Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,880   Posts: 1,520,483   Online: 828
      
Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567812 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 128
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,319
    Quote Originally Posted by Mainecoonmaniac View Post
    I'm saying that the perspective of a 6x7 camera with a 90mm lens is about the same perspective as a 50mm lens on a 35mm camera. The only difference is that the 6x7 camera with a 90mm lens has less depth of field than a 50mm at the same focused distance. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
    You mean field or angle of view, not perspective. Perspective depends solely upon one's point or position of view, regardless of format and focal length. Also, since the aspect ratio of 35mm is 3:2 and the aspect ratio of 6x7 is 7:6, focal length/field of view comparisons don't really work.

    I'm not really sure what the OP is asking.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    151
    Images
    8
    Using a DOF calculator (Barnack) set at CoC= 0.02mm
    35mm format: 50mm f/1.2 lens focused at 2m gives 7cm DOF
    6x7 format: 100mm f/4.5 lens focused at 2m gives 14cm DOF
    Both lenses have a view angle over the diagonal of the frame of approx. 45 degrees

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by msbarnes View Post
    I don't think any MF lens matches an 50mm f1.2 outside of maybe the contax 80mm f2 (645)or Hasselblad 110mm f2 (6x6), but both I think are incredibly expensive as well as the supporting cameras. For thinnest DOF for the money, then I think that you would want to go with the Pentax 67 105mm f2.4.

    But personally, I don't think super thin DOF is necessary and MF bokeh is incredibly smooth. I have an 80mm f2.8 lens but I prefer a little more DOF so I shoot at f4-f5.6 if light permits.


    Untitled by Michael_Sergio_Barnes, on Flickr


    11 by Michael_Sergio_Barnes, on Flickr
    thanks. unique quality of the background is good. possibly more important then wafer thin, you are right.
    Canon EOS 3, Leica M6 TTL
    Fuji X-E1, Sony RX1
    harold.co.il

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by msbarnes View Post
    Oh and I'm no bokeh expert but Mamiya's reputation is not the best.
    what are the issues with Mamiya ? and what camera(s) are good in your opinion ?
    Canon EOS 3, Leica M6 TTL
    Fuji X-E1, Sony RX1
    harold.co.il

  5. #15
    Klainmeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Santa Fe, NM
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,493
    Images
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by colonel View Post
    what are the issues with Mamiya ? and what camera(s) are good in your opinion ?
    I've heard this repeated over and over, yet everytime I see a pic from a M645 or a M7, I think it's fine. But I'm no expert in this field.

    Have you looked into the Mamiya 645 series? The 80mm 1.9 and the 55 2.8 are both fine lenses that could give great effect.
    K.S. Klain

  6. #16
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,163
    Images
    289
    Depth of field is a result of the size of the aperture.

    For example:
    A 35mm lens at f/1.4 has a 25mm aperture.
    A 100mm lens at f/4 has a 25mm aperture.
    A 400mm lens at f/16 has a 25mm aperture.
    They will all have the same depth of field at those f/stops.

    That is the math behind it. Once you know the size aperture (depth of field) you like to shoot at you can start comparing lenses.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  7. #17
    msbarnes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    379
    Images
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by colonel View Post
    what are the issues with Mamiya ? and what camera(s) are good in your opinion ?
    My favorite type of photography is available light portraits so I can't help but pay attention to bokeh.

    I am qualified to answer this question because I only use Rolleiflex cameras for reasons that are independent to the bokeh properties.

    This is only from what I've read but...

    Most MF lenses (Pentax, Mamiya TLR/SLR, Hasselblad, Bronica, etc.) seem to be suitable/good but the Mamiya RF lenses seem to be knocked down the most and also Fuji RF lenses. From what I've read, the Mamiya Rangefinder lenses were designed to be very high contrast and so the bokeh is very busy. Similar with the Fuji RF's (The GF670 is an exception though). Most people believe that the bokeh on these RF lenses are either bad or "suiteable" but nobody really raves about them.

    The most hyped MF bokeh for a normal lens typically belongs to:
    Rolleiflex 80mm f2.8,
    Nikkor 80mm f2.8 (Plaubel Makina), and
    Hasselblad 110mm f2.0 (really expensive though and you need a 200/2000 series Hasselblad).

    But these are all very different cameras.

    I've had 5 Rollei's from MX-EVS (Tessar) to 2.8E (Planar), and they've all been excellent:

    Even the Tessar:

    Untitled by Michael_Sergio_Barnes, on Flickr
    Michael | tumblr

  8. #18
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,194
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    435
    I have no complaints about the bokeh from my Mamiya 180mm f4.5 for my RB67. But that's a different animal than the Mamiya 7 or a Fuji rangefinder. But I do agree overall with msbarnes - the bokeh king in hand-held medium format is the Rollei f2.8 lens.





    Both taken with a Rollei 2.8E with the Planar lens.

  9. #19
    Klainmeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Santa Fe, NM
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,493
    Images
    30
    Well, here's one shot on the M7II 80mm @ 5.6

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	C+D.jpg 
Views:	122 
Size:	106.5 KB 
ID:	67473
    K.S. Klain

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    St. Louis, Mo.
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    741
    Quote Originally Posted by colonel View Post
    Thanks. so are you saying that a 6x7 lens of 100mm f4 would be equivalent to a 35mm lens of 50mm f2, but the 6x7 lens wold still provide less DOF ?
    Normally they tell you to double the focal length of a lens that you use with a 35mm camera to get what you want with a 6x7 camera. Of course this is an approximation. Also a 6x7 camera's viewfinder and negative are more square than a 35mm camera's so it will still look a bit different. I used a 180mm for tight portraiture on my Mamiya RZ67. It had the same depth of field as my 180mm lens on my Contax 35mm camera. Of couse it had less depth of field than the 100mm that I used for tight portraiture with my Contax.

    I'm no lens expert but from my understanding, Bokeh is determined by the lens aperture. The more aperture blades a lens has, the more circular the aperture. Lenses with great Bokeh have a very circular aperture.

Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567812 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin