francois_gauthier

First, you will have to test them to compare the results. My bet is the 50 will be clearly better at F2.8 . If the zoom is already excellent at F4, you won't need to carry both.

 

Still, 2 reasons to keep the 50 :

 

First, when you want a smaller and lighter lens (take around, discrete, special filters or close-ups in 52mm size)

 

Second, just to have a backup at home (or in lugage when travelling)

The aperture difference is actually a little less than 1 stop (2/3 s).

 

Before answering, please mention what camera body it is for and if you are seeking a manual focus or auto focus model. Adding what other lenses you already have or plan to get would also help us focuss on your needs.

Hi Tony, i prefer 6x6 (TLR and SLR) but when i decided to get also a 6x9, i was looking mostly for a nice lens and a large viewfinder.

 

Most 6x6 folders have awfull tiny viewers. The Selfix does not have a rf but at least you can frame with your glasses on ! The foldable Albada finder does it for me.

I have bought (too) many things on Ebay . Some where great, some where deceptions. But it was worth it overall.

 

I was never victim of a 'real' scam but maybe it is because i just avoid very pricey stuff (more than $500 US) and am as carefull as possible over $200.

A macro lens is optimize for close-ups and close-down a few stops. This is why some of them are great closer than 10 feet but quite 'average' over that.

 

If that specific model is well above average at all distances at medium aperture, it can indeed be a nice general usage lens.

 

It does not have to be that sharp at wide aperture (around F4) for portraiture if the background blurr (bokeh) is nice.

 

Remember that the 100 F2 can be use for close-ups with a tube or achromat c.u add-on. And it is a nice lens at F2.2 - F2.5 .

 

So, it is a mather of main usage : how often do you shoot macro vs wide .

Yes, it is.

Hi,

 

i would like to know if the MPP Microflex TLR (England) has a fresnel screen

(if it is dark or fairly bright).

 

Also, does it have multiple exposure capability ?

 

Finally, what is the purpose of the button just in front of the crank ?

(multiple exposure ?)

 

Thank you

First, there 3 are step-ups available from bay 1 : to 46, 49 or 52mm. Obviously you want the 52mm. If you go larger, 2 problems will arise : you will obstruct your viewing lens too much and you won't be able to access the aperture and speed wheels . So stick to 52mm (i use both bay 1 and 49mm stuff)

 

Second, about the Nikon or similar close-up lenses being much superior than the Yashica made ones : yes and no depending on wich one.

 

There are basically 2 kinds. The most common are single element but the better ones have 2 and are called 'achromat'. They are much thicker and a lot better (not more powerfull but less quality loss)The single one are still fine if you don't exceed +2 but when you can, get the 2 elements kind. Nikon ordinary one element is not much better than other brands ordinary ones. There are no 2 elements in bay 1.

 

They are also optimise for focal lenght. For exemple , the Nikon 3T and 4T are for teles like 105 (80 to 200 i believe) taking 52mm filter size ; 5T and 6T same thing but for 62mm.

 

Now, if you get a Nikon no 3 (for normal) and you put it on your TLR, it will work just fine but won't give the same power (would be more likely like a +2) . Also, you will have to put it on the top lens first to make focus, then place it on the taking lens. Finally, you will have to rise the camera a little to place the lower taking lens at the same place the viewing lens was (or your picture will be lower than framed)

 

This is why a step-up is fine for your filters but for close-ups, you may still want to get a bay 1 set (the upper part is thicker because it also corrects parallax; you just install them and shoot normally)

 

Third, the powerfull wide add-ons all have curvature (fish-eye like) and a modest 0.8 won't really satisfy you. There is no wide wonder for your TLR, you will have to get a super wide lens for your D40

Mervyn, you are right, the MPP Microflex has 5 elements (unlike the Microcord) but these are rare beasts outside of Britain.

 

There was a time a was looking for one...but 'settled' on Autocord.

 

There is also the mathers of condition and sample variation. I have 2 Autocords and one is probably too sharp for portrait.

TLRs like yours are just not made for that.

 

Your lens is bay I (about 30mm) and adapting something much larger with curvature won't do (unlike filters up to 52mm) . There are wide auxiliary lens kits for that and Yashica made it but all have modest effect (0.7 or 0.8x) and quality loss.

 

On close-ups, it is better. There are kits (taking + viewing lenses for parallax correction) in +1, +2 and +3 . There are also up to +6 without taking lens and you would need a parallax adjuster. But again a TLR is not good for 1:1 . Still, a nice +2 gets close-ups with minimal quality lost. Over that, it is progressively harder and poorer.

 

NB : the parallax comes from the different height of the taking lens and is a problem only within 3.5 feet.

 

So, you want something your TLR is the worst at. You will have to go for a slr, even a modest one.

Many have coupled light meter, even a TLR like the Yashica Mat 124G and it is fairly fast to use.

 

But if you want Aperture Priority and some automation, the choice is limited and costly in 6x6 and above (mostly some modern Rollei).

 

Take a look instead at a few 645 slr where you find models closer to 35mm experience, like Pentax 645 and later Mamiya 645.

I agree with David that $49 is too much for a Yashica A wich was the 'entry' model. It does not have the slow speeds but only 1#25 to 1#200 sec and believe me, you will need the slower ones some day.

Remember a TLR has no miror shake at slow speed and is great on a tripod. Furthermore, you will need some clip-on filters and shade on that and they are harder to find.

 

As for having a 3 elements lens instead of 4, it will be quite fine but you must close it at F11 or F16 for that. At F11 with green or orange filter, 1#25 sec need bright lights or fast film.

 

The Yashica C, early D and early 635 have the 3 elements 'Yashicor' and are good semi-auto cameras (slow speeds and bay I) but are most of the time in the same price range as plain early Mat wich are better cameras overall unless the crank is weaken.

 

In fact the only advantage of 3 vs 4 el is : less prone to flare for sunsets and other direct bright light subjects.

 

The 4 el have better corner rendition and are usable at more apertures but still gain much by being close down to F11 (but already nice at F8). It is at fast apertures like F5.6 (or more) that the number of elements makes a big difference . At these, 5 or 6 are necessary to have corner to corner sharpness but only the much pricer Rolleis with Planar or Xenotar have them.

I like Rebecca's comments left a short moment after mine.

 

In fact, i was carefull by buying from a nice seller mint models that already had recent cla (clean, lubricate, and adjust) for Autocord (late Citizen shutter), 124G and Kallo but also found bargain stuff in older Mat and Ricoh. Always ask if those old beatters have clean taking lens and working (unjammed) shutters. Not much can go wrong in an old Diacord you buy at small price if properly described but i would not risk a few hundred bucks on a doubdfull Autocord.

 

These are nice to carry, they won't attrack thieves (unless maybe written 'Rollei') but strangers asking 'how old is this camera ?'

Hi Anna,

 

so much to say but i'll try to be fairly short. I have used Yashicas since 1970 (and still do), have many TLRs (including Yashicas, Autocords, Diacords, etc.), have bough many times on Ebay and Keh and done conferences on the subject.

 

A TLR is often described as the best entry level to mf (medium format). It is thrue but it can also be your definitive mf because of its unique combination of advantages. Main are : silence, no miror blackout (unlike slr), freedom of point of vue (waist level + sport finders) and picture quality (some models). Main disadvantage : image reverse left-right (confusing to follow subject)

 

You are better to stick to models that have full aray of speeds (B and 1 sec to 1#300 or better 1#400 or 1#500) and using Bay I (also call bay 30) filter size. These 2 clues will bring you to the best value models. Among these, the ones with 4 elements (tessar type) are the best pics.

 

There are too many characteristics to check (i use about 15) and no model is best for all of them. I am mentionning only lens quality (all 4 elements are good but some are better), toughness (most have a physical weekness to check), multiple exposure capability (for crank auto models , all knob semi-autos are me enable) and screen quality (old type are very dark, fresnel are much better, grid is usefull).

 

Minolta Autocord . The best overall. Auto and me. Sharpest lens. Weakness is focussing lever easy to bend. Screen a little under average and no grid. Comment : since it was used by many pros, too many are found in bad shape. My best TLR is in good shape with Maxwell grid brightscreen replacement.

 

Kallo Kalloflex . Auto and me . Best lens effect (combination of sharpness and bokeh). No physical weakness : a tank ! Old screen type very dark. With a brightscreen, would be ny number one. Rarer and sought after model, therefore pricier in good shape.

 

Yashica. Some D and 635 have 4 elements but better stick with Mat models. Some older ones where also made with selenium light meter (EM and LM), newer have CDS type (uses air-zinc batteries now). Older models have a better bookeh and are better build. The main advantage of newer ones is to get a working meter (coupled !) that i find acurate. Screens are the best outside of brightscreens replacements, grid too. Physical weakness is the crank (very noisy a bad sign) and lather models are not tough. Comment : easy to find and not use by pros. A plain (no meter) old version (new version has F2.8 viewing lens) in good shape is common, cheap and simply the best value in mf. A 12, 124 or 124G with working meter is the easiest and fastest model to use hand-held.

 

Ricoh Diacord G . Semi-auto with nice 'balance' focussing lever (both sides) . Well builded. Screen about average, no grid. Comment : best value with knob.

 

Sure, there are nice others like Rollei, Microcord, Ricoh 225 but i find them pricier for the specs.

 

Place to buy : i like Keh for many things but their good TLRs are too pricey. I avoid their lowest grade ('ugly') , they are famoust for next level being great ('bargain') wich i only partly agree but anything over that (ex or better) is exceptionnal. Ebay is riskier but it is the best place for stuff like that : common old simple design mechanical camera.

 

Be very picky on condition for Autocords and late Yashica Mat and be prepare to pay more but the best bargains are often early plain (or unworking meter) Yashica Mat and Ricoh Diacord, a little ugly (unpecfect esthetic) that still work well.

 

Try to find one with included hood and a few filters since those are pricey separatly. Also consider a step-up. They are made in 46, 49 and 52mm. 52mm is too wide and obstruck the viewing lens. Also buy a nice hand-held meter . A tripod is also often a must but the good news is a light one is fine since you don't extend it to eye level to shoot.

 

TLRs bring a special photography experience. Have fun !

Put the money where you already know you are going to like : 35 1.4L . Just don't use it completely wide open (from F2 max)

 

If you want a secondary lens, consider the 85 F1.8 . Rangefinders don't really 'incite' to go long because of the smaller frame but i would not be surprise if you learn to apreciate a short tele on a slr. The quality is there and it is much smaller and cheaper than the 35 . Also, better than any Canon 50 on 5D .

 

I also second the opinion that if you pick a 50 , the 1.4 is a better choice and can be an acceptable pick as secondary lens to the main 35 L .

You can have similar sturdiness and light weight too if your camera is much lower than eye level. If you don't want to go on your knees for that, i recommend a right angle finder.

 

Combine that with one of the smallest and lightest CF available. If not Gitzo, take a look at Velbon Sherpa pro CF 500 and 600 series

This is not a real life feedback for these models but generally, i trust more Tamron than Sigma for reliability (sample variation, etc.) It means that at similar specs ans price, Tamron wins unless clear reviews say otherwise.

One third on delivery is acceptable for many but you should draw the line on the contract. That means that you would change your contract now to accept that for everyone or you stick to your actual policy.

 

I guess it depends if you are willing to let go some clients to get an higher paiement safety for you. It also depends how most other photographers get pay.

You should mention what other lenses you already have and on what body you had your 50mm. If it was on a 'APS' sensor, it was covering like a 75mm . In that case, the 85 F1.8 should be your pick and it is a much better lens anyway.

 

If it was on film, those 'normal' 50 are often the only afordable, fast and better than average glass. An obvious value play but comparing to other brands, those have never been Canon's strenght. Still, if you love the focal and don't want a big lens, it will be fine on a 5D (F2.8 to F8).

 

There are many nice lenses in that system. Take a look at 17-40 F4 L, 70-200 F4 L is , 24-105 F4 L is, 35 F1.4 L and 85 F1.8 (not L but as good). I find the F2.8 zoom models too big and heavy.

I have the Tokina AT-X 50-250 F4-5.6 zoom. In fact, i started with it as a 'universal' tele in 1984.

 

I soon found it not fast enough to hand-held but it is great on a tripod.

 

About macro, it is a 50mm 1:1.4 (F6.3 i think) making it possibly the most powerfull zoom without being a specialise lens. I did very nice macro shots with it with a TTL flash and cord.

 

Still, i would not buy it purely as a macro lens. There are better solutions for that. Your target means vertical taking and there is a zoom creep risk (sliding).

 

First you need to know what magnification you want. More power means harder to get and pricier.

 

As a guideline, 1:1 is the same as a 35mm film , field is about 1.4 inch wide. 1:2 is twice, 2:1 is half and so on.

 

Up to 1:2, it is easy and you can get a Pentax-M 50 F4 or add tubes to your 50mm lens. 1:1 lenses are pricier but you can add a 25mm tube on the 50 macro to get there.

 

If you want more than 1:1, consider a bellows (like tubes but variable). These are expensives in K mount but cheap in screw mount (M42) and this is the way to go with an adapter.

 

Lightning is as important, ask also about it (ring flash, etc.)

I recall there was a small button for battery check that also put a green light on the pose number.

 

But when you press the shutter release half way one of 3 things happen : red light signalling over-exposure (would need faster than the 1_500 sec max), yellow light signalling long exposure (slower than 1_30 sec) or no light when in between.

Teleconverters work better with primes and sometimes tele zooms. I would avoid them on an 'extreme' zoom starting wide like the 24-120 .

 

I second the 100-400 VR recommandation. It has everything you look for : flexibility and minimal redondance to your other lens. Only the price could be a problem.

There is not much you can do to disquise a camera but you can sure disguise you bag by using your regular backpak. I sometimes put a small shoulder camera bag in it.

 

Thieves are probably attracted by large camera and lens(looks expensive). If your Sigma lens is a large zoom (you should mention exactly what it is), something like a low cost Canon 50 F1.8 would complete it : better for low light and much smaller . An F1.4 USM would add silence but cost much more.

 

I would also consider bringing a film point and shoot as backup (very cheap used these days) if the big one fails.

Unlike normals and of course wide angles, long tele like yours often take one size smaller without vignetting. 72 is one size from 77, so it is worth a try.

 

At least, i knew of some old 400mm that took 72 filters with step-down from 77.

The longer the lens focal lenght, the longer the tube must be to have the same effect. So, your 50mm tube will 'improve' the ratio more than on a 70mm or more lens.

 

Of course, another aspect is the minimum focus distance of the lens . 50mm usually have 0.45m (1.5 foot), not more than 2 feet. So, yes you will get a stronger ratio from such a lens.

 

But you will find out that overdoing it has its problems : harder to focus, less light, less quality, etc. In fact, even specialise gear is not that easy if you want it mighty powerfull. But 1:2 is an easy target (about 3 inches wide field) Even 1:1 (half of that) is realistic. Anyway, there are many nice things to catch in the 1:2 to 1:4 area.

 

I suggest you try the 25 tube first, then the 50 wich should provide a very close focussing. You could also go all the way and use all the tubes together just to see the results (why not)

 

My suggestion of the 50mm lens is also base on it alone. You zoom is a great one but probably big and heavy. A small, light but fast lens will bring another experience for relatively not much money. Many starts in photography with just that single prime lens.