As Tim said in the post above both of those lenses--particularly the 127--are very sharp indeed. The 127 is perfect for midsection & up shots, the 180 for the headshots. You'll be able to focus pretty close with the 127; you might look at KEH.com for the lenses and an extension ring for even closer focusing, as their prices on all three items (the 127, the 180 and the extension ring) are very cheap.
Thanks for the advice folks I will look into the 127 mm
Originally Posted by luis ducoing
I have never used the RZ series of lenses, but to my knowledge the RZ lenses are usually optically the same formulations as the K/L series of lenses for the RB series, and the 140mm Macro K/L is certainly superior (resolution, flare-resistance) to the old C-series lens I use, and posted about here.
So, the RZ 140mm Macro can only be better, you can't go wrong. The one thing the 150mm 3.5 will buy you is shallower depth-of-field, so for typical portraits that would be my lens of choice. But for close-up optical quality, I don't think there is contest between any other lens in the Mamiya line and the Macro, none of them are as highly corrected.
It all thus depends on what you need...
This weekend I scanned a rather un-artistic shot where I wished to illustrate (for this thread) the level of optical correction of the 140 Macro. I have earlier-on shown the good performance at infinity, here it is at the opposite end of the spectrum: Around 2:1 magnification (I think, but it's more than 1.5:1 in anyway) by stacking two 82mm extension tubes, and adjusting the lens' floating element to minimum focusing distance. This is slightly outside the intended usage range of this lens (which end at a No.1 + No.2 tube, not two No.2 tubes).
A close-up of mould (fungus, no idea which type) growing on a Papaya fruit (natural lighting, this was a long exposure):
Now this image is limited by three factors, I imagine:
- A *very* heavy and unwieldy camera combination on a poor (1950s) tripod. Mirror-lockup seems to have done the trick though, the leaf-shutter is marvelously vibration-free for this sort of work.
- As ever, a non-professional scanner with flimsy plastic film-holders.
- Shallow DOF, yet also some diffraction by shooting at f/22 to get as much DOF as possible. Shooting at f/32 or smaller would have made it even softer.
I have extensive experience with Macro lenses from Olympus and Canon, and (aided by the 6x7cm format being 'easier' on lenses for resolving power, no doubt) none of those systems have a single Macro lens that can do infinity to 2:1 this well. Of course, none of those systems have a Macro lens as darned difficult to use as this one!
That's a good shot! I regularly use my RB67 in the field with the 140 macro plus the no. 1 and 2 tubes stacked together. It is quite a heavy setup, but with a focussing rail, mirror lockup and the chimney finder surprisingly easy to use. The only downside is trying to remember which knob to loosen on the tripod/ball head/focussing rail/camera to stop the whole thing from flopping over with an alarming 'thunk'. The quality makes it worthwhile. Interestingly, the manual for the RB67 ProS states that the 127mm lens is the only one that will not have vignetting when the no. 1 and 2 tubes are stacked together, but I can't say that I've ever seen it in other lenses.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Thanks! And yes, that may be so, but the 127mm with two tubes is going to have some pretty bad image quality in the corners! More of a stop-gap solution in my opinion.
Originally Posted by xtolsniffer
After more than two years, I have to say that the 140mm Macro is still my favourite lens for this camera. The print quality is just exquisite, in large prints (such as this one) detail is resolved right to grain level in the corners.
Much as I've dabbled in smaller formats recently - and envy the quickness of shooting - there is still something really special about the quality of the prints from 6x7cm monochrome film. I have started to dabble in 4x5in also, but on that end of the scale, one cannot grab a snapshot like this easily when an opportunity presents itself. I guess this beast of a camera really might be the perfect all-round camera
(Ilford HP5+ [6x7cm], 140mm at f/8, 12x16in analogue hand print)
This week-end, I printed the following two images taken through the 140 Macro. It was during a Sunshower ("Jakkals trou met wolf se vrou") which are always lovely events to photograph, due to the very special quality of the light:
The 140 Macro is a very high-contrast lens, but I enjoy the exceptionally gentle roll-off of the highlights. Both captured on Ilford FP4+ (Mamiya RB67 Professional).
Last edited by philosomatographer; 03-28-2011 at 06:14 AM. Click to view previous post history.
I think Im bumping up an older thread here, sorry.
Wow, maybe I really should hunt down one of those macro lenses at some stage. Now that I've actually heard something about them. All I have at the moment on my pro sd is the 127mm, which I might add has done me great service and will continue to.
There is more than one way to skin this cat and it important since the difference in focal length is so small.
First might be an extension tube or even two; these allow macro use, closer focus, on any lens in this system.
Second is a shorter lens which can focus closer normally, if that's what your really looking for.
Given that all the lenes available for this system with the possible exception of the 50 are really great; my thought is that a such a small change, 127 to 140, will not result in a truly meaningful difference.
Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR
"We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin