Your favourite “bang for the buck” lenses

[anyone]

Okay, back to bang for buck: the best option in this range which I got recommended here was the Pentax 67 55mm 4. It’s cheap and good, although it’s a little large.

I stayed away from the Pentax 645 A 55mm 2.8 due to mixed reports, even though newer version may be better, but lack the aperture ring.

Yes, besides Hasselblad V Zeiss glass which I like a lot, it seems I also got to be a Pentax fanboy.

 

[rdeloe]

Oh, I bet, and will give it a try. What I'm getting out of this is experience with shift lenses at longer than 35mm on a small medium format, or (43mm on a full size Phase One). While you get less keystone distortion with the longer lenses, I'm learning about the advantages of not HAVING to correct them - more foreground width, for one. Everything I've spent on Mamiya and Pentax 645 lenses wouldn't add up to one Rodenstock, so it's a big bang for the buck education. Which is why we're in this thread, after all.

Matt

Wait until you discover how nice Mamiya 7 lenses can be. But that's a step up in price and commitment due to the needed hacking. Mamiya RZ lenses seem to be terrific too, but are in a different weight class. John Leathwick is very happy with his RZ 50mm (the newer design).

This is a throw-away test shot I made yesterday with my Mamiya G 50mm f/4 -- the widest lens for the Mamiya 6 system. The 50mm position of my GF 35-70mm lens is sharper and crisper than the old Mamiya G. But in a scene like this, where it's sky above, I can shift it 15mm without a lot of light falloff and no colour change. This image is 10mm of rise. I shot an LCC frame alongside this to see if it was needed. To my eye, if I used the LCC frame, I would be using a vignette to add a bit of darkening in the sky -- so the LCC frame is pointless.

 

[MGrayson]

Wait until you discover how nice Mamiya 7 lenses can be. But that's a step up in price and commitment due to the needed hacking. Mamiya RZ lenses seem to be terrific too, but are in a different weight class. John Leathwick is very happy with his RZ 50mm (the newer design).

This is a throw-away test shot I made yesterday with my Mamiya G 50mm f/4 -- the widest lens for the Mamiya 6 system. The 50mm position of my GF 35-70mm lens is sharper and crisper than the old Mamiya G. But in a scene like this, where it's sky above, I can shift it 15mm without a lot of light falloff and no colour change. This image is 10mm of rise. I shot an LCC frame alongside this to see if it was needed. To my eye, if I used the LCC frame, I would be using a vignette to add a bit of darkening in the sky -- so the LCC frame is pointless.

View attachment 211017

Very nice!

I have a Mamiya 7II with the 43mm, 50mm or 65mm (I forget which), and 85mm. The 43 is stupendous, but I know from your experience how hard it is to adapt. And if I ever use a film camera again, it will be that lens on the Mamiya.

 

[rdeloe]

Very nice!

I have a Mamiya 7II with the 43mm, 50mm or 65mm (I forget which), and 85mm. The 43 is stupendous, but I know from your experience how hard it is to adapt. And if I ever use a film camera again, it will be that lens on the Mamiya.

Mamiya did such a good job with these lenses. The 43mm has become my favourite lens -- a focal length that suits me well, and outstanding image quality. It's a shame I can only shift 4mm because of the big rear end, but so it goes.

I suspect I'm telling you things you already know... but for posterity and other readers, the Mamiya N 50mm is apparently the same design as the 43mm, and is a complete redesign over the Mamiya G 50mm for the Mamiya 6 system. The MTF chart for the Mamiya N 50mm suggests it's fantastic. I don't have one because it shares the big rear end of the 43mm. The G 50mm has a diminutive rear end that clears the mount, allowing shift within the whole image circle. I don't take it out much anymore because I rarely need a lot of shift, and do well with the 43mm and the 65mm. But it's nice to have something in the 50mm focal length that shifts a lot.

 

[scho]

Couple of Pentax 645 shots on the GFX 100s via the Kipon T/S adapter. Also shot through a window in this miserable February weather.

Pentax-A 55/2.8 3 degrees tilt

Pentax-A 75/2.8 4 degrees tilt

 

[Focusrite]

I stayed away from the Pentax 645 A 55mm 2.8 due to mixed reports, even though newer version may be better, but lack the aperture ring.

I can happily vouch for the Pentax 645 D-FA 55mm f2.8. I use it on the GFX50R with a modded tilt-shift adapter and stitch 2:1 panoramas from 11mm shifts. The edges and corners are good ( not great ), and it needs to be stopped down for edge sharpness. It's never bitingly sharp across the frame (probably because I stop it down so much ) but is at a level that is satisfactory for me. I would rate the edges as being better than what the Pentax 645 A 35mm will get when shifted the same amount.

Can't vouch for how much it may or may not distort - my use is exclusively for landscapes.

Here are a couple of shifted & stitched shots that I had on hand. Unsure what aperture was used. Likely around f11 or f13, but could be as far as f16. No sharpening has been applied to either aside from the Lightroom default +25. The tree shot is focus stacked. No CA removal adjustments made.

The biggest trouble with the D-FA 55mm is that the FA 45-85mm exists. I've never compared the lenses directly ( I own the "A" version of the 45-85; it lives in a box ), but the 45-85mm has a manual aperture ring, apparently has a huge image circle in the middle of its zoom range, is excellent when stopped down, and is cheaper than the D-FA 55mm. The downside is that it's bigger and heavier. I'll have to do actually do a direct comparison at some stage - the 45-85mm might prove adequate enough to replace not only the 55mm, but also the 75mm.

 

[rdeloe]

I have been dismissive of the 55/2.8 A Pentax because of the strong field curvature. It looks like you found a way to work with it. It's a light, compact lens that is quite sharp in the central portion.

The 45-85 is a large and heavy lens, but it's the best 45mm lens in the entire Pentax medium format lineup, including 6x7. It's not even close. It's commonly asserted that the 85mm end is weak, but I shot it side-by-side at 80mm with an APO-Digitar 80/4 and if the Pentax is weak, then so is the Digitar. I thought it was very strong.

One irritant with the 45-85 in A version is that the whole front rotates when you focus. This doesn't matter at all, unless you're using a polarizer, in which case it's quite annoying. The FA version has the same basic optics, and is internal focusing so that problem is solved. However, I've never had one to compare whether the image circle grows in the middle of the focus range. I had an FA 150-300 that didn't have that nice property, so I'm suspicious about the FA 45-85.

 

[scho]

Another through a window image derived from 3 merged images using the Kipon T/S adapter on the GFX 100s with a Pentax-A 645 55/2.8 lens at f/11. Some rise/fall lens adapter adjustments for composition and 3 degrees tilt. Cropped final image to a 4:3 aspect ratio to eliminate window frame edges. I used Keith Cooper's spreadsheet for determining appropriate tilt value for the 55 lens.

 

[diggles]

This thread inspired me to try out some older Schneider lenses designed for film. Yesterday, the Apo Symmar 100mm f/5.6 arrived and it is quite good and around $400 on ebay. I just posted a single image capture that was made with it on the Fun With Medium Format images thread.

In the image I am posting here, I pushed the image circle with the Rm3di. There is just a slight degradation in the sharpness towards the edges, but it is not much and not noticeable in the 6000px wide image I posted on Flickr.

What I did find, with only a couple hours of testing, is that really bright areas might glow a bit. I've seen this phenomenon with lenses 10 times the price so I'm not sure how much of an issue it really is with this lens. In an image like this where the light is fairly soft it is not an issue at all.

Rm3di + CFV 100C + Apo Symmar 100mm f/5.6 (2 image LR stitch with back in portrait position. About 23mm camera fall, 15mm LR)
2024-02-23-B00764-Pano by Warren Diggles, on Flickr

 

[Paul Spinnler]

I highly recommend the 150 Sironar W (dislaimer, I have an extra one for sale, but this is not why I post it now specifically, I truly believe its good) – it is sharp on an IQ4 and due to the "W" construction for 5x7 cameras back in the day even with a Rm3Di you'd be photographing within the sharp sweet spot of the lens when shifting say 30mm.

If you want a long lens that's still excellent today with sharpness edge to edge this is a nice one to consider ... yellow ring they are like 2k though.

 

[diggles]

I highly recommend the 150 Sironar W (dislaimer, I have an extra one for sale, but this is not why I post it now specifically, I truly believe its good) – it is sharp on an IQ4 and due to the "W" construction for 5x7 cameras back in the day even with a Rm3Di you'd be photographing within the sharp sweet spot of the lens when shifting say 30mm.

If you want a long lens that's still excellent today with sharpness edge to edge this is a nice one to consider ... yellow ring they are like 2k though.

That is good to know Paul, thank you! I do have the Apo Digitar 150n so that focal length covered.

I've been thinking about getting a 210 though. Based on the price, I'm assuming the APO Sironar W 210 is also good. The other one I've been looking at is the APO Symmar L 210mm. Do you have experience with either of these?

 

[MGrayson]

I hate sample variation. I'm happy to pay for premium lenses if some effort is put into making sure that they are all up to a high spec. Unfortunately, old lenses can develop crankiness with age (*cough*). A year ago, I picked up a Mamiya 645 50mm shift lens. I was not thrilled with the results, even at f/11. But was it the lens design or that particular lens?

I liked the build and mechanism, especially the color coded "how far can you shift at this orientation" scale. So I picked up another one. The second one is better. Is it a SK or Rodie? No. But it's better, even in the center.

Everything shot with an X2D at f/11. 17,600 pixels wide, 153MP, with the horizontal FoV of a 33mm lens.
Three shot pano. Only levels. This is from the newer copy, but you can't tell at this magnification.


These are all 1200px wide crops, so you're probably seeing them at 200%.

Old copy - center


New copy - center


Old copy - unshifted left edge


New copy - unshifted left edge


Old Copy - 10mm shift


New copy 10-mm shift


So not a huge difference, but noticeable. I consider the newer copy to be usable. How *useful* it will be is another matter, since the XCD 45/3.5 is an excellent lens. But I'd been casting aspersions on this lens and it seems I just had a less than perfect sample.

And if anyone wants a mediocre copy, I have one to sell - cheap!

Matt

P.S. These crops would be from an 11 foot wide print. So both would look pretty good at a mere two meters.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

That is good to know Paul, thank you! I do have the Apo Digitar 150n so that focal length covered.

I've been thinking about getting a 210 though. Based on the price, I'm assuming the APO Sironar W 210 is also good. The other one I've been looking at is the APO Symmar L 210mm. Do you have experience with either of these?

I have the Sironar Digital 210 which is the Sironar S optimised for digital and I can barely if any see a difference between the 210T.

I would just get the Sironar S stuff or the black / yellow ring W stuff.

 

[rdeloe]

So not a huge difference, but noticeable. I consider the newer copy to be usable. How *useful* it will be is another matter, since the XCD 45/3.5 is an excellent lens. But I'd been casting aspersions on this lens and it seems I just had a less than perfect sample.

And if anyone wants a mediocre copy, I have one to sell - cheap!

Matt

I'm seeing more than a minor improvement. There's more contrast, more detail, and overall much better image quality.

These lenses are old, and things happened to them. A nice case in is the Mamiya N 65mm f/4 L. I bought a nice copy a year ago, and then dropped it on the pavement on the first day. I thought it was fine because it had the springy plastic hood. However, out of all my Mamiya N lenses, it was the one that needed f/11 to be really good. I finally bit the bullet and bought another one. The difference is stark. The new one is sharp and contrasty at f/4, while the old one is glowy and soft on the edges at f/4.

At least I know what happened to my first copy. You couldn't tell from looking at it that I dropped it. Every time we buy a multi-decades old lens. we're also buying all the things that happened to it along the way.

 

[MGrayson]

I'm seeing more than a minor improvement. There's more contrast, more detail, and overall much better image quality.

These lenses are old, and things happened to them. A nice case in is the Mamiya N 65mm f/4 L. I bought a nice copy a year ago, and then dropped it on the pavement on the first day. I thought it was fine because it had the springy plastic hood. However, out of all my Mamiya N lenses, it was the one that needed f/11 to be really good. I finally bit the bullet and bought another one. The difference is stark. The new one is sharp and contrasty at f/4, while the old one is glowy and soft on the edges at f/4.

At least I know what happened to my first copy. You couldn't tell from looking at it that I dropped it. Every time we buy a multi-decades old lens. we're also buying all the things that happened to it along the way.

It’s actually worse than it looks. I mistakenly adjusted levels and contrast on the older lens images. When I do the same with the newer one, the difference is stark.

 

[MGrayson]

No pictures necessary. I compared the pano made with the newer Mamiya 50mm shift to unshifted shots with the XCD 28 the Pentax 645 35mm A at both f/8 and f/11. In all cases, the 50mm shift had more detail, even out at the edges where it was shifted and the other two lenses were not. In other words, it is worth using. Granted, it means a much larger file. While the XCD 30mm is sharper than the 28mm wide open, I don't think it would matter much at f/8 or f/11.

Matt

 

[rdeloe]

No pictures necessary. I compared the pano made with the newer Mamiya 50mm shift to unshifted shots with the XCD 28 the Pentax 645 35mm A at both f/8 and f/11. In all cases, the 50mm shift had more detail, even out at the edges where it was shifted and the other two lenses were not. In other words, it is worth using. Granted, it means a much larger file. While the XCD 30mm is sharper than the 28mm wide open, I don't think it would matter much at f/8 or f/11.

Matt

That's terrific news because a 50mm lens that can shift and doesn't cost much is very useful. The 97mm image circle on that lens technically allows for 24mm of shift on the long side on a 33mm x 44mm sensor. Even if it's only good out to 20mm, that's still 5mm more than I can manage with my Mamiya G 50mm.

On the Pentax-A 35/3.5 (and again, this is for future readers...), it is so important to get the flange distance exactly right with this lens. If the adapter is off a bit, image quality is affected. It's especially a problem on a setup like mine where you have to set the correct flange distance by adjusting the standards. On my F-Universalis, I've found that it's not enough to memorize the number on the scale and set it at that position. The difference between "a tick more than 85.5mm" and "a tick less than 85.5mm" is noticeable. My solution is I built a wooden key that I sanded down to the correct thickness. I put the key between the standards and crank them down tight.

 

[MGrayson]

That's terrific news because a 50mm lens that can shift and doesn't cost much is very useful. The 97mm image circle on that lens technically allows for 24mm of shift on the long side on a 33mm x 44mm sensor. Even if it's only good out to 20mm, that's still 5mm more than I can manage with my Mamiya G 50mm.

On the Pentax-A 35/3.5 (and again, this is for future readers...), it is so important to get the flange distance exactly right with this lens. If the adapter is off a bit, image quality is affected. It's especially a problem on a setup like mine where you have to set the correct flange distance by adjusting the standards. On my F-Universalis, I've found that it's not enough to memorize the number on the scale and set it at that position. The difference between "a tick more than 85.5mm" and "a tick less than 85.5mm" is noticeable. My solution is I built a wooden key that I sanded down to the correct thickness. I put the key between the standards and crank them down tight.

The Pentax 35m A images are sharp. They are just at a disadvantage being 35mm rather than 50mm. I imagine that a Schneider Kreuznach 35XL might produce more detail than the Mamiya 50, but I can't really use that on the X2D.

 

[John Leathwick]

Some interesting options still coming out of the woodwork. I've been distracted by family matters, but managed to take time out to buy a small 180mm of excellent reputation to round out my lightweight Universalis kit. It's on the way, and I'll report idc...

John

 

[rdeloe]

The Pentax 35m A images are sharp. They are just at a disadvantage being 35mm rather than 50mm. I imagine that a Schneider Kreuznach 35XL might produce more detail than the Mamiya 50, but I can't really use that on the X2D.

I see what you meant now.

Speaking of those two 35mm lenses... At 100% I'd say they're a wash based on these unedited samples.