The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Mamiya A 200mm F/2.8 APO thoughts.

CVPEDU

New member
Hi y'all - so I moved to medium format from a Nikon, where I had a 200 f/2.0 lens that I dearly loved.

Does anyone have any thoughts on the Mamiya A 200mm F/2.8 APO? - wondering if it can deliver that smooth super thin DOF like the 200 f/2 did on Nikon?
and is it sharp!?

thanks so much!
 

segedi

Member
Don't have experience with that particular lens, but do have medium format experience. A 200mm/2.8 should give you plenty of smoothness and even a more razor thin DOF - especially at closer working distances. I tend to think of f/2.8 as an f/1.4 equivalent on 6x7 and 6x6. And a 1.8 with 645. I'd say that lens should give you even more of what you are after than w/ the Nikon!
 

CVPEDU

New member
Don't have experience with that particular lens, but do have medium format experience. A 200mm/2.8 should give you plenty of smoothness and even a more razor thin DOF - especially at closer working distances. I tend to think of f/2.8 as an f/1.4 equivalent on 6x7 and 6x6. And a 1.8 with 645. I'd say that lens should give you even more of what you are after than w/ the Nikon!
thanks! thats kinda what I was thinking...

are there any other recommendations for extreme DOF? I was looking at the 80 1.9, however, I dunno if its worth it, since I have a 80MM Schneider Kreuznach 2.8 LS
 

Bernard

Member
A 2.8/200 in medium format is more or less an equivalent to a 2.0/135 in 35mm. There is a Mamiya 2.8/300 that's a good match for your Nikon 2.0/200 in terms of angle of view, and depth of field..

I have the Mamiya 200, and it's definitely sharp. The focus ring isn't as smooth as it could be, which can make it hard to nail your focus plane, especially near infinity where the slightest nudge will move your peak sharpness point by 50 feet.
 

robmac

Active member
Used it on 35mm with adapter. Marvellous glass. Very sharp, nice bokeh, great tonality & CA control. As other poster mentioned focus mechanics could be a bit smoother, but not big deal. Works really well with a quality 1.4x.

Note the lens has two hoods, one smaller pull-out one that's permanently attached and a second larger one that screws onto the first. When buying ensure you get both if at all possible.

The 80/1.9 is fantastic as are the 150/2.8 ULD and the 120/4 macro. I still have the 150 and 120 and would love to re-acquire the 80 and 200 one day.
 

CVPEDU

New member
Also, anyone have any experience with the Type C (Microprism) focus screen? and if it would be helpful for manually focusing?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1111964-REG/mamiya_70758_focusing_screen_type_c.html

I find, that the DOF even at f/4 with the 80LS is difficult to gt a headshot in focus, since the AF spot in the body is basically the size of the entire face, it doesnt often know which part of the face to grab... and often not the eyes.

I feel like manual focus should be the option, but that's difficult too, outside.

thanks!
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
I find, that the DOF even at f/4 with the 80LS is difficult to gt a headshot in focus, since the AF spot in the body is basically the size of the entire face, it doesnt often know which part of the face to grab... and often not the eyes.
If Ken or Don were around they'd tell you the solution is simple... upgrade to an XF :). The spot-AF setting on the XF is very very small.
 

weinlamm

Member
Still interested in comparison Nikon 200/2 to Mamiya 200/2.8?

In the case of: which distance...? More near or infinitely?
 

gerald.d

Well-known member
Hi -

If you're after something close to the Nikon 200/2.0 on 35mm, you might also want to consider the Mamiya 300/2.8.

Kind regards,


Gerald.

/edit - oops, I see Bernard suggested that last week :D
 

CVPEDU

New member
Still interested in comparison Nikon 200/2 to Mamiya 200/2.8?

In the case of: which distance...? More near or infinitely?
I was more curious like DOF for a portrait, maybe half length or headshot...
I am considering my options, I just want amazing bokeh :)
 

anyone

Well-known member
I am aware that I am digging out a quite old thread. Are here any owners of the 200mm 2.8 who still use it? Possibly on one of the current mirrorless medium format cameras? Are you happy with it on 50/100MP?

What is a fair price for this lens nowadays?
Thank you!
 
Last edited:

rawlit

New member
I am aware that I am digging out a quite old thread. Are here any owners of the 200mm 2.8 who still use it? Possibly on one of the current mirrorless medium format cameras? Are you happy with it on 50/100MP?

What is a fair price for this lens nowadays?
Thank you!
I'm using it on Phase One XF and IQ260, I'm happy with it, although this system is quite heavy and I seldom use it.

On GFX kit is lighter and gets more use although you're losing too much of the lens coverage and intended use.

Ideally this lens is best used on film, where its APO characteristics shine!

As for prices check ebay, i see there's one selling now.

Alex.
rawlit.com
 

anyone

Well-known member
Thank you, Alex!

I would use the lens for occasional portraits, but mainly landscape. So besides the nice bokeh, infinity sharpness at medium apertures would be an important consideration. It would fill the gap between two Hasselblad lenses, the 180mm / 4 and 250mm Superachromat.
 

FloatingLens

Active member
Thank you, Alex!

I would use the lens for occasional portraits, but mainly landscape. So besides the nice bokeh, infinity sharpness at medium apertures would be an important consideration. It would fill the gap between two Hasselblad lenses, the 180mm / 4 and 250mm Superachromat.
Interesting for you to say... the difference between 180mm and 250mm in medium format is noticeable, but not significant enough to justify another dedicated 200mm lens in between, in my experience that is.
 

anyone

Well-known member
Interesting for you to say... the difference between 180mm and 250mm in medium format is noticeable, but not significant enough to justify another dedicated 200mm lens in between, in my experience that is.
Probably true - but I also try to supplement my Hasselblad-Kit by very good lenses that don't have an exact match in the V system.

I would be curious about further real-world usage opinions on that lens, wide open, but also at medium apertures infinity for landscapes.
 
Last edited:

Paul2660

Well-known member
Remember if you plan to use the 200 F 2.8 on the XF, the lens has to be modified as won't fit the XF as is. SK Grimes (not sure if they are still around) could do this but cost was around 250.00 US so I just used the lens on the GFX 50s. I would have preferred to use it on the XF and IQ backs, but never made the conversion.

I will be selling mine soon. with the GFX adapter.

Paul C
 

buildbot

Active member
Remember if you plan to use the 200 F 2.8 on the XF, the lens has to be modified as won't fit the XF as is. SK Grimes (not sure if they are still around) could do this but cost was around 250.00 US so I just used the lens on the GFX 50s. I would have preferred to use it on the XF and IQ backs, but never made the conversion.

I will be selling mine soon. with the GFX adapter.

Paul C
I recently did this conversion on an 80mm F1.9 myself - instead of using a Dremel tool, I used pair of diagonal cutting pliers to cut off the rather soft aluminum from the ring, much less scary. Though the 200mm may be built better/differently making such modification more difficult.
 
Top