Mamiya 80mm 2.8 vs 80mm 2.8 "D"? Which one?

[haring]

Is it worth spending extra $1000 on a "D" version of this lens? I heard that the D version is sharper and it has more contrast. Is it true?

I have been looking around on the net and so far I didn't find any comparison...

I would like to buy a AF 80mm lens for my camera. I have been using manual focus lenses so far and I am wasting a lot of film...

My camera doesn't operate with the 80mm LS version. So the LS is out of question.

Thanks!

 

[ggriswold]

I have had some really good results with a late model non-D. The one with the white reference "dot" for orienting the lens when you mount it. Like most Mamiya non-D lenses I think quality can be variable. What back are you using?

 

[kdphotography]

....I would like to buy a AF 80mm lens for my camera. I have been using manual focus lenses so far and I am wasting a lot of film...

....

Film? No worries----any of the 80mm will do you fine. It's when you start using the most recent generation of MFDBs that you become relegated to D series lenses or the Schneider LS lenses.

 

[haring]

Film? No worries----any of the 80mm will do you fine. It's when you start using the most recent generation of MFDBs that you become relegated to D series lenses or the Schneider LS lenses.

I see! Thanks!
Otto

 

[Steve Hendrix]

***Copied post on your same question from LL, added here just for the benefit of others.***


I have tested and compared 2 good copies of both the older AF version and the newer "D" Af version. They're very close in sharpness (similar to each other, but not nearly as identical to each other as the non D and D 120mm). The difference is the build quality (as has been noted) but also the chromatic aberrations are much more pronounced with the non D version. The coatings make a big difference.

Of course, that doesn't mean it's a deal killer, this can be adjusted in post mostly. The way I see it, it's a bargain lens if you don't have an 80. Unless it's a completely new lens from scratch, it is hard to significantly improve on an existing design if it is already a sharp lens or - more to the point - if the measurements, the design, the materials, and the production of the lens has been optimizes as far as it can go. I suppose this would be the case even with an unsharp lens that had a newer version. For this lens, it's a very sharp lens even wide open - both versions - the build quality and the improved coatings are the primary difference in the newer D model.


Steve Hendrix

 

[topgreat]

My copy of the old 80mm 2.8 is not sharp at wide-open. By stopping down about 1/2 to 1 stop, sharpness gets better. It is even softer than my 80mm 1.9 wide-open. The new D lens is sharp wide-open with better contrast as well. Build quality of the 80mm D is better, but not much. However, if you shoot at f/5.6 or f/8, it won't be much different by considering the sharpness of both.

 

[Steve Hendrix]

My copy of the old 80mm 2.8 is not sharp at wide-open. By stopping down about 1/2 to 1 stop, sharpness gets better. It is even softer than my 80mm 1.9 wide-open. The new D lens is sharp wide-open with better contrast as well. Build quality of the 80mm D is better, but not much. However, if you shoot at f/5.6 or f/8, it won't be much different by considering the sharpness of both.

Tolerances with the new D lenses are tighter as well (which adds to the cost), so fewer variances in quality compared to older versions.


Steve Hendrix

 

[Jack]

The LS versions render differently as well. Some prefer that rendering even at the premium price and I am in that group. The LS sync capability is another benefit, but a secondary one for my main uses.

Here are a few images I recently shot with the 89 LS version wide open:

 

[hotLZ-dave]

I just bought a 645 afd II body. Was looking for the 80mm f 2.8 lens and saw a big spread
in prices. There are two versions of this lens? the original 80mm af and the 80mm f 2.8D?