Mamiya MF lens questions

[Graham Welland]

Mamiya primes are 35, 45, 55, 80, 120, 150, 210, 300mm. There are also zooms for 55-110, 105-210. I've seen a review of the 35/55-110/105-210 and 120 macro but nothing much about the others.

I tend to use 35, 55, 55-110, 105-210, 120 macro and 300mm, with a minimal kit of the 35, 55-110, 105-210 for travel.

I consider the zooms to be excellent. 35mm is very sharp and nicely built. 45, 55, 80 do not have the build quality and feel of the previous generation manual focus lenses but are sharp. The 120 macro is extremely sharp and akin to the Mamiya 7 lenses (43/80/150) plus it is a manual focus macro that is just superb (if I do say so myself!). 300mm is nasty in manual focus mode as it lacks feel and in general the MF AF sucks anyway. The 300 redeems itself by being very sharp with excellent resolving ability. Unfortunately I don't have Didger's expected tech specs to back it up - just my personal experience.

I'm surprised that people feel that the Mamiya will be similar in weight to the 1DsII outfit. In my experience, compared to my Nikon D1x outfit, the benefits and convenience of the Mamiya AFD/Kodak and lenses was better than the Nikon DSLR. It actually feels lighter although the Nikon was more 'robust' in construction. Ditto Canon I guess.

Your mileage may vary ....

[Graham Welland]

I'm surprised that people feel that the Mamiya will be similar in weight to the 1DsII outfit

It's no question of "feel".  I checked camera weight and weight of all the lenses I'm interested in.  Unless Mamiya is joking about the weight published in their ZD specs and unless the lens weights given on the B&H website are wrong, a ZD kit WILL weigh about the same or less than my 1ds kit for comparable lenses.  Definitely facts, not "feel".

Unless Mamiya suddenly come out with a new engineering paradigm for their zoom lenses then a 'true' DSLR like a 1D/Ds/D2x is going to be a better choice for the tough stuff

I don't get it.  I'm presently using a 1ds with almost nothing but primes, so what makes the ZD less than "true"?  What do you mean by "tough stuff"?  What I'm doing with my 1ds (heavy rough Sierra X-country backpacking) is about as tough as stuff gets!!

Ok, maybe I should be more pedantic with my descriptions ... stick a battery in the camera and see what the weight distribution is like. That's what I found to be different. Pure pack weight, whilst a consideration, isn't the only factor. Irrational as it sounds I found my Mamiya outfit felt less like a boat anchor than my Nikon outfit. It probably weighs more ...

'Tough stuff' - normal 35mm SLR use such as sports, candids, photo journalism, etc. MF auto focus is crude by comparison to what people have got used to with current DSLRs. Whilst hiking around gets you the hero vote, I doubt that you'd do it with a ZD hanging off your shoulder/neck. (I assume). You might consider doing it with a robust DSLR such as your 1Ds though.

[Sabercat04]

The Mamiya 645 AF and AFD cameras support only stopped down metering with the MF lenses and I will be very surprised if the ZD changes that. That alone may make the AF lenses worth having even if you don't often use the autofocus.

[Graham Welland]

Well, if you're only shooting wide then the only lens in town really worth considering is the 35mm. The AF version actually has a decent MF mode and optically I didn't notice any difference from the manual version I used to use on my 645 Pro TL.

There is the 24mm too but that's an uncorrected fish eye for all intents and purposes. If you've ever seen or used one you'll see that this is a major boat anchor of a lens (and a pig to protect from lens knocks too). Definitely a candidate for some auto lens correction tools.

I've been considering the Hartblei for it's tilt/shift and on a 22MP sensor you'd get a decent wide angle with movements.

[didger]

I just did a considerable bit of research on what info is available about Mamiya ZD.  The weight is a bit LESS than a 1ds.  The total weight for prime lenses in the same range as what I use with my 1ds is very nearly the same.  If the ZD shutter is as vibration free as the 1ds shutter, a total ZD kit (including tripod) might weigh in at a little less than what I have to carry now most of the time with my 1ds kit.  The Mamiya lenses would cost considerably less that what I paid for my existing lenses for 1ds and since they're all primes the sample variation issue is not quite so critical.

I only looked at Mamiya lenses.  Are there other brands that will also work on Mamiya 645 cameras?  Most of the Mamiya lenses are not rated by Photodo and obviously there's nothing nearly as good as something like a Canon 50mm compact macro.

What would be the absolute best lenses that would fit a ZD and cover the range of 35mm to 120mm or 150mm, including one macro?  Are there clear detailed and comprehensive test results and expert reviews to back up any claims about what are the best lenses?  The few Photodo ratings available for Mamiya brand 645 are a bit lackluster at best, but few models were tested.

I'm looking at all this because after all the stuff I've read about 1ds2, especially Michael's latest, there's no way I'll ever go that route.  However, the ZD is exactly twice the sensor size as 1ds and exactly twice the pixels and all the lenses are primes.  If the basic sensor quality is about comparable to 1ds and good enough lenses are available, it means that the gap between 1ds and ZD should be at least as big (probably more) as the gap between 35mm slides and 1ds.  Countless slide shooters routinely print and sell good looking 16x20 prints and Galen Rowell hardly ever printed that small.  All this means that you should be able to get very good 30x40 prints with a ZD if there's no ugly surprises with ZD quality.  I doubt that Mamiya will be jumping into this market with a $10,000+ camera with ugly surprises.

[Jonathan Wienke]

The Mamiya is definitely worth keeping an eye on. My guess at this point is that the 1Ds-MkII would be the better tool for shooting moving subjects with a reasonably rapid frame rate, but that the Mamiya would be the better option for more static stuff like portraits, landscapes, and studio work where the prime-only limitation of the Mamiya would not generally be a serious drawback. If I ever get into MF digital, the ZD would be something I'd seriously consider. Unless its image quality sucks.

[etmpasadena]

You won't find any comprehensive test results on the Mamiya. Mamiya is really the only 'living' MF maker left. The are that way because they make great products, both cameras and lenses. Because there are no tests you'll just have to trust the many professionals who over the decades have used the system.

Anyway, I have the 35mm, 45mm, 80mm and 105-210 zoom. If you really want, I'll shoot something exciting like a brick wall and scan it for you if you want to check for edge sharpness. Just shoot me an e-mail.

Erik

[didger]

I'm surprised that people feel that the Mamiya will be similar in weight to the 1DsII outfit

It's no question of "feel".  I checked camera weight and weight of all the lenses I'm interested in.  Unless Mamiya is joking about the weight published in their ZD specs and unless the lens weights given on the B&H website are wrong, a ZD kit WILL weigh about the same or less than my 1ds kit for comparable lenses.  Definitely facts, not "feel".

Unless Mamiya suddenly come out with a new engineering paradigm for their zoom lenses then a 'true' DSLR like a 1D/Ds/D2x is going to be a better choice for the tough stuff

I don't get it.  I'm presently using a 1ds with almost nothing but primes, so what makes the ZD less than "true"?  What do you mean by "tough stuff"?  What I'm doing with my 1ds (heavy rough Sierra X-country backpacking) is about as tough as stuff gets!!

Anyway, I have the 35mm, 45mm, 80mm and 105-210 zoom. If you really want, I'll shoot something exciting like a brick wall and scan it for you if you want to check for edge sharpness. Just shoot me an e-mail.

Thanks so much.  Until I'm a bit closer to maybe actually buying the camera I don't want to waste your time, but I may very well end up taking you up on your offer.

The things that will stop me buying the ZD are not the quality, whcih I am confident will be high, but the price

Yeah, well, me too.  However, I've got a still vaporous thing in the "ether" for maybe serious print distribution in an already existing huge gallery market.  The guy has a super high end fine art printing plant and his own distribution and he really seems very interested and in no way flaky.  His son is my principal US distributor for my CD's and India musical instrument products and also a good friend and occasional backpacking and peak climbing partner.  He used to work with his father and he's convinced his father is serious and that 1ds should be just good enough, though I'm sure if things gel he'll be pushing for larger format very soon.  I'm getting ready, just in case the pie in the sky comes a little closer to the ground.  For the past few years I've basically been living on just cashing royalty and commission checks.  I could get back into an intense personal selling effort for a few months with enough motivation (a photo kit with the basic 1ds quality but exactly twice the resolution and no caveats about only absolute ultimate quality lenses at optimal aperture.

I hope the image quality matches the hype (sight unseen!). If it sucks it'll hurt them badly.

This seems quite inconceivable.  If they've been sharp enough to be the only real survivors in the MF market, surely they've got their act together well enough not to blow that.  I'm pretty optimistic about the camera and the money thing.  We'll know fairly soon.

[BJL]

Didger,

I get the feeling that the law of diminishing returns kicks in for 35mm size sensors with current lenses at anything above about 11mp.  Diffraction and resolution limits of all but the best lenses ...

Yes, I am coming more and more to the conclusion that lenses are going to be the toughest frontier for progress at the high resolution end of digital photography, ultimately because electronic sensors can have resolution far finer than color film while still giving adequate if modererate speed, at least matching the most prestigious reversal films. For example, it seems that pixels as small as about 3.4 microns (5MP in 2/3" format) can have good noise levels to at least ISO 100 (maybe 200) and also as much dynamic range as reversal films like Velvia and Provia (which is not saying a lot, I am carefully avoiding comparisons to the DR of negative film!)

So I could fantasize about a low speed, high res. "digital Kodachrome/Velvia/Provia" niche camera with this 3.4 micron pixel pitch in 35mm format, which would have about 80MP, maybe about matching 4"x5" Velvia or Provia for resolution ... except that it seems no current lenses can come close to keeping up with that resolution.

What should we expect? New generations of ultra-sharp lenses from Canon, Nikon, Olympus etc., to support the push to ever smaller pixels in their chosen sensor sizes? Canon or Nikon DSLR's in larger-than-35mm format? Mamiya and Contax MF retaking the high res. sector due to their lens advantage?

Their have been rumors of a larger-than-35mm format DSLR from Nikon, reported by somewat knowledgable people like Thom Hogan, so maybe they plan to outflank Canon in the MF/LF replacement sector by jumping to something like a 48x36mm or 645 format DSLR?


My guess is on the main strategy being each company improving the high end lenses for their current DSLR formats, for the sake of a comfortable upgrade path.

[didger]

stick a battery in the camera and see what the weight distribution is like

Don't care.  I do almost nothing but tripod.

I doubt that you'd do it with a ZD hanging off your shoulder/neck

I reckon not, since I've even removed the strap from my 1ds because I NEVER carry it around my neck.  In any case, have you gotten the world's only sneak preview of ZD, so that you can speak so confidently about poor ergonomics?

hiking around gets you the hero vote

WOW!!!!! How cool.  Is there a prize or anything?     

What should we expect? New generations of ultra-sharp lenses from Canon, Nikon, Olympus etc.

Since on the whole there's been very little designed in Japan that really beats the old non computer aided design and manufacturing Zeiss and Leica lenses, I'm not expecting any lens miracles from Japan any time soon.  We've had a couple of years of 1ds, and now 1ds2 and now the Nikon D2x (or whatever it's called), and where are these wonderful lenses, especially the wonderful ultrawides with sharp corners at moderate to large apertures?  I'm betting that in a year or two there will be 30+ Mpixel MFDSLR's with the same problem of only really benefitting from all those pixels with a few really super lenses used at optimal apertures.

[didger]

I greatly prefer MF.  I find most automation a nuisance for landscape shooting.  I've already noticed how many used Mamiya lenses there are and also how generally inexpensive these lenses are in any case; no more than equivalent lenses for 35mm format.  What's even more remarkable is that these lenses are not particularly heavy either.  Now there's just two issues remaining.  Will the ZD fullfill expectations and will I ever have the money.  I'm short term more confident in the camera than the money.

[didger]

My 4 Zeiss lenses that I use with my 1ds are also totally no automation, no communication with the camera.  If I can get some old fashioned non anything automated optically great glass, that's an extra incentive to get this camera.  I have no problem with metering stopped down.  That's how people used to do photography, ya know.   

[didger]

I strongly prefer the wide open metering for my own use

Different strokes for different folks.  In any case, for me there was no choice for my 1ds.  I wanted Zeiss primes for my wide angle shooting and wide is almost all I do.  If there's a lot of totally manual great used Mamiya lenses around cheap, that's good news to me.  Adorama has some great bargains and I'm sure there's plenty elsewhere too.  Now I just need to see how good the camera is and then find a great bargain on that, ha ha.

[didger]

I've been considering the Hartblei for it's tilt/shift

I have all 3 Hartblei/Arsat TS lenses.  They're pretty good for specialty lenses and fairly cheap, but I wouldn't say they're in the same league as Zeiss or the best Canon lenses.  However, for medium format, there really isn't much else, is there?  Michael likes the 45mm Hartblei TS quite well, but I don't think he did any really critical resolution tests.  If I really get into a ZD system I'll try to get an MF mount put on that lens.

[Quentin]

Didger,

I get the feeling that the law of diminishing returns kicks in for 35mm size sensors with current lenses at anything above about 11mp.  Diffraction and resolution limits of all but the best lenses (and perhaps even the best lenses) incresingly limit the benefit of the higher pixel counts.  I seriously doubt that it will be worth gong much beyond 1Ds II pixel counts with current 35mm equipment as the base.

So you may well be right in thinking the ZD will be worth its 22mp whereas the 1Ds II is maybe struggling to make the most of its 16.7mp.

The only experience I have of Mamiya is a 7II 6x7 rangefinder, and those lenses were bitingly sharp.

The things that will stop me buying the ZD are not the quality, whcih I am confident will be high, but the price (still a bit uncertain but looking not too bad) and the possibilty (I'll put it no higher) that something else will poke its head above the parapet before the ZD is available - from Kodak maybe?  or Pentax?  Who knows  :cool:  At the moment, I'm getting great results with my Kodak 14nx.

Quentin

[Graham Welland]

The Mamiya is definitely worth keeping an eye on. My guess at this point is that the 1Ds-MkII would be the better tool for shooting moving subjects with a reasonably rapid frame rate, but that the Mamiya would be the better option for more static stuff like portraits, landscapes, and studio work where the prime-only limitation of the Mamiya would not generally be a serious drawback. If I ever get into MF digital, the ZD would be something I'd seriously consider. Unless its image quality sucks.

I agree. Unless Mamiya suddenly come out with a new engineering paradigm for their zoom lenses then a 'true' DSLR like a 1D/Ds/D2x is going to be a better choice for the tough stuff. When things are more static then the ZD and Mamiya lenses are more appropriate.

I hope the image quality matches the hype (sight unseen!). If it sucks it'll hurt them badly.

[Ben Rubinstein]

Didger, if you don't need the AF then if the ZD takes the Mamiya MF lenses you could also be looking at a considerable drop in price from your expectations for some absolutely great lenses. I don't know if they will go back up in price but 2nd hand Mamiya 645 lenses are being sold for peanuts at the moment. I used to shoot landscapes with Mamiya and the 'N' lenses were impressive. Micheal used to shoot Mamiya so i'm sure he could tell you about his opinions on the lenses he had.

[Sabercat04]

I realize that stopped down metering is commonly done and I've done it. But I strongly prefer the wide open metering for my own use. That said, I certainly agree that the MF autofocus isn't what it is in 35 mm cameras and I don't use it very often.