Mamiya Lenses--Differences?

[brian_de_groodt]

Wondering if anyone that's familiar with Mamiya lenses (or lenses in general) can explain

to me the differences (including advantages/disadvantages of each) between the following

specs.

 

MAMIYA M645 - LENSES

200 F2.8 APO A (77) MEDIUM FORMAT SLR MANUAL FOCUS TELEPHOTO LENS 200 F2.8

APO A (77) MEDIUM FORMAT SLR MANUAL FOCUS TELEPHOTO LENS

 

and

 

MAMIYA M645 - LENSES

210 F4 (58) WITH CAPS MEDIUM FORMAT SLR MANUAL FOCUS TELEPHOTO LENS 210 F4

(58) WITH CAPS MEDIUM FORMAT SLR MANUAL FOCUS TELEPHOTO LENS

 

Looking at KEH, it's about a $700 difference between the 2 and I'm unsure about what the

difference is.

 

Aplologies if this is totally basic stuff. My wonderful fiance bought me a Mamiya as a gift

and I'd like to get a telephoto for some landscape/monument photography in March.

Thanks in advance!

[sheldonnalos]

The difference is the aperature (f/2.8 vs f/4). That is equivalent to one full "stop" of light - ie. the ability to shoot in 1/2 the amount of light, or to use a shutter speed that is twice as fast.

 

As typical with most lenses, buying another "stop" costs about double the price. Since you are talking about landscape/architecture photography, I'd suggest buying the cheaper f/4 lens and spending all or some of the surplus on a nice tripod and ballhead.

 

Hope this helps!

 

Sheldon

[carl photography]

Use a faster film (with a higher ISO rating) whenever you do need to hand-hold the f4 lens, instead of spending more money for the faster lens.

 

Also, the f4 lens is smaller and lighter, making it easier to hand-hold steadily, and it accepts the same size filters as many other Mamiya 645 lenses.

 

"Brandon's Dad"

[vivek iyer]

The 200mm f/2.8 is color corrected. It should be a sharper lens that the 210mm f/4.

 

When Mamiya puts the APO designation on one of its lenses, it really means something.

[brian_de_groodt]

Thanks! This is really shocking to me in many ways($). I feel like someone bought me a

wonderful new puppy...but that's a big responsibility.

 

I'm tempted to buy the APO and use it for my shots and then sell it afteward. Of course,

I'll probably find myself falling in love with it and keeping it. I *do* need a new tripod/

ball. I see one suggestion of spending less on the lens and buying the new tripod. Would

that be the consensus of the group?

[vivek iyer]

Depends on your requirements. If you need a tripod and other accessories, you need to get them.

[carl photography]

Brian, I agree that a decent tripod is more useful for landscapes than a super-fast telephoto, which is a specialized tool designed for working photographers who "need the speed" for sports, candids, etc.

(Tripods are not allowed in certain locales, but this is a rare exception.)

 

When stopped down, as for a landscape photograph, these two lenses probably are very close in performance. Mamiya lenses are designed for professional use; I have three 645 lenses, and they're all fine.

 

Here's a test report on the 200 f2.8 APO lens: http://www.popphoto.com/article.asp?section_id=2&article_id=276

 

My favorite Mamiya 645 lenses, 55mm and 80mm, also were tested in that article. Here's the article's conclusion: "The Mamiya-Sekor 645 lenses performed, as a group, on par with or better than other 645-format lenses we've tested. The f/2.8 speed of the 200mm and 300mm lenses deserves special notice (very bright viewfinder images); they're the fastest optics of their class for the format (with pricing to match!)."

 

"Brandon's Dad"