Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,760   Posts: 1,516,078   Online: 911
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Central Florida, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,907

    Mamiya RZ 50mm f/4.5W how good/bad?

    I am in process of selecting pieces for my RZ kit.

    On the other thread I had going, many advised, the original RZ 50mm f/4.5 W (non floating element and non ULD version) is not great. I have been advised to get the ULD version at much greater cost.

    In my understanding and PM by someone, floating element is often employed to correct flatness issue at close focus range.

    So here's a question for folks who owned this lens. In landscape type usage where lens is typically focused from say 10 yard away to infinity, how does this lens perform?

    I would like to hear from folks who owns or owned this lens, please. I read up plenty so I really don't need second hand information at this point.
    Develop, stop, fix.... wait.... where's my film?

  2. #2
    Mainecoonmaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,885
    Images
    6
    I own one and it's not bad. But I have never shot a uld version for comparison. The floating element version is out of my price range.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Central Florida, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,907
    Thanks. Can you elaborate/characterize what you are seeing, please?
    Develop, stop, fix.... wait.... where's my film?

  4. #4
    brucemuir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Metro DC area, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,265
    Images
    4
    I have it now but haven't shot it that much really.
    I did do some tests when I first got it because everyone always say's "get the floating element version".

    I thought my copy performed quite well.
    I like to think I have high standards for lenses and own too many to count off the top of my head in formats from 135 to 4x5.

    I'm sure the newer version is better but I cant complain yet.
    I haven't really tested the non floater for distortion and I think someone mentioned it exhibits this flaw so if you are into architecture you should probably opt for the floating version.

    For landscapes I know I would be fine with the older non floating "w' version.

  5. #5
    Mainecoonmaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,885
    Images
    6
    It's pretty sharp. But I think my Mamiya RB 65mm is slightly sharper.
    Why don't you buy one from a shop that will allow returns? Shoot with it and if the sharpness suits you, keep it. Also check out Flickr like I did. The best I could describe the sharpness as not startling like German lenses.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Central Florida, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,907
    Yup... testing it personally would be the best but... (there's always but...)

    I am at a stage where I am planning my first RZ kit - meaning I don't have one yet. Since my use will be both landscape and portrait, wide and short tele will be important part of my kit. I'm trying to find out if W would be sufficient for MY needs or ULD will really be required. That will change the total cost of this kit significantly.

    I tend to be very picky about lens. But I keep thinking, if Mamiya produced it, it had to be good for something.... in a way pro will be satisfied.
    Develop, stop, fix.... wait.... where's my film?

  7. #7
    brucemuir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Metro DC area, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,265
    Images
    4
    I have never been dissatisfied with Mamiya glass.
    I think the only one people complain about is the old non "C" 50 for the RB.

    My non floating 50 for the RZ was decent even wide open in the center.

  8. #8
    Mainecoonmaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,885
    Images
    6

    That's my impression too

    Quote Originally Posted by brucemuir View Post
    I have never been dissatisfied with Mamiya glass.
    I think the only one people complain about is the old non "C" 50 for the RB.

    My non floating 50 for the RZ was decent even wide open in the center.
    That's my impression too. Bottom line for me that it's not a bad lens. Quite good actually. But don't know if the floating element version is that much better. If it is, I can't afford it anyway so I'm not going to obsess over it.

  9. #9
    polyglot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    South Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,053
    Images
    12
    I'll go scan some old negs I shot with the 50 W you like. And I have plenty from the 65 M-LA for comparison.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Richmond VA.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,707
    I do have a 50c for my RB67, have been quite happy with it.

    Jeff

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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