a rebuilt Mam-Nikon :-) ). Never got around to doing the formal Mam150 vs Sigma150macro comparison as I (due to a chance opportunity) suddenly found myself in the middle of a main system switch...
Too bad none of the focal length available in the Minolta protocol fits exactly, but +/-10% FL difference makes sure that the SuperSteady-Shot stabilization of the Sony A850 is working at at least 90% effectivity. The 150F/2.8 seems to be the best value for me - in the 50-60 and 80-90mm class there's already plenty of very good native or adapted 135-format alternatives. The 200F/2.8APO also seems to be a likely candidate as does the 110/120-class macros, but we'll see next month...
Too bad none of the focal length available in the Minolta protocol fits exactly, but +/-10% FL difference makes sure that the SuperSteady-Shot stabilization of the Sony A850 is working at at least 90% effectivity. The 150F/2.8 seems to be the best value for me - in the 50-60 and 80-90mm class there's already plenty of very good native or adapted 135-format alternatives. The 200F/2.8APO also seems to be a likely candidate as does the 110/120-class macros, but we'll see next month...
May 22, 2010 at 06:47 AM
p.14 #16Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
theSuede ... there's also an 80/4 Macro that gets overlooked a lot because of the populated field and not being 'fast' ... but it fits very nicely alongside my 150/2.8 A and if I ever pull the trigger on the 45/2.8 that'll make up my Mamiya trinity.
May 22, 2010 at 07:11 AM
p.14 #17Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
The 150/3.5 is quite a good lens, however it is a portrait lens pure and simple, do not expect it to be maximally sharp at wide apertures.
The A 150/2.8 is the way to go if you want the sharpest of the M645 150's. The 150/4 should be avoided, it was the budget 150 and not nearly as good as the f3.5 version which can be had these days for essentially identical money. The f3.8 version is optically similar to the f3.5 as far as I'm aware, the slower speed is due to the leaf shutter which is irrelevant to anyone not shooting M645 bodies.
The A 150/2.8 is the way to go if you want the sharpest of the M645 150's. The 150/4 should be avoided, it was the budget 150 and not nearly as good as the f3.5 version which can be had these days for essentially identical money. The f3.8 version is optically similar to the f3.5 as far as I'm aware, the slower speed is due to the leaf shutter which is irrelevant to anyone not shooting M645 bodies.
May 22, 2010 at 07:53 AM
p.14 #18Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
rafael
I've tested Jim C's 55 - very nice.
Have never used the 80/2.8, but love the 1.9. While never a Zeiss fan, like Jim I also like the Leica 90/2 non-APO, but unlike JC, I prefer the Mamiya 1.9 over it. The 90/1 APO (also owned) is a whole other kettle of fish - stunning. That said, I sold it in favor of my CV 90/3.5 APO, and I would readily re-buy a Leica 100 APO (or a CV 90) over the 90/2 AA unless I really wanted that F2.
I agree with consensus on the 150/3.5. Nice, but the 150/2.8 A spanks it handily. As mawz says, the 150/3.8 is the 3.5 with a leaf shutter.
I've tested Jim C's 55 - very nice.
Have never used the 80/2.8, but love the 1.9. While never a Zeiss fan, like Jim I also like the Leica 90/2 non-APO, but unlike JC, I prefer the Mamiya 1.9 over it. The 90/1 APO (also owned) is a whole other kettle of fish - stunning. That said, I sold it in favor of my CV 90/3.5 APO, and I would readily re-buy a Leica 100 APO (or a CV 90) over the 90/2 AA unless I really wanted that F2.
I agree with consensus on the 150/3.5. Nice, but the 150/2.8 A spanks it handily. As mawz says, the 150/3.8 is the 3.5 with a leaf shutter.
May 22, 2010 at 10:12 AM
p.14 #19Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
As Kent (aka RustyBug) said, the Mamiya C 80/4N Macro is a very nice lens. It's just as sharp as its A 120 sibling, and it has a shorter working distance (aka wider angle of view). On its own, the 80/4 goes to 1:2 magnification, and it has a matching extension tube that takes it to 1:1. I often use the C 80/4N Macro for studio shooting at close range (as opposed to macro), as it's very easy to focus (despite it's relatively slow f/4), and it's very, very sharp.
May 22, 2010 at 06:07 PM
p.14 #20Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread
Conner999 wrote:
...The 90/1 APO (also owned) is a whole other kettle of fish - stunning.
Conner999, whale oil beef hooked - I'd love to try an APO 'cron 90/1.0. It would have about the same size front element as the EF 200/1.8 that I just scored (about 130mm). Of course, it would probably be called a Summicrikeyhugeandincrediblybrighticronimar, or similar, and I'm sure it would be an absolute pleasure to use, with a monopod.
...The 90/1 APO (also owned) is a whole other kettle of fish - stunning.
Conner999, whale oil beef hooked - I'd love to try an APO 'cron 90/1.0. It would have about the same size front element as the EF 200/1.8 that I just scored (about 130mm). Of course, it would probably be called a Summicrikeyhugeandincrediblybrighticronimar, or similar, and I'm sure it would be an absolute pleasure to use, with a monopod.
May 22, 2010 at 06:17 PM