PDA

View Full Version : mamiya c330 macro



RIchardn
10-02-2007, 07:20 AM
I have a c330 which I have been using for portrait and architectural work. I am now thinking about trying some macro photography.
is it possible with this camera and which lens is best suited for this?
any tips gratefeully received
Richard

kraker
10-02-2007, 07:31 AM
I have a c330 which I have been using for portrait and architectural work. I am now thinking about trying some macro photography.
is it possible with this camera and which lens is best suited for this?
any tips gratefeully received
Richard

I own the "slightly" older C3 with 65 and 80mm lenses. Didn't really get into macro with it yet, but the paramender is an accessory that will make life a lot easier if you want to do macro. See Graham Patterson's FAQ (http://www.btinternet.com/~g.a.patterson/mfaq/m_faq-6.html#Heading85). After I managed to buy a paramender, I tried a few macro shots with the 80mm lens, and it looks OK. Still, without any DOF preview, I don't think it will be the ultimate macro camera... :p

David H. Bebbington
10-02-2007, 07:36 AM
I own the "slightly" older C3 with 65 and 80mm lenses. Didn't really get into macro with it yet, but the paramender is an accessory that will make life a lot easier if you want to do macro. See Graham Patterson's FAQ (http://www.btinternet.com/~g.a.patterson/mfaq/m_faq-6.html#Heading85). After I managed to buy a paramender, I tried a few macro shots with the 80mm lens, and it looks OK. Still, without any DOF preview, I don't think it will be the ultimate macro camera... :p

When I owned Mamiya TLRs, I found the 80 mm fine for macro - IIRC, you can go to nearly life size. If DOF preview is an issue, there was one lens (I think it was called 105 mm DS, for "double stop") which had iris diaphragms on both the viewing and taking lenses.

steven_e007
10-04-2007, 02:28 AM
One advantage of the mamiya TLRs for macro is the very generous bellows extension. Closest focussing distances are very close! I've found it works really well with either the 80 or 55mm lenses - but you must have a paramender. Also, it must be a GOOD paramender! The earlier model can wear a bit so the camera can droop a little and also rock from side to side. Not much, but when doing macro a tiny movement will upset the framing, so better to invest in a mint Paramender mark 2 than pick up the cheapest thing you see on eBay.

Of course, if living macro is your thing (butterflies and stuff...), forget it, the one disadvantage is that cranking the paramender up and down does kinda wreck the spontinaity and yes, the damn things always fly off. Nearly as bad as the time lag from pressing the button to the camera taking the picture on a digital ;-)

I also saw the double iris lens for sale on eBay recently. I've never used one, but they are about...

benjiboy
10-05-2007, 05:16 AM
I find with the 55m/m W/A lens you can get 1:1 (lifesize) ,but don't forget to increase you're exposure to allow for the bellows extention.

RIchardn
10-12-2007, 02:40 AM
THanks for you help and advice I'll give it a go.
How much compensation do you need to make for the bellows?
regards
RIchard

Mike Wilde
10-12-2007, 07:17 AM
in my c330f the lens length in use is set to matched up to a dial setting on the side where the lensboard release knob is. This sets a cam in the right location to drive a little red flag down the left hand side of the view finder. My viewfinder has factory applied marks for 1.5x, 2.0x, 2.5x, and maybe 2.75x - this is from memory.

TheFlyingCamera
10-12-2007, 10:21 AM
Bellows compensation is pretty straightforward. For whatever lens you're using, no compensation is required when the lens is focused at infinity. At life size magnification (1:1), the bellows is extended 2x the focal length, and requires 2 stops. At 1/2 life size, the bellows is 1.5x the focal length at infinity, and requires 1 stop. From there you can calculate your intermediate compensation factors. Below 1/4 life size (a half-stop) unless you're shooting chromes, I wouldn't worry about exposure compensation, because you can't set less than a half-stop on the shutter speed anyway. With the Mamiya C2xx/3xx lenses, I don't know if the fstops are marked in less than 1/2 stop increments, but they're small enough it would be hard to precisely set a quarter-stop increment.

Dan Fromm
10-12-2007, 12:16 PM
Mechanical shutters' speed settings increment by half stops? None of mine do, which are you thinking of?

TheFlyingCamera
10-12-2007, 12:45 PM
I wasn't thinking about mechanical shutters per se. I was thinking about exposure control. So shoot me for implying you could set a half-speed on a mechanical shutter.

Again, not having shot with a C2xx/3xx Mamiya, I'm not familiar with the specifics of aperture/shutter speed settings for their lenses, so you'll forgive me for suggesting some combination of settings that are not available on that specific piece of gear. As I already noted, you'd be lucky to be able to set anything other than half-stops for aperture settings, so the greatest precision you'd have would be 1/2 stop. More precise than 1/2 stop you'd not be able to detect in a print, and even with a chrome you'd have a hard time seeing a 1/4 stop difference.

David H. Bebbington
10-12-2007, 01:02 PM
Bellows compensation is pretty straightforward. For whatever lens you're using, no compensation is required when the lens is focused at infinity. At life size magnification (1:1), the bellows is extended 2x the focal length, and requires 2 stops. At 1/2 life size, the bellows is 1.5x the focal length at infinity, and requires 1 stop. From there you can calculate your intermediate compensation factors. Below 1/4 life size (a half-stop) unless you're shooting chromes, I wouldn't worry about exposure compensation, because you can't set less than a half-stop on the shutter speed anyway. With the Mamiya C2xx/3xx lenses, I don't know if the fstops are marked in less than 1/2 stop increments, but they're small enough it would be hard to precisely set a quarter-stop increment.

The only practical aspect to note is that exposure compensation is in fact dependent on the number of multiples of back focus distance the lens is extended, not focal length as such. From what I remember of my Mamiya TLRs, all the lenses up to 80 mm were retrofocus designs (back focus longer than focal length), the 105 was of conventional design, and all the longer lenses (135, 180, 250) were telephotos (back focus shorter than focal length).

Regards,

David

Dan Fromm
10-12-2007, 02:33 PM
David, are you sure its back focus and not focal length? Really, really sure?

If you are, please direct me to a reference.

Cheers,

Dan

David H. Bebbington
10-13-2007, 01:37 AM
David, are you sure its back focus and not focal length? Really, really sure?

If you are, please direct me to a reference.

Cheers,

Dan

Haven't got a reference, but the principle worked for me when I had a Mamiya TLR!

Regards,

David

David H. Bebbington
10-13-2007, 01:50 AM
Dan, I just made an experiment with my "office ornament" Speed Graphic and a 240 mm Tele-Arton:

Camera extension at infinity focus 6.5", camera extension at nearly life-size (1:1) 12.5 inches (no more available on camera). Certainly no question of needing twice the focal length (480 mm extension) to get to 1:1.


Regards,

David

k_jupiter
10-13-2007, 02:47 AM
Ummm... Why don't you look at the chart on the side of the bellows? C220 gives bellows exposure factor on a line at the bottom.

Poisonally, I would buy a rb67 with a 90mm lens and a #2 extender tube. Throw the dang paramender away.

tim in san jose

David H. Bebbington
10-17-2007, 09:19 PM
David, are you sure its back focus and not focal length? Really, really sure?

If you are, please direct me to a reference.

Cheers,

Dan

I was just glancing through my Kodak Professional Photoguide (3rd edition, 1998) and found an entry on close-up exposure (pp. 46 - 47) which confirms that the usual formula does not work with retrofocus or telephoto lenses. Kodak suggests a formula for these lenses:

Exposure factor = (M/P + 1)

where
M = Magnification
P = Pupillary magnification

P is calculated as rear exit pupil diameter divided by front entrance pupil diameter (so it is specific to a particular lens).

Will send PDF file of these pages to anyone interested.

Regards,

David

Dan Fromm
10-18-2007, 05:07 AM
Oh. Correction for pupillary magnification. Well-known, been around forever, but often ignored.

When I bought my PB-4 in 1970, a sheet giving magnification vs. exposure factor curves for many, many Nikkors was packed with it. The curves for w/a lenses, all retrofocus, are terrifying.

IIRC, there's a full discussion, with formulae for lens facing normally and lens reversed in Lefkowitz.

Cheers,

Dan