Which Mamiya 645 AFD II lenses are sharp??

[Henry Goh]

I have not shot with Mamiya so could people who are familiar with the 645 lenses and Zeiss ones on Hasselblad V system please give me some guidance on their quality comparisons.  Sharpness, bokeh, color etc if you can.  Thank you.

Henry

[MichaelEzra]

80mm AF and 55 mm AF are top notch.

[Henry Goh]

80mm AF and 55 mm AF are top notch.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137315\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks Michael.  How about the zooms and Macro?

[Frank Doorhof]

Love the 120MM Macro and the 105-210 AF
The 55-110 is nice, the 35mm is very nice
the 80mm f2.8 is a case of nice but not the best
Also just got the 150mm AF f3.5 and that lens is also very very sharp.

[Henry Goh]

I'm considering dumping my 3 Hasselblad V bodies and lenses and moving to another platform for MFDB.

[Henry Goh]

Love the 120MM Macro and the 105-210 AF
The 55-110 is nice, the 35mm is very nice
the 80mm f2.8 is a case of nice but not the best
Also just got the 150mm AF f3.5 and that lens is also very very sharp.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137320\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thank you Frank.

BTW, have you any of your spectacular studio images shot with the new back to share yet??

[Frank Doorhof]

Yeah on www.doorhof.nl/models
Look at the folders:
Esther 2 / Stephanie and Marie.
The new shots from them are with the leaf.

And I will be bringing the leaf with me to demo during the workshops I will be teaching in LA on the 27-28th October.

[Bernd B.]

I'm considering dumping my 3 Hasselblad V bodies and lenses and moving to another platform for MFDB.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137321\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I just bought an AFD in mint condition just to play with it a bit and I think the finder is a nightmare, even with the type "c" screen. Manual focussing is very difficult and plus the screen is out of adjustment and has to be serviced (which is normal for AFD`s, according to my Mamiya service, AFDII should be better). The finder of a Hasselblad H (or my old Pentax 645) is much more precise to focus.
The autofocus is better than you often hear about (and usually does not need to be readjusted). A friend told me it`s worse than a Nikon F4. That´s not true. But I miss an autofocus lock button or better an autofocus start button to make focussing independant of the shutter release button.
Before you sell all your Hasselblad stuff buy one and try yourself with a few rolls of film.

What´s your problem with the Hasselblad V?

[Henry Goh]

I just bought an AFD in mint condition just to play with it a bit and I think the finder is a nightmare, even with the type "c" screen. Manual focussing is very difficult and plus the screen is out of adjustment and has to be serviced (which is normal for AFD`s, according to my Mamiya service, AFDII should be better). The finder of a Hasselblad H (or my old Pentax 645) is much more precise to focus.
The autofocus is better than you often hear about (and usually does not need to be readjusted). A friend told me it`s worse than a Nikon F4. That´s not true. But I miss an autofocus lock button or better an autofocus start button to make focussing independant of the shutter release button.
Before you sell all your Hasselblad stuff buy one and try yourself with a few rolls of film.

What´s your problem with the Hasselblad V?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137389\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

No problems with the V system except I personally think with digital, their days are numbered.

[eronald]

Bernd,

I think you can move AF start to some other button with the AFDII.
In the tests I made with the AFDII the AF was precise.
As for subjective impressions about finders, they cannot be dismissed and must be assessed individually, because one of the reasons for going MF is having a better finder.

Doesn't it make more sense to assess the camera one will use rather than one of its ancestors ?

Edmund

I just bought an AFD in mint condition just to play with it a bit and I think the finder is a nightmare, even with the type "c" screen. Manual focussing is very difficult and plus the screen is out of adjustment and has to be serviced (which is normal for AFD`s, according to my Mamiya service, AFDII should be better). The finder of a Hasselblad H (or my old Pentax 645) is much more precise to focus.
The autofocus is better than you often hear about (and usually does not need to be readjusted). A friend told me it`s worse than a Nikon F4. That´s not true. But I miss an autofocus lock button or better an autofocus start button to make focussing independant of the shutter release button.
Before you sell all your Hasselblad stuff buy one and try yourself with a few rolls of film.

What´s your problem with the Hasselblad V?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137389\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Henry Goh]

I have read several times that RZ lenses are sharper than 645 ones.  Is it because when using an MFDB on RZ, we are only using the sweet centre spot of those lenses and hence get the best optically?

[Bernd B.]

Bernd,

I think you can move AF start to some other button with the AFDII.
In the tests I made with the AFDII the AF was precise.
As for subjective impressions about finders, they cannot be dismissed and must be assessed individually, because one of the reasons for going MF is having a better finder.

Doesn't it make more sense to assess the camera one will use rather than one of its ancestors ?

Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137392\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Maybe my post didn`t point out that the AF of my AFD is exact. I just don´t like that I don´t see exactly what the AF is doing (not because of the screen misalignment but because of the appearance of the finder-image).
I have that same feeling with my 5D and everytime I come come I wonder how many pictures are sharp. But I´d like to see it on the finder myself, as a feedback and to be in touch with the picture I´m just about too take. The AFDII may have an even better AF but the design of the prism hasn´t changed nor is there a newer type of focussion screen type "c". I think the problem is the design of the prism.
Generally I´d rather like to see myself loving the AFD, because I don´t like Mr. Poulsen´s "members only" attitude. But the finder of the Hasselblad H Cameras is clearer and sharper. Not brighter again.
I´m tired of bright screens and large screens that don´t show you what´s up in the picture. The AF-start feature on the AFDII is a step in the right direction but doesn´t change the main problem: without using AF you can´t exactly and easily tell the point where the focus is.
Don´t ask me if the diopter calibration is wrong or if my eyes are getting tired. Last week I played with a Hassy H for half an hour, just trying to find out something about this one point: and it was definitely much better.
Having said that I´m still a MFDB-novice with my valeo17 for Hasselblad V. The purchase of a Hassy H, if ever, is years in the future for me.

[Bernd B.]

I have read several times that RZ lenses are sharper than 645 ones.  Is it because when using an MFDB on RZ, we are only using the sweet centre spot of those lenses and hence get the best optically?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137398\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That might be the one reason.

The other one might be that the retrofocus designs of the rz cameras are more telecentric because of the larger mirror in the camera. That is quite helpful for digital capture.

I´ll get myself an adapter for my RZ soon and try it myself (comparing to the Hasselblad V lenses then).

[eronald]

Re. finders, I've played with all of those I could get my hands on.

- The Hasselblad V, I own already, this I cannot focus any more. My eyes won't cut it.
- The Hasselblad H2 most people like, I don't. It deforms, when I move the camera around I get seasick. It looks cheap. What more can I say ?
- The Contax I cannot use without an additional diopter glass. Bah!
- The Mamiya AFDII finder somehow works for me, but I too would like a focus point display. What I plan to do is buy an extra screen and get somebody to scribe two center lines for me.  Maybe there is an extra grid screen anyway ?
- The Hy6 waist-level is similat to a V Hassy, I cannot deal with it. The prism finder I haven't tried yet.
- The Mamiya ZD finder looks ok to me.
- Sadly, this just about concludes a survey of available MF bodies
- I wonder if Mamiya could be persuaded to make an MF digital rangefinder ?
Edmund

Don´t ask me if the diopter calibration is wrong or if my eyes are getting tired. Last week I played with a Hassy H for half an hour, just trying to find out something about this one point: and it was definitely much better.
Having said that I´m still a MFDB-novice with my valeo17 for Hasselblad V. The purchase of a Hassy H, if ever, is years in the future for me.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137402\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Bernd B.]

Re. finders, I've played with all of those I could get my hands on.

- The Hasselblad V, I own already, this I cannot focus any more. My eyes won't cut it.
- The Hasselblad H2 most people like, I don't. It deforms, when I move the camera around I get seasick. It looks cheap. What more can I say ?
- The Contax I cannot use without an additional diopter glass. Bah!
- The Mamiya AFDII finder somehow works for me, but I too would like a focus point display. What I plan to do is buy an extra screen and get somebody to scribe two center lines for me.  Maybe there is an extra grid screen anyway ?
- The Hy6 waist-level is similat to a V Hassy, I cannot deal with it. The prism finder I haven't tried yet.
- The Mamiya ZD finder looks ok to me.
- Sadly, this just about concludes a survey of available MF bodies
- I wonder if Mamiya could be persuaded to make an MF digital rangefinder ?
Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137404\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The ZD finder is a completely new design. All the 645 90 degree finders suffer from having to bridge over the long distance between screen and the back end of the camera. Let´s see what the Hy6 brings in here.
I wonder what you say about the H2. You are the first person who complains about this. I heard it uses a system of mirrors instead of a prism.

[Mort54]

Getting back to the original subject of this thread - lenses. I'd love to hear some feedback on the new 28 and 75-150. I've seen some reports on this forum, but I'd like to hear something more definitive. In the case of the 75-150, I'd like to hear from anyone who has shot a side by side comparison with the 55-110 and any of the primes that fall in the 75-150 range. Anybody?

[Frank Doorhof]

I tested the 75-150 for about 2 weeks.
I absolutly loved the sharpness and contrast, there really was nothing NOT too like, expect ..... FOR ME the range was in between two formats.
75 was not wide enough and 150 not tele enough.

When I bought myself I opted for the 55-110 and 105-210.
The 105-210 is a stellar lens I think equal or maybe slightly softer than the 75-150.
The 55-110 is softer but also very nice.

If you can work with the 75-150 it's a no brainer.

[Mort54]

I tested the 75-150 for about 2 weeks.
I absolutly loved the sharpness and contrast, there really was nothing NOT too like, expect ..... FOR ME the range was in between two formats.
75 was not wide enough and 150 not tele enough.

When I bought myself I opted for the 55-110 and 105-210.
The 105-210 is a stellar lens I think equal or maybe slightly softer than the 75-150.
The 55-110 is softer but also very nice.

If you can work with the 75-150 it's a no brainer.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137498\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks Frank. Have you ever shot with the 120? If so, how does it compare to 120 on the 75-150 and the 105-210. Of all the Mamiya lenses, the 120 seems to get the most glowing reviews for sharpness and contrast.

[Frank Doorhof]

The 120mm macro f4 manual is STUNNING.
It's without a doubt my best lens.

I have to say if you really want a catagorie.

I would say:
120MM macro on a solid 1.
150MM AF f3.5 solid 2.

Than the 35MM AF
Than the 105-210MM AF
Both very close, love the contrast and color of the 35MM and the 105-210 has gorgous Bokeh.

Than the 55-110
Followed by the 80mm f2.8 kitlens.

I must say that performance wise for MY eyes this is the order.
I must also say that compared to my Canon lenses the differences are a little less obvious, with the Canon lenses I hated some bokeh and loved some others, somehow on the Mamiya lenses I love them all for the bokeh.
Also color and fidelity (contrast) seem to vary little compared to some Canon lenses).

In other words the difference seem to be smaller than I experienced with my Canon glass.

[Rick_Allen]

I shot some middle aged corporate-types last week with the 120macro (it was all that was available at the time) and then spent 4 days retouching there spots. This lens is SHARP maybe too sharp.