Sekor C/N lenses

[ben_wickerham]

I am about to invest in a Mamiya M645 1000s so I can begin shooting medium

format. Usually I try to do extensive research on the equipment before I take

the plunge bout have found it difficult to find any reviews of the Sekor lenses.

I have read a few places that the lenses are excellent performers, but have yet

to find any specific details or reviews pertaining to individual lenses. I

wonder if anyone can recommend one or two lenses, particularlly in the normal to

wide range that would be a perfect match to this camera. On a side note, I have

read that the 80mm 2.8 is both pin sharp and soft...any thoughts? Also, C lenses

would be just fine compared to the N lenses as long as they have the

performance...thats all Im worried about. Thanks

[randall ellis]

I'm not a numbers person so I can't help you there, but I find that the 55mm and 80mm are my most commonly used lenses. It really depends on your shooting style, but I like the 55mm for a wide angle. I have the 55, 80, 150, and 210mm lenses which all take the same (58mm) filter size, which is something that you might want to consider (the 35mm lens takes a much larger filter).

 

As with any lens, any specific lens may or may not have been well cared for over the years so it may or may not conform to the reviews. Personaly, I would just get the lengths that you want and not worry about all the fine details, but that's just me.

 

- Randy

[mtk]

Hi Randy...I just sold my 1000s system to go to an RB67 system. I can assure you that virtually any of the "C" or "N" lenses are sharp, lotsa' contrast and well made. The later "N" lenses may have an extra coating and are made of metal and poly, but the overall build quality for me was just fine. The older "C" lenses are just as good. It is my understanding that the "N" lenses simply mean NEW. Please note the N lenses are also listed as C besides! Bottom line: Buy and use with confidence...Have Fun! Mark

[steve_levine]

The N glass is newer and supposedly has improved coatings. In my experience, there is little difference.

[bueh]

As the previous posters said, the M645 lenses are very, very good. In real-life photography they all capable of producing stunning results.

 

I would give the 80mm f/2.8 a miss. The faster 80mm f/1.9 is a great lens -- beautiful rendering of out-of-focus areas thanks to the large aperture. I also like the short 110mm f/2.8 tele, which is another great portrait lens.

 

In my experience, the wide angle lenses are were the "N" really matters. The wider you go, the larger the difference between the old and new versions. The non-"N" 35mm has really a not-that-exciting image quality, while the "N" version is pretty decent. The 45mm non-"N" is also a not that great performer, but maybe I am biased because I don't like the angle-of-view of this focal length. This lens is also pretty large and the heaviest of the three common wides. At 55mm the lens differences probably aren't noticeable anymore in everyday photography. I highly recommend this lens, and if you can afford it, why not get the "N" to get the latest available coating.

 

By the way, a much cheaper M645J is a bit lighter and offers most of what the 1000s can do. The M645s are cameras for hand-held use, so you won't probably use mirror-lock up often (although if you need it, the faster 1/1000 sec top speed is nice).

 

On the other hand, if weight (and bulk) is not an issue, I also agree that a Mamiya RB67/RZ67 is an even more tempting option as the larger format is really an eye-opener. Faster sync speed, better built-quality, bellows focusing and a very handy rotating back are the highlights of theses cameras. Keep in mind that it is virtually impossible to shoot pictures in portrait format when using a waist-level finder on a 645 SLR.

[ondebanks]

B. - M645 1000s bodies sell nowadays for $100, 645J bodies for about $60. The $40 difference does not compensate for the lack of quite a number of useful (some would say essential) things on the J body: mirror lock-up, self-timer, dof preview, 1/1000 sec vs. 1/500 sec min, 8 sec vs. 1 sec max, shutter dial lock, 2nd (top) shutter release button. So the 1000s is really the one to go for.

 

Ben - lens recommendations: here's what I have used:

 

45mm f2.8 C - surprisingly good wide open (sharp centre but edges somewhat less so), nice lens overall.

 

55mm f2.8 N - a bit soft wide open, but _really_ gets its act together very fast: at f4 it is excellent in the centre & vg in the corners, at f5.6 it is excellent over the whole frame. Excellent contrast. And its price, always lower than the others, making it a wonderful bargain.

 

80mm f1.9 C - same behaviour as the 55mm, but does it all one stop faster; so it is excellent over the whole frame by f4.

 

150mm f3.5 C - very good performer but not quite up to the sharpness standards set by the 55mm and 80mm. The f2.8 version should be better.

 

210mm f4 N - also a very good performer but not quite up to the standards set by the 55mm and 80mm. On the plus side, the resolution is very uniform across the frame, even wide open; on the minus side, it is no APO and overall sharpness suffers a little from both blue and red fringing. It also has a slightly odd central "hotspot" in illumination - it doesn't follow the normal vignetting/falloff curve that I have modelled in software for other lenses. I suspect that its internal baffling is not the best design.

 

For all lenses - but especially wideangles and standard lenses - the reported performance discrepancies can sometimes be attributed to misaligned elements. For this reason, it's always advisable to test any lens purchase, especially used ones, and to be particularly careful with the wideangles. I don't think that Mamiya lenses are any more prone to misalignment than other manufacturers, it's just something to watch out for.

 

For example, here's my story...The very good 45mm that I referred to above became rather poorer after I dropped it once; the images afterwards showed clear evidence of misalignment on one side. I had originally bought it very cheaply in beat-up condition (coating scuffs, slightly dented filter thread, dented and chewed up bayonet lugs, missing coupler for prism), so this fall only aggravated its problems; it soldiered on for a few more years's occasional use before the focusing helix seized up and some oil appeared on the blades. It was so sick, so beyond repair and so not saleable that I literally binned it (farewell old friend!). I salvaged only the clean rear lens block, which I now use as a rather good magnifying loupe.

 

Right now I have a brand new 35mm f3.5 N winging its way to me, for a shockingly low price (;)). I'll report back on my tests of it.

[brit]

Hi here is an article i found dated September 2001

 

http://www.popphoto.com/cameralenses/276/mamiya-mf-lens-tests.html

 

they seem very happy with pretty much all they tested. Just incase the article is moved or wiped, as far as the M645 std lens goes...

 

Quote

 

Mamiya Sekor C 80mm f/2.8

Mamiya Sekor C 80mm f/2.8N Mamiya's manual-focus "normal" optic for the 645 is sharp and compact. Results: Mamiya's f/2.8 normal lens showed slight barrel distortion (.55 percent). Exposure was extremely accurate, with less than 1/10 stop over/underexposure at every aperture. At the measured minimum focusing distance of 26 inches (1:6), center sharpness was excellent at every aperture. Corner sharpness was good from f/2.8 to f/4, very good from f/5.6 to f/8, and excellent from f/11 to f/22. Optimum performance was at f/16. In field tests, light falloff at the edges was gone by f/5.6. Test slides showed excellent sharpness, flare, and contrast performance at all apertures.

SPECIFICATIONS: 55mm (56.3mm tested), f/2.8 (aperture measurement not available due to instrument limitation), 8 elements in 6 groups.

 

View angle: Diag: 65 degrees. Min aperture: f/22.

Focusing turns 100 degrees counterclockwise; min focus 1 ft 5 3/4 in.

Weight: 11 1/4 oz.

Filter size: 58mm.

Mount available: Mamiya.

Included lenshood.

Average street price: $665.

 

Unquote

[jeff_l5]

<p>First-time post here.<br>

I recently bought a Sekor 55mm F2.8 lens plus a Nikon adapter to use with my D90. I love the performance of this lens, especially considering the cost at less that $100 U.S., used.<br>

I see the "C" and "N" types discussed quite often, but I'm not sure which one I have. My guess is that it's what people refer to as "C/N". The markings on the front read "MAMIYA-SEKOR C 55mm 1:2.8 N. Can anyone tell me if this is a "C/N" lens. Also, when someone refers to an "N" lens, would this suggest the absence of the "C"? The "C" is printed in green, while the rest of the markings are white.<br>

It seems to be plenty sharp, and a bit warmer and more natural looking than a vintage Nikkor 50mm/1.4 manual-focus I have, but that lens may be optimized for black&white anyway.<br>

If anyone is curious how this lens/camera combo performs, here is a set of test shots I took:<br>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/47800690@N03/sets/72157637411405435/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/47800690@N03/sets/72157637411405435/</a><br>

I am also looking for a 35mm Sekor in the 645 mount. I see the F 3.5 listed on eBay ranging from $300-500. Can anyone suggest the actual street value of this lens? Most are marked with both the "C" and "N".<br>

I was considering a Zeiss Distagon until I realized the 645 lenses can adapt to Nikon with proper focus range. I'm not convinced my D90 would reveal much advantage of a Zeiss over the Sekor anyway. Plus I hope to get a 645 with a digital back in hopes of improving dynamic range and image quality. If anyone has any input regarding a used 645 with digital back in the $5-6K range, it would be much appreciated. I shoot mostly outdoors, so as long as it doesn't need to be tethered to a laptop while shooting it would suit my needs. But most of the advantages of going medium format I'm looking for would be for table top product photos.<br>

If the manual-focus 645 lenses are compatible with a digitally equipped 645 then all the better.<br>

I've been a Mamiya fan since buying a C220 about 20 years ago. The image quality is quite nice but I tend to shy away from the cost and hassle of getting film processed and scanning unless I'm shooting something remarkable and have the time to carefully meter and estimate depth of field, etc. <br>

Thanks.</p>

 

[ondebanks]

<p>JL,<br>

Welcome to the forum. Glad that you are happy with your new Mamiya lens. It's one of the best in the lineup. Your Flickr shots show that you are making excellent use of it!</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I see the "C" and "N" types discussed quite often, but I'm not sure which one I have. My guess is that it's what people refer to as "C/N". The markings on the front read "MAMIYA-SEKOR C 55mm 1:2.8 N. Can anyone tell me if this is a "C/N" lens. Also, when someone refers to an "N" lens, would this suggest the absence of the "C"? The "C" is printed in green, while the rest of the markings are white.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Most if not all of the lenses have a green "C" on them - just ignore that. It's the presence or absence of another letter on the front ring that matters for classification purposes - a white "S", "N", or "A". If one of these letters is marked on the front ring, it's what people mean by a type S, type N, or type A lens. If there is no such letter on the front ring, just the green "C", it is a type C lens. (People who say "C/N" mean type N too - they are confused by the superfluous "C").</p>

<p>Thus, you have a 55mm type N lens - the most recent of the three types of manual focus 55/2.8 .</p>

<p>The build of the lens is the other giveaway. The older lenses - types C and S - have all-metal barrels and focal length marked in a florid font (calligraphic in appearance) in two places - on the front ring and again in green near the aperture ring. The newer type N and A lenses have some plastic in the barrels, and focal length markings in the same two places but in a plainer font.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I am also looking for a 35mm Sekor in the 645 mount. I see the F 3.5 listed on eBay ranging from $300-500. Can anyone suggest the actual street value of this lens? Most are marked with both the "C" and "N".</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It's better in general to get the N type, with improved multicoating - important in a wideangle like this. Otherwise the C and N types of the 35/3.5 are optically the same - an unchanged mid-1970s formula.</p>

<p>On 645 film & digital, the 35mm image quality is sharp centrally but not great towards the edges. It will probably be satisfying sharp all over with your APS-C cropped Nikon. Now, if you were only shooting it straight on Nikons, I'd steer you away from this lens - there are lighter, faster, sharper options at 35mm focal length for DSLRs. But if you intend to use it on a shift or tilt-shift adapter like a Mirex, or later on a 645 body, then it makes sense.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If anyone has any input regarding a used 645 with digital back in the $5-6K range, it would be much appreciated. I shoot mostly outdoors, so as long as it doesn't need to be tethered to a laptop while shooting it would suit my needs.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's a whole other topic which we could go into at length! For now I'll just say that $5-6k gives you plenty of options in the used market, for a 645 AFD or AFD II body and a decent untethered (as in, tethering optional) DB.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If the manual-focus 645 lenses are compatible with a digitally equipped 645 then all the better.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>They are, but you do lose aperture automation, i.e. you are in stopped-down metering territory. Just as you are with the Mamiya 55mm on your D90. OTOH you gain electronic focus confirmation - the 645 autofocus cameras indicate when you're in focus and if not, indicate which direction to turn the focus ring. I primarily use manual focus lenses on my digitally equipped 645 AFD and am very happy with them. </p>

[jeff_l5]

<p>Well, I recently bought a used 645AFD with an Aptus 22 back, low mileage on the back, only 4200-some actuations. I'm very satisfied with the results.<br>

The kit came with 80mm and 135mm AF lenses, which seem plenty sharp, but like 35mm DSLR kit lenses, the build quality seems to be lacking. Plus the 55mm/2.8 Sekor manual focus lens I have seems to produce a nicer look. More glossy for lack of better words. Maybe the contrast is higher, not sure, but I've seen similar differences among AF and MF 35mm lenses as well. Plus I can get closer shots on small subjects with it than with the AF lenses.</p>

<p>I'm looking for recommendations on macro-capable lenses for shooting items the size of, say, jewelry rings, being able to fill the frame. Would there be any disadvantage to using an extension tube on the 55/2.8 Sekor? If there is a better solution then I am open to recommendations. I'm looking for optimal image quality under studio conditions. Even if it's a different brand with an adapter I'd be OK with it. If a macro lens is ideal, I'm looking to stay under the $500 mark for something used. The extension tube would be ideal as long as the full-frame image quality doesn't suffer. I don't mind if there is a loss of light level due to smaller aperture for DOF on an extension tube. I'm shooting 15-30 second exposures as it is with fine results.</p>

<p>I've been posting test shots here: <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/47800690@N03/sets/72157638265828233/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/47800690@N03/sets/72157638265828233/</a></p>

<p>Thanks.</p>

[ondebanks]

<blockquote>

<p>I'm looking for recommendations on macro-capable lenses for shooting items the size of, say, jewelry rings, being able to fill the frame. Would there be any disadvantage to using an extension tube on the 55/2.8 Sekor?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The 55/2.8 is unusually close focusing, so it gets to a larger magnification (0.18x, almost 1:5) than any other non-macro M645 lens. So it should be good with an extension tube. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>If a macro lens is ideal, I'm looking to stay under the $500 mark for something used.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No problem then. The old 80/4 macro (~$200) goes to 1:2 as is, and with its dedicated extension tube, it goes to 1:1. It has an excellent reputation. Most you'll come across are type "C" but some are type "N".</p>

<p>Even better, the 120/4 macro (~$400), one of the 1990s type "A" lenses, goes to 1:1 without any tubes, and is said to be apochromatic in performance (although Mamiya never labelled it "APO"). Versions of that same winning optical formula were put into the AF-mount 120/4 macro lenses. </p>