Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Hasselblad 150 f/4 CF vs Mamiya AF 150 f/3.5

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    France
    Posts
    193
    Post Thanks / Like

    Hasselblad 150 f/4 CF vs Mamiya AF 150 f/3.5

    From an optical point of view, which one would you recommend ?

    I can buy either for about the same price, and would use it on a Mamiya 645 body. The AF/MF difference is no big deal to me, unless the optic formula is different.

    Thanks.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Holland
    Posts
    158
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad 150 f/4 CF vs Mamiya AF 150 f/3.5

    Both of these have quite a classic MF rendering, the sonnar look is probably the best known. The mamiya look is a bit warmer in my opinion (not necessarily color, but the rendering).
    The Sonnar 150 2.8 F/FE is beautiful too, and might be worth a look if it works on your camera. I really like the focus fall off and the shallow depth of field of that one.
    But choosing one over the other is like picking from a menu in a nice restaurant, you're guaranteed a decent meal, but everyone still makes their own decision on what to eat based on personal preference.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    France
    Posts
    193
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad 150 f/4 CF vs Mamiya AF 150 f/3.5

    Thanks. I wish I could test them and compare.

    The OOF highlights I could see on some Sonnar samples seemed a bit harsh sometimes, the Mamiya is apparently a bit smoother in this regard. Since I would use the lens primarily for portraits, it's a important point (that and a gentle focus-oof transition).
    Have yo used them with digital backs too ?

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    39
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad 150 f/4 CF vs Mamiya AF 150 f/3.5

    Like Jerufo I would recommend the F 150/2,8 over the 150/4 Sonnar. It is not even expensive these days and has beautiful bokeh. You could also adapt the Jena Sonnar 180/2,8, which has about the smoothest oof rendering possible.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.S. Canada
    Posts
    2,010
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad 150 f/4 CF vs Mamiya AF 150 f/3.5

    I've not used the AF 150/3.5, but the manual focus version (IIRC the formula is the same) is not very impressive in terms of resolving power but IIRC the bokeh was nice. It's faster manual focus 150/2.8 brother is $%^ stellar on all counts, as is the AF version by reputation. Have not used the Hassy 150/4. The Hassy 110/2 is also excellent.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    38
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: Hasselblad 150 f/4 CF vs Mamiya AF 150 f/3.5

    Quote Originally Posted by robmac View Post
    I've not used the AF 150/3.5, but the manual focus version (IIRC the formula is the same) is not very impressive in terms of resolving power but IIRC the bokeh was nice. It's faster manual focus 150/2.8 brother is $%^ stellar on all counts, as is the AF version by reputation. Have not used the Hassy 150/4. The Hassy 110/2 is also excellent.
    Right now I am testing following lenses on Phase one DF and IQ180 back.
    Hasselblad 150mm 2.8
    Mamiya 150mm 2.8
    Hasselblad 120mm Macro
    Hasselblad 110 2.0
    Pentagon Zeiss 180mm 2.8
    Russian Kaleinar 150mm 2.8
    The best results I got from Hasselblad 120 Macro and 110 F2
    Hasselblad 150 2.8 has minor cleaning marks but still bether microdetails than Mamiya 150 2.8
    Sonnar 180 is fantastic lens, but bulky,Has nuys bokeh.
    Russian Kaleinar 150 2.8 is bulky to and not good as Hasselblad 150 2,8
    I hop this will halp you to deside.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    France
    Posts
    193
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad 150 f/4 CF vs Mamiya AF 150 f/3.5

    Thanks all for sharing your experience, much appreciated !

    I've eventually settled on the Mamiya AF 150/3.5 which, to me, exhibits quite pleasing OOF areas and a "natural" transition from in-focus ones. I agree the sharpness is nothing extraordinary, and the micro-contrast could be a bit more pronounced, but for portraits this should provide a good basis to work on.
    Had money not been a concern, I admit I'd have probably grabbed the 150/2.8

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •