300mm 2.8 APO vs 300mm 5.6

[lightminer]

If I want to use one of the two 300mm lenses with the 2x adapter for 600mm, is

there any reason to get the 2.8 vs the 5.6? I know that after the 2x adapter

the one becomes a 5.6 and the other an 11, but the 2.8 is manual focus. I've

heard with telephoto you really really want autofocus because the depth of

field is so extreme, and I've also heard that if birds or whatever are flying

around most autofocuses aren't fast enough anyway, so you end up with manual

focusing in the end anyhow.

 

So, I realize that the main thing is that you can use a faster shutter speed,

but how important is autofocus? Also, in order to take advantage of the speed

aspect, I'd be shooting it wide open, and most lenses are very poor when wide

open - Mamiya knew they were developing this lense for use with the 2x

extender, so they intend it to be used wide open so I can only hope it is

optically optimized for wide-open use - anyone have any experience with this?

 

Anyone use it and also own the 5.6 that can comment on sharpness when at a

common aperture?

 

Thanks!

[igor_lorget1]

Hi,

well I don't have any personnal experience with these two lenses, but had a similar experience with other brands. With long lenses, in order to avoid lens blurr due to too low shutter speed ("inverse" of the 300mm focal would be 1/250th at slowest, 1/500th with the 2x adaptor) you'd probably like to have the fastest lens available, thus the 2.8

 

If you double it it becomes a 5.6. That's getting slightly dark, and the 5.6 --> 11 is really too damn dark to focus manually and AF will probably simply die on you. On top of this at f/11, in order to get 1/500th of sec or faster you'd have to use very fast film (and blew the advantage of MF) or have a very well lit subject (which you might not get as often as you think)

 

I used to have a 4-5.6 lens (Nikon) and doubled it. Chaos at the long end. No matter how you focus it (MF or AF), at 5.6 doubled it's going to be very hard thing to work with.

 

I would definitly go with the 2.8 no matter what, for the speed and focus capability.

 

Hope this help.

 

Igor

[bogdan_nicolescu]

Using 2x adaptors on an APO lens you will loose the APO quality... Can't say how much impact this has on B&W but for color I would rather prefer to preserve the APO quality over a longer focal length...

Now, it's all depending of the type of shot you take, whether the APO quality offset the benefits of a long focal length....

However, an APO lens resolution and color rendition is an astonishing thing indeed...

[lightminer]

Bogdan - small note - I'll be using the Mamiya adapter, not 3rd party, so it is supposed to be really good (and is quite expensive!) so hopefully that will help, but that is good to know that potentially the 2x adapter will bring down the quality.

 

For Mamiya MF if you want long shots you have to do this, they have 300mm lenses - and the 2.8 in particular says it was made to be used with the 2x adapter, they also have 500mm lenses - I don't know anyone who has ever seen or used it, its super expensive, and still only turns into 310mm in 35-mm speak. That is quite a monster with the 2x, though, turning into a 620mm in 35-mm speak! And that one starts at 4.5 to be clear.

 

Looking at a lot of images of birds/hawks/eagles, etc. in 35mm it looks like you have to get to 300/400 to really get them well. So that means either using the 500mm straight or the 300 with the 2x adapter. The 300 alone is only 182, which is not enough. You end up cropping the negative and might as well be using a 35mm neg.

 

I am aware that this range is really the purvue of 35mm - this super long range stuff, but the MF guys have the lenses, so I want to give it a try!

 

Igor - thanks for the comments. I can imagine that doubled it is harder! You said a few things that are exactly what I want to know, that the difference between final f-stops of f11 and f5.6 do make enough difference in shutter speed shooting with slow film (which is exactly what I do) to lean in that direction.

[bogdan_nicolescu]

Miner,

 

As far as I remember I read this in one of Mamiya instruction booklets and they particularly specify that using the Mamiya 2x adapter on 300mm and 500mm APO lens will infringe the APO quality of those lenses and loose resolution as well... I will try to pull out this particular information and confirm it to you if you're still interested.

 

I have tried the 500mm APO together with Mamiya 2X adapter and I can tell you that this is not an easy thing to handle... Lens only is all right, although is tripod only... The lens has a pretty interesting feature, a sort of mechanical memory so you can actually change the focus in two different pre-set distances with one finger tip swing.

Yes, expensive lens but it does worth every cent you pay for it...

Regards

Bogdan

[lightminer]

Okay, cool, this is exactly the kind of stuff I'm trying to figure out before buying anything! Thanks!

 

Is there anyone out there with photos on photo.net with images from either of these lenses?

[lightminer]

Oh, and Igor - it seems that Nikon makes a 300 for the Mamiya camera! (unless I'm reading it wrong?) f2.0 - larger than the Mamiya one, f2.8. Also very expensive, of course. There is a used one on auction site for 14k!

[bogdan_nicolescu]

...couples of pics with 500mm f4.5 APO on my portraits folder... not great ones but it might give you an idea... I should post some more in about two weeks time...

[rich_morgan1]

I have the 300mm 5.6 and the 500mm 5.6. Both are okay, not great. I haven't, however,

compared either of them to their APO counterparts. I occasionally use the 2x teleconverter

if I have no other alternative. Image quality is definitely not a strength with those

combinations.

 

BTW, most prime Mamiya lenses test as sharpest (lpm) at f4 or 5.6. The only one that I've

personally used that isn't like that is the 55mm, which is sharpest at f11 and f16. The

zooms are sharpest at f8 and f11. Here are some examples:

 

http://www.mamiya.com/assets/pdfs/645AFD/645AFLensesChart.pdf

 

http://www.mamiya.com/assets/pdfs/645AFD/645AFLensesChart.pdf

 

http://www.popphoto.com/assets/download/PP0804_MamiyaLensTest.pdf

[lightminer]

Rich, you may be interested in the 'info' image on my images. It is a lot of image sharpness data from various lense tests I could find including the ones you reference. I incorrectly labelled the 35 as 30, but other than that the info is correct. You'll notice this data confirms the f11 diffraction sharpness falloff that many argue about.

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=759901

 

As far as the 300/500 go, I understand that the APO versions are amazing, with the non-apo versions as you describe them.

 

 

 

I'm still wondering if the 2.8 300 is sharper than the 5.6, or is the difference just that it opens to 2.8? And how does the 2.8 compare at 2.8 versus 5.6? I agree with Rich above that the other lenses are best at 5.6 in general, and that is what I'm wondering - is this particular one better at 2.8? Because the only reason to build it is if it is stellar at 2.8 itselt.

[lightminer]

I just rented the 300mm 4.5 (not 5.6, that is mistake) and the autofocus was useless! It is true I was trying to take a picture of an animal with branches around it, but each time I was ready, it would start zooming from one end to the other (hunting) and not settle down and never take a picture. In disgust, I set it to manual, and missed the main picture I wanted, but got some great other ones. I'll post when they get back (yes, I still shoot film!). Didn't get a chance to try with birds - which if they are flying in clear blue sky won't have tons of elements in front and behind to confuse the autofocus. But I have to say the manual focus was awesome and easy to use - much easier than the 80 or other lenses I've used (perhaps because of the short depth of field it is really obvious when you are out or in focus?). But, anyhow, this alleviated my fear of long-lens manual focus, and I am know a manual focus fan.

 

That makes the 2.8 very tempting........

[lightminer]

Bogdan,

 

I wonder if the 2x extender for the Pro TL is not quite as good as the newer one? Maybe the 'c' version won't degrade things as much... Not sure. The manual, if it warns you, is probably warning you about the Pro TL version. Just a hopeful idea.... (that the new 2x won't cause as much degradation :) ).

[lightminer]

Here is one image from that day. This is the 4.5 manually focused. You can see all the branches that kept it from

being able to focus automatically. Note I have another at a lower f-stop, and you don't always want everything out of

focus. Another thing to think about for the big one, 2.8 may be too small for many images.<div></div>