Lenses for Mamiya ZD

[frankric]

I've ordered a Mamiya ZD with 80 f2.8 and 35 f3.5 AF lenses. I own a few of the original "C" series 645 manual focus lenses and I'll use these initially to cover the other focal lengths. My plan is to add other AF lenses after I discover I'm happy with the ZD  

I'd appreciate it if anyone who is familiar with the Mamiya AF lens range could pass on their experience with their lenses. i.e which are stellar, which are OK and if they've discovered a dog! Or point me towards such info.

I'll be using the ZD for Landscapes.

Thanks in anticipation

Frank

[BernardLanguillier]

I'd appreciate it if anyone who is familiar with the Mamiya AF lens range could pass on their experience with their lenses. i.e which are stellar, which are OK and if they've discovered a dog! Or point me towards such info.

I'll be using the ZD for Landscapes.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110761\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi Frank,

I have been using the ZD for landsccape using 3 AF lenses: 35, 55-110 and 300f4.5. I bought all 3 second hand (the ZD as well actually).

They are all 3 opitcally good, but the 55-110 is really sharp with virtually no distorsion accross the range. The 35 is a bit weak in the corners.

I intend to replace the 35 mm by the 28 mm if I can afford it when it becomes available.

Regards,
Bernard

[stefan marquardt]

from all the lenses I use on the ZD (all non-af) the 35mm is the only not so good lens. the shiftlens is very good. the 2,8/80mm is the best/sharpest (and cheapest)lens I have. the 1.9/80mm is usefusefull for narrow dof-shoots, and quite sharp too.
you can use schneider-kreuznach and zeiss-jena lenses via an adapter too (60mm curtagon and 50mm flektogon= very good). I find the zeiss-jena lenses good - but not better than the mamiya lenses (Jenoptic is on of my clients, and I like puting on the zeiss lenses and show them the marriage of theire old lenses and a new digital body).

I think for landscape i would concentrate on the 45mm, 50 shift, 2.8/80mm and the 150mm lenses.

stefan

www stefanmarquardt de

[frankric]

Thanks Bernard & Stefan. That's what I was looking for.

A second-hand ZD Bernard?? The joys of living in Tokyo! I very much admire the work you post here from time to time by the way.

Regards

Frank

[mcfoto]

Hi
The 150mm is excellent & the 120 macro is a very good one to have in the camera bag. I now own one after renting this lens on many jobs, very sharp. I used to own a Hasselblad 503CM & have no regrets about selling it. I prefer the Mamiya glass.
Denis

[MatthewG]

I own a 210, 80, 45    For me the 210 has given me the best quality shots but I use all.

[pss]

I've ordered a Mamiya ZD with 80 f2.8 and 35 f3.5 AF lenses. I own a few of the original "C" series 645 manual focus lenses and I'll use these initially to cover the other focal lengths. My plan is to add other AF lenses after I discover I'm happy with the ZD   

I'd appreciate it if anyone who is familiar with the Mamiya AF lens range could pass on their experience with their lenses. i.e which are stellar, which are OK and if they've discovered a dog! Or point me towards such info.

I'll be using the ZD for Landscapes.

Thanks in anticipation

Frank
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110761\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

35, 80, 150, 55-110......
the 35 is ok, the 80 is great, the zoom is ok, the 150 is great....i am comparing this to schneider lenses which is not really fair....i also use my P30 on my RZ and those lenses are a bit better.....considering that the 35 is the widest fullframe lens out there and is a couple of years old, i guess it is pretty good...the zoom is on the camera all the time...i wish it was a little better, but it is a zoom, so there are limitations.....i have high hopes for the 28 and the new zoom.....
price/value all mamiya lenses are unbeatable....easily compare with anything from hasselblad,....yea they are plastic, but that makes them smaller and lighter and cheaper....the optical quality is still outstanding....

[awofinden]

I have the 35, 55, 80 and 150.  The 35 isn't great but it's still a major improvement on the 35mm canon f2 I used to have. The rest are great, low distortion, sharp and they have a nice contrast too. I'm a big mamiya fan, it seems like the obvious choice for medium format. It's a bonus that there cheap too.

[Quentin]

With my ZD I use the 35mm which is a decent lens but with a touch of of CA and a little moustache distortion; the 55mm, which is my "standard" lens, very good; the 80mm which is outstandingly sharp; the 120mm Macro, a very good manual focus macro lens, and an old 210 non AF.  I could use a longer lens.

I also use a 45mm Hartblei super rotator tilt / shift lens.  Sometimes its good, but it is uneven across the frame, so I use it with some caution, although for the money one can hardly complain.  A zeiss equivalent would costs megabucks.

Quentin

[Jack Varney]

I have had good success with the AF 80mm f/2.8, the 55mm and the 55-110 zoom. The original manual focus lenses provide a lower ratio focusing ring which makes fine focusing easier, at least to me. I use the 150mm and the 300mm. I do mostly landscape work, so manual focus is the order of the day for me. Thus, the manual focus lenses are fine.

[Lester]

I guess not all lenses are built the same. I used a manual 35mm for landscape and I think it is very sharp for my used. I also know for a fact that I also have a Nikon 17-35 Ed that is sharp on the edge and one that is not. I guess the best thing to do is test the lenses and see how you like it. It is used on a P45 back. I have a pic of the Lake Powel bridge, full fame and at 1:1 you could see cars on it, with the P45 and 35mm lens.

I have had good success with the AF 80mm f/2.8, the 55mm and the 55-110 zoom. The original manual focus lenses provide a lower ratio focusing ring which makes fine focusing easier, at least to me. I use the 150mm and the 300mm. I do mostly landscape work, so manual focus is the order of the day for me. Thus, the manual focus lenses are fine.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111260\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[ternst]

Has anyone here used either of the 500mm lenses? There is the APO (about ten grand) and the normal one (about $1300, or $500 used). Obviously there would be a lot of difference, but has anyone used the cheap one and have any comments about it? I only need a longer lens 2-3 times a year and can't justify the APO lens, yet don't want to shoot with a coke bottle as a lens.

Same deal for the 300 - there is the 2.8, the 4.5, and the 5.6. Has anyone used the 2.8 with the 2x converter, and is it a decent combo, or does the 2x bring it down to junk? I assume th 5.6 is pretty marginal, however what about the 4.5, which seems to be a good lens on paper (and is actually AF too, which I don't need, but is a newer design) - can anyone comment on the 4.5 with and without the 2x? There are no dealers in my part of the country so no way to have a look in person at any of this stuff, so I will have to buy blind...Thanks for any thoughts...

[BernardLanguillier]

can anyone comment on the 4.5 with and without the 2x? There are no dealers in my part of the country so no way to have a look in person at any of this stuff, so I will have to buy blind...Thanks for any thoughts...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111298\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have used the 300 f4.5 AF without 2x converter on a Mamiya ZD and was very happy with the image quality.

I have only used it stopped down though.

Reagards,
Bernard

[Lester]

I have both the 500mm and 300mm APO. The 300mm is really sharp, by itself. The 500mm is harder to use, you really need a good support for it. It is sharp enough for the size of lens it is. If you used a 2x on either of these lens, there is always a fall out on sharpness. I got the 500mm and 300mm on ebay, the 500mm is less then $5000 and the 300mm is less then $2500. I also got the 300mm 4.5 AF and it is sharp by it self. These lens are used on a P45, so it might be sharper with the ZD.

Has anyone here used either of the 500mm lenses? There is the APO (about ten grand) and the normal one (about $1300, or $500 used). Obviously there would be a lot of difference, but has anyone used the cheap one and have any comments about it? I only need a longer lens 2-3 times a year and can't justify the APO lens, yet don't want to shoot with a coke bottle as a lens.

Same deal for the 300 - there is the 2.8, the 4.5, and the 5.6. Has anyone used the 2.8 with the 2x converter, and is it a decent combo, or does the 2x bring it down to junk? I assume th 5.6 is pretty marginal, however what about the 4.5, which seems to be a good lens on paper (and is actually AF too, which I don't need, but is a newer design) - can anyone comment on the 4.5 with and without the 2x? There are no dealers in my part of the country so no way to have a look in person at any of this stuff, so I will have to buy blind...Thanks for any thoughts...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111298\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[frankric]

Hi
The 150mm is excellent & the 120 macro is a very good one to have in the camera bag. I now own one after renting this lens on many jobs, very sharp. I used to own a Hasselblad 503CM & have no regrets about selling it. I prefer the Mamiya glass.
Denis
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111110\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Denis I do very little macro, so would it be true to say that the 150 would be a better way to go for everyday use?

By the way, I've seen your work, though I'm from the opposite side of Australia, but I hadn't put 2+2 together and figured out who 'mcfoto' was on this forum. Your creativity simply blows me away, and I don't doubt you could do excellent work with a Box Brownie. However, good gear helps, no doubt.....

Thanks to everyone who responded. it builds up a bit of a picture of the system in my mind which is very helpful.

I had thought that using the Manual Focus lenses in stop-down mode would be a bit of a drag, but I notice several of you are doing so, so maybe it's not so bad. No doubt I'll find out soon enough. Not much different to using the Pentax Spotmatic I started with, I suppose.

Thanks again

Regards

Frank

[mcfoto]

Hi Frank
Thank you & you shoot in one of the most beautiful areas in Australia! The 150mm would be better as it is AF & very light. You could get extension tubes or try close up filters if you need to. On ebay at the moment check out Adorama as they have a few under $300.00 USD & they will ship to you within a week. I have had great service from them. Min focus is 1.5m 7 it is the same size as my 17-35 2.8 EF Canon lens.
Denis