danny_liao Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Which lens is better for portrait work with an RZ...a 140mm or 180mm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucas_griego Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Define 'better'. Both will work fine. I prefer the 180mm. Try both out if you can. Ideally get both. Rent them and try them out first if you can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithdunlop Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 What is your criteria for "better"? I use the 180mm and it suits my needs. The 180mm gives me the subject distance that I'm comfortable with, and the optical performance is outstanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebigfish Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 The 180. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_________1 Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 By portraits, I'll presume that you mean a pretty tight one person close-up i.e. head and shoulders. I'd spring for the 180mm which gives a nice compression effect although I use the 210mm APO personally. The 180mm is incredibly sharp and reasonably priced. You may also want to look at the 150mm for a one person full-length portrait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_holland1 Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 If you have the 110, get the 180. If not, with the 180 you will need a huge studio to take anything but head shots and still get your subject far enough from your background to control shadows. I have the 180, and use it 85% of the time. For my taste, "portrait length" starts at 180, and 140 seems a bit short. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_dewberry Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 I like the 140, less compression, and it suits my taste better. If you go to the mamiya website, look at the portfolio of Mark Seliger, you'll see a lot of portraits he did with the 140. The 140 is not the traditional choice, but its very effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christopher perez Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 After using a 180W-N and the std. 110Z for portraits, I have a hankering for a 150W. The 180mm seems just a bit too long for the kinds of things I do. If you can, rent all three lenses (140, 150, and 180) and then decide which to purchase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny_liao Posted March 24, 2004 Author Share Posted March 24, 2004 Thanks for all your help. Now, which one performs better, the 180 telephoto or the 180 short barrel? Or does it matter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph_verdesca Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 The normal 180 tele is what you're looking for - the short barrel version is for use with the (not inexpensive) tilt-shift adapter, and would require a (not inexpensive) extension ring to allow you to focus to infinity without the (not inexpensive) tilt-shift adapter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_________1 Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 They are optically identical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nghi_hoang Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 The 180 W-N is an incredibly sharp lens. I have it and use it often for portrait. Some of my "clients" complain about the details that show up in prints. I have read that the 140 is designed specifically for macro work and not as good as the non-macro lens for portrait. I have the 110 and use it for full body portrait with the 180 for tighter crop. I vote for the 180 W-N. -Nghi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h.d._shin1 Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 What about the older non-W-N 180? It's both cheaper and smaller. Or did it have issues that prompted Mamiya to come out with the newer W-N? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miles_feigenbaum___dallas_ Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Danny, you have to ask yourself a few things first; how far from your subject will you be? Outdoors won't be a problem to fill the frame with the 180 as you can step back and get the entire person in the frame. The 180 is nice for tight shots indoors. Be prepared to budget for a Softar diffusion filter as the lenses are very sharp and will show all imperfections in detail which your woman clients won't like. You didn't ask about the 150 but I think you'd be doing yourself a favor by considering that one. The newer 180 will have the designation of W-N after the 180 indicating the half stops between the normal f-stops available. Wider spacing between the stops , hence , the halfstops available and the 'newer' optical design. The perspective is really nice on this one. Another good thing is the effect that you get if shooting somewhat wide open or close to, the persons eyes can be in tack sharp focus and the forward parts of their face and their hair can be put in a softening , slightly out of focus 'mode', a nice touch on your female clients. 'A very very small depth of field. Don't forget to order the lens hood specifically for the lens of choice, an inexpensive item but necessary. Another item that I HIGHLY recommend is the flip up magnifier made for the RZ AE finder or the PD finder. You can focus on the persons eye lashes with this!!! see the web sites listed below for these items. http://www.keh.com/shop/product.cfm?bid=RZ&cid=06&sid=newused&crid=7241613 ------------------ http://www.keh.com/shop/product.cfm?bid=RZ&cid=14&sid=newused&crid=7241777 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_holland1 Posted March 25, 2004 Share Posted March 25, 2004 You might want to take a moment a look at the Mamiya's descriptions of the lenses on their web site (ignoring for the moment their indication that each lens is perfect for everything). The principal difference between the 140 and the 150 is that the former is their floating element design that allows you to control flatness of field (not very important in my judgement for portraits) and the latter has an additional stop of maximum aperture (relatively more important to aid in focusing rather than as a taking aperture). Having already posted that I use the 180 (and now adding that I don't have the 150), if I add the 150 it would be more for brightness than for its slightly greater coverage. I found, incidentally, that my old eyes have great difficulty focusing with the prism finder and a 4.5 lens with indoor light. If you opt for the prism finder, the magnifier that Miles described may be more of a necessity than an option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shotz Posted March 25, 2004 Share Posted March 25, 2004 Love my 180. I use it with the regular 6x7 back and the 6x4.5 back. Working distance is good and results are just terrific each and every time. I'd be too close to set my lights with a 140 but that may be just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h.d._shin1 Posted March 27, 2004 Share Posted March 27, 2004 Peter, do you use the W-N or older version of the 180? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now