The Biogon derived 43/50mm on the 7II are.... amazing :-)
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Dawid Loubser <dawidl@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> OK, I know this is off-topic (but what else is new?)
>
> Has anybody ever figured out why Mamiya lenses are so amazingly good?
> Or is it just
> me? Sure, one can accept that the lenses on the Mamiya 7 rangefinder
> are among the
> best lenses available at any cost, especially the wide-angle lenses.
>
> But I am talking here even about the retrofocus SLR lenses for the
> RB67. Specifically, I
> am talking about my scratched, slightly busted 65mm C-series wide
> angle lens, with an
> equivalent of 32mm FOV.
>
> Have a look at this recently scanned slide (Provia 100, Epson V700)
> shot wide open (notice very shallow DOF,
> blurred foreground just to prove it's taken wide open :-) in very
> demanding lighting conditions. This is a
> torture-test for any lens, with extremely bright highlights all over
> the frame.
>
> http://www.deviantart.com/download/141023473/Cubana_Full_Size_by_philosomatographer.jpg
>
> I have never personally used any wide-angle lens that can perform
> anywhere near this level. Not many
> 35mm or equiv. lenses, wide-open, will not show one bit of chromatic
> aberration or coma with these bright
> lights in the corners of the frame. And lets not even talk of the
> M.Zuiko 17mm, the "equivalent" on
> Micro four thirds, which is supposed to be 30 years newer technology
> than the Mamiya. Medium format
> resolution aside, the aberrations visible in an output image of
> similar size should have been at
> least at a similar or better level.
>
> This may be ballsy, but I'd like to see if the Leica M Summicron 35mm
> (a non-retrofocus design) can compare,
> for an image of at the same output size. (sure, I know this is medium
> format, but we can still compare relative
> lens performance by "ignoring" capture medium size, it's the output
> that counts, right?).
>
> You should see this Mamiya lens sing at f/8, it's spectacular. Man, I
> can but only imagine how good their symmetrical
> 65mm lens for the 7 rangefinder must be.
>
> Every time I lust after that OM Zuiko 35mm f/2.0 lens I can't afford
> right now, I am consoled by using this magical
> lens (which actually cost me a lot cheaper than the Zuiko :-). Ken,
> you're the lover of the Zuiko 35mm f/2.8, show
> us what it can do? (relatively speaking)
>
> Sorry for the off-topic rant, but damn, every time I use one of my
> Mamiya lenses, I realise how pedestrian most lenses
> for 35mm cameras are by comparison, and I can't understand why the
> Mamiyas should be so much better? In fact, with the
> *huge* flange to focal plane distance of the massive RB67 body (which
> is actually an 8x8cm SLR camera, i.e.
> even the Pentax67 lenses sit much closer to the film because its
> mirror is much smaller) the Mamiya lenses
> (which also cover 4x5in, by the way) should be worse. Yet, they are so
> much better than most others I've seen.
> Also, spectacular as the Schneider SA 90/5.6 XL is on the Linhof 617,
> it needs to be stopped down to f/11 for that
> level of performance. The Mamiyas are great wide open.
>
> And so cheap in the current market...
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
// richard m: richard @imagecraft.com
// w: http://www.imagecraft.com/pub/Portfolio09/ blog:
http://rfman.wordpress.com
// book: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/detail/745963
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
