M 645 45mm C lens (67mm filter vers)

[neil_grant]

<p>I'm think of getting a used one of these, but I'm wary of lenses with floating elements as they can jam up (expensively) over time. Who's got experience with these lenses?</p>

[marc_batters]

<blockquote>

<p>I'm think of getting a used one of these...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You're thinking of buying a 'used' lens. A lens that when purchased new, probably cost around $2,000, and is now available for 1/10th that price on the used market. You can't expect anything on the used market to operate 'as new,' especially if you don't have maintenance performed throughout the life of the component.</p>

<p>I've had about six lenses CLA'd lately and a couple of camera bodies worked on. It's a fact of life when buying new or used equipment. <br /> The last 'floating' lens I had worked on was a 28mm Zuiko for OM. It didn't really cost anymore than other lenses I've had CLA'd.<br /> Buck-up...Get a CLA on your used equipment. It's still far cheaper than buying new!</p>

<p>Marc</p>

[adamjohnson]

<p>Buy from KEH and the lens will have been inspected and guaranteed to function. When it comes to Mamiya M645 lenses most say buy the N version, but I had a preference for their C version lenses. The images below were taken with a lens that KEH rated as EX.<br /><br /><em>Mamiya-Sekor C 45mm f/2.8, Fuji Velvia RVP 50</em><br /><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8449/8053073454_ef21d6d5bc_c.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="590" /><br /> <br /> <br /> <em>Mamiya-Sekor C 45mm f/2.8, Fuji Velvia RVP 50</em><br /><img src="http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2567/4101823752_aa3dac812c_o.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="590" /><br /> <br /> <br /> <em>Mamiya-Sekor C 45mm f/2.8, Fuji Velvia RVP 50</em><br /><img src="http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2672/4101824550_d6cf38f71a_o.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="601" /><br /> <br /><br /></p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>I've not heard any reports of the floating elements "jamming up" although obviously any moving part is going to be subject to some wear. I think if you check the lens out thoroughly for signs of abuse or overuse you should be OK. Give the lens a gentle shake and listen out for any slight knocking sound. Also feel for any shift in weight as the lens is moved around.</p>

<p>In any event, none of the Mamiya 645 wideangles are brilliant performers at the edge and corners of the frame IME. They're acceptable, and that's about all you can say for them. The 55mm is probably the best of the bunch, if you discount the 50mm f/4 shift lens. The 45mm N or S version (same optics) suffers quite noticeably from soggy corners at wider apertures, as does the 35mm. It's still miles better than the horrible first version of 45mm C lens; the one with a 77mm front thread. That's a real dog and best left well alone.</p>

<p>If you can live without the f/2.8 aperture and a few more millimetres of focal length, then I'd recommend the 50mm f/4 shift lens over the 45mm f/2.8. It has better overall definition and you have the shift ability thrown in. It's also free of any floating elements, but only has a preset iris. Hey ho. You can't have everything.</p>

<p>P.S. Nice shots Adam.</p>

[ondebanks]

<p>I basically concur with Rodeo Joe. I had the 77mm thread 45mm C, a long time ago; great in the centre and poor in the corners. I now have the 67mm thread 45mm S, bought from KEH. It is noticeably better. I am happy to use it wide open on my 37x37mm digital back. My 55mm N is not as good wide open, even centrally, but massively improves 1 or 2 stops down.</p>

<p>Terminology wise, strictly speaking these are all C lenses ("C", "S C" and "N C"), but it's less confusing to simply refer to them as C, S and N types.</p>

<p> </p>

[philip_wilson]

I also agree with Rodeo Joe - I tend to use the 55 and 35 a lot more than the 45. While both the 35 and 45 suffer from soft

corners the 35 does no seem as bad due to its wider angle of view.