Best lens for Mamiya C3 for portraits

I have a Mamiya C3 Pro TLR that I would like to use for portrait photography, but

only have 65, 105, and 180mm lenses. I know the 65 is out, but can the 105 or

180 be used successfully? The 180 puts me across the room, and the 105 is

close. It seems the sweet lens might be the 135. Is this the best lens for this type

of work? Thanks.

Mamiya TLRs are nice cameras for people and portraits. I think the answer is 'try

what you have, and see what works for you', but here's some comments.

 

The 105 is longish normal on 6 x 6, and will be fine for environmental portraits or

full-length shots. Most 105s were four-element tessar types, and they perform like

tessars. Later premium lenses (marked 'D' or 'DS') have a five-element heliar-like

design, so they're a little better across the field at large apertures.

 

The 135 is also a simple tessar design, and in my opinion has great rendition

or 'drawing'. You can find one fairly cheaply. I liked the 135 for head-and-

shoulders portraits, although I no longer have one.

 

The 180, like the 105, came in two flavors. The later 180 'Super' version is an

excellent lens and better corrected than the plain vanilla version. (I've only had

the 'Super' version, no experience with the other.) 180 is a good focal length for

tight heads.

 

I got rid of most of my Mamiya TLR stuff when I bought an RZ, but I hung on to the

105D, the 180 Super and a 330f body.

I wind up using the 105 most of the time for head and shoulder portraits in the home... I like this lens better than the 135... Using fine grain film, and backing off one step with the 105 leaves me room on the negative to crop in the enlarger and get exactly what I want... ymmv

 

denny

I have a C330 and used a C3, C220 and C330 in a previous job many years ago where they had all the lenses. The 135 probably is your best bet. That's equivalent to a 90mm on a 35mm camera, which is a standard portrait length for a Leica, a hair longer than Nikon's 85 and a bit shorter than Nikon's 105. Personally on 35mm I like a 105, which corresponds to about 150 in 2 1/4. Unfortunately Mamiya didn't make a 150. But I've used the 85 in smaller rooms, so the 135 makes a pretty good equivalent in 2 1/4. As for sharpness of one version vs the next, I don't think that's as much of an issue for portraits as it is for other types of shots. Many portrait photographers use at least mild diffusion filters to take the edge off the sharpness of their lenses, especially super sharp glass like Hasselblad. So if the lens is a touch on the soft side already, it doesn't hurt.

I used a Mamiya C33 (not C330) for a few weddings until I ended up with Hasselblad gear. I could never understand just why the Mamiya folks never supplied a 150mm lens. IMO and in the opinion of many other photographers whom I have known and talked with; the 150mm focal length is the optimum for head and shoulders shots using a 6x6 format camera.

 

Mamiya supplied the 135mm which I used but considered a bit too short. The 180mm was too long for me unless I was outdoors with plenty of room to back up. However, of the two, I really liked the 180mm better than the 135mm but, that lens needed too much room to work with.

Craig,

 

I've used the 180 super most for portraits (head and shoulders), but I do agree it is a bit on the long side when space is tight. I think the 135 is probably the best compromise. I usually used the 180 super or 105D, DS for portrait work and skipped my 135. To my taste, the 105 lenses are too short for tight headshots, and can introduce distortion. Nevertheless, the 105 length is great for looser shots. Again, If I could have only one lens, I'd go with the 135.

Thanks for all the input. There are a few 135's on the bay, but don't know if I want to take the plunge. I might just try what Dave suggested and work with the 105 and 180 to see how I like them.

I have used the 135 and 180 super for over twenty years, and find the 135 the most useful especially since I have a fairly small studio, or to use in domestic rooms , I particularly like the way it "draws the image " of the human face, the 180 is good for tight head shots, or outdoors without getting so close that it flattens the features, you can get 135's fairly cheaply these days, try to buy a black one not a chrome one, and don't be alarmed if the rear element of the taking lens is missing, they are all like that.

Try to keep the 180 if you are able, they are both good portrait optics.

Craig, that is a great ideal.Try the 105 and 180 for awhile. That way, it will show you if you really need the 135.

I mostly used the 180, though i do have the 135 also, i like the 180 for the sharpness

One of the reasons I prefer the 135 to the 180 super John, although I own both is I find the 180 a little to sharp and revealing for female portraits,ladies don't like it , especially when they reach a certain age.