Mamiya 645AFD Lens

[friskybongo]

Hi All,

 

I have a Mamiya 645AFD (not the AFD II or AFD III) and am looking on ebay for a portrait lens (already have the 80mm). I'm thinking of either the 120mm macro or 150mm. What were the different versions/iterations that were manufactured by Mamiya?

 

 

Thank you.

[orsetto]

A couple of the manual focus lenses, like 110mm f/2.8N, are prized for their unique "look" thats different from more typical portrait lenses. But the AFD body does not mechanically couple with MF lenses for convenient metering: you need to use stop down metering, which is a pain (and not always accurate with some AFD bodies). There is a newer Schneider AFD version with leaf shutter for flash, its superb but very expensive (and may not be compatible with the original AFD mk1 body electronics).

 

Among the reasonably-priced, standard AF lenses, most popular for portraits are the 150mm f/3.5 and 120 Macro. The 150mm f/3.5 is the default choice: nice sharp lens. The macro offers more versatility, but is a bit short for head/shoulders, almost too sharp, slow in aperture (and AF focus speed, which is why there's also an alternate manual-focus "D" version). The fast 150mm f/2.8 AFD is excellent, but large/heavy. 210mm f/4 ULD is nice for added compression and background blowout in suitable outdoor environments, where you can put some distance between you and the subject.

Edited August 29, 2019 by orsetto

[rodeo_joe1]

A couple of the manual focus lenses, like 110mm f/2.8N, are prized for their unique "look"

+1 to that!

The 70mm leaf-shuttered lens is in that category as well, but I have no idea if it would couple to an AFD.

[orsetto]

The 70mm leaf-shuttered lens is in that category as well, but I have no idea if it would couple to an AFD.

 

There was a very hard to resist listing running for a couple months last spring from a seller in Japan offering a complete set of three clean working M645 leaf-shutter lenses (IIRC, 55mm, 70mm and 150mm). Really tempting at the price, but it would have meant finding a first-gen M645 body and starting up with yet another MF system, which I'd rather not do after finally culling my arsenal to Hasselblad, Mamiya TLR and Mamya Universal RF. I should have tried harder to talk my friend who's owned the M645 since day one to bite on that deal, so I could borrow the kit. But he's too smart to succumb to GAS.

[friskybongo]

Update:

 

Thank you for your comments. I'm looking at the 150mm f/3.5 lens now. My question: If I'm taking portraits with this lens on the Mamiya and have them scanned and printed to say 12"x18" or 16"x24", would they exceed the image quality of the same portrait taken with the Canon 80d and a 70-200 f/4.0 or 100mm f/2.8 macro?

 

Regards.

[orsetto]

I'm looking at the 150mm f/3.5 lens now. My question: If I'm taking portraits with this lens on the Mamiya and have them scanned and printed to say 12"x18" or 16"x24", would they exceed the image quality of the same portrait taken with the Canon 80d and a 70-200 f/4.0 or 100mm f/2.8 macro?

 

Technically? Probably not. Subjectively? Maybe.

 

It all depends on the "look" you're after. Generally speaking, film is film and digital is digital. A very talented technically-oriented photographer can shoot large format film and make it almost pass as a digital capture, and there are ways to make a digital capture simulate the film look (though perhaps not totally and organically).

 

In this case, you are comparing an APS-C sized sensor to a piece of film 6x larger, but the resolution and grainless clarity of the smaller digital sensor offers an altogether different pictorial representation than the film, which will show some organic grain. If B/W, film offers a different tonality as well, in color, a different manner of representing color. One isn't "higher quality" than the other unless you have an over-riding, distinct preference. Very subjective.

 

Just in a very general sense, a 12x18 print from your 80D will roughly equal the "overall quality" of a print from 645 film SLR (shot with perfect technique) using comparable lenses (and similar inkjet printing). At 16x24 subtle technical differences may become more apparent, favoring one or the other. But there are all sorts of interactions you need to factor into it: the specific film is one, and lens coverage is another. The 150mm lens on 645 will give the perspective of roughly 60mm on your Canon, but with the shallow depth-of-field and more pleasing focus falloff of 150mm on your Canon, further affected by the film rendition. It can be tricky keeping all of this straight when switching between systems. If you print the film frame in analog, using an enlarger and photographic printing paper, that adds another variation not easily done digitally.

 

If you want smoother digital tonality and/or improved low light performance, try a "full frame" larger-sensor camera like Canon 6D or hi-res Nikon D850 / Sony A7RIII. If you want a distinctly different look in terms of color/tonality, and perspective vs DOF, use the the Mamiya 645. The systems aren't directly comparable: each tool serves a different purpose or artistic intent. The M645 + 150mm f/3.5 is a sweet combo, if you enjoy traditional medium-format film portraits: this film format and lens focal length was the standard for pro wedding/portrait work in the pre-digital era.

Edited September 3, 2019 by orsetto

[friskybongo]

Thanks Orsetto!

[rodeo_joe1]

I've recently been using my old M645 lenses on a Sony APS format 24 megapixel a6000, via an adapter obviously.

Most of the 645 lenses, including a 150mm f/3.5 and 300mm f/5.6, have returned stunningly sharp results, and with almost zero visible colour aberration. Better, I might say than most lenses specifically designed for DSLR/MILC use.

 

So any lack of sharpness is probably going to be due to film or focussing issues.

 

You have to remember that a typical colour film emulsion is in the region of 20 microns thick, which means that it's impossible to get an absolute zero point focus throughout the emulsion thickness.

 

Getting technical, the confusion circle at the limits of the emulsion surfaces will be at least 2.5 microns diameter with an f/4 lens. That's in addition to any lens aberration blurring, and not taking account of any turbidity (light spreading) within the emulsion. So basically, using film is going to knock quite a high percentage off the native MTF or LPPMM resolution figure of any lens.

would they exceed the image quality of the same portrait taken with the Canon 80d and a 70-200 f/4.0 or 100mm f/2.8 macro?

Technically? Probably not.

Almost definitely not. On a par maybe, but certainly not obviously better.

Edited September 4, 2019 by rodeo_joe|1

[mag_miksch]

and have them scanned

this may be a weak point, is it drum or flatbed?

[friskybongo]

mag_miksch:

I would be sending the film to a commercial lab and not doing it myself.

 

Question: when film (negatives or transparencies) is scanned, is some image quality lost in the process? Would quality be better if prints are made the traditional way via enlarger onto photographic paper?