Bronica 100 f/4 macro vs 150 f/3.5?

Hello

I have a chance to get either Zenzanon 100 mm f/4 (macro), or 150 mm f/3.5 for my ETR. They both are "MC" (so yes, not so good), cost the same and no, I can't get them both neither for financial, nor for physical reasons (my shoulder starts to hurt under Bronica). I'm not much of a portrait or macro shooter. So I'm having a hard time choosing. It might also happen that I won't buy any of those two and stick with my standard 75/2.8 in the end. But still I'd like to know which lens is better.

Thank you

M

P.S. I forgot to mention. They cost of both would be a bit more than equivalent of 55$

The answer depends on how often you plan on shooting objects up close. For me I'd go with the 150mm and use a close-up lens or a extension tube if I wanted to get close.

Optically both lenses are pretty equal at infinity. Since you said your not a macro shooter I think you already chose. BTW, the 150mm is excellent for portraits. MC get a bad rap, it's not because of it's optics, many have mechanical issues. Make sure the one you choose has a smooth focus travel through the full range.

best of luck

Thank you Sir.

Aye, I'm not a macro shooter, but then again I don't have people to photograph either so I might just pass both opportunities. Now if it was a wide angle lens, I'd gladly pay for it, it's handy for architecture and streetjob.