kevin_wong7

<p>Image quality! How can I forget... That I have done side by side test in studio with flash, and I have to say that I find the sharpness and amount of details are literally the same (even zooming in to 100%), with the 1.2 L giving a slightly DIFFERENT, and may be just about better colour rendition compare to the 1.4 lenses. </p>

<p>Hi all, the reason I post this is to find out if it is just me getting one bad Canon 50mm f 1.2 L lenses, or is it quite a common feeling?</p>

<p>So I have had my 1st hand 50mm 1.2 L lenses for 6 months now, used in about 10 shoots (I do portrait and fashion for a living) and had felt really let down by it AF twice.</p>

<p>It was both in studio situation using flash, with fair amount of modelling light on the subject, I totally expect this £1000+ lenses to be able to AF fairly accurately, but it just won't.</p>

<p>In both occasions I was shooting in portrait position, using the AF point at the tip of the "9 point" diamond in the viewfinder. (or the one on the very right tip, in landscape position). The 5D II give me the usual "in-focus" signal when I focus on the subject's face. The resulting photo is out focused, not massively but just enough to be dimmed unacceptable and certainly will be very noticeable if printed on a magazine full page.</p>

<p>OK I shoot wide open, f 2.8 - 3.5 etc, so the depth of field is shallow. But I have been shooting exactly like that for over 40 shoots with my canon 50mm f1.4 lenses and it was NEVER a problem. 95 - 97% of the photos are sharp. (By the way, thanks but really, it misses the point if you tell me to "just shoot in f 4"...)<br>

I also find that the f1.2 L is more susceptible to chromatic aberration.</p>

<p>Having paid almost 3 times the price of the 50mm f1.4, I do expect the 50mm f1.2 L, will in some way be superior, apart from the weight and build. <br>

Unfortunately in both occasions I did not have my cheaper 50mm lenses with me to do a comparison. For my next few shoot I will bring both 50mm lenses and compare the 2 when the issue occurs. But the thought that I cannot really rely on the lenses that suppose to be Canon's top of the range is simply ridiculous.</p>

<p>I am now also considering to sell the 50mm L lenses to fund the 85mm L, which I had hired a few times and loved both its performance and final image. I think 50mm will remain the focal length that I use most but it seems like I may as well just use the 50mm f 1.4. (How I wish the Zeiss made 50mm is AF...)</p>

<p>Have you faced this same situation? Would love to know, thank you.</p>

<p>Having read the other comments, I just thought of another point of difference in the two system worth noting I guess:<br>

5Dii and 1Dsiii 's handling of higher iso, say between 400 to 800 is wayyyy better than that of most of the MF digital back, in terms of noise, so again, it depends on what style of photos it is used for.</p>

<p>Hi Euph, I constantly use both camera system, although with the RZii I only shoot with film.<br>

I think there are a few major issues:</p>

<p>1) Price: While a 5Dii is about £1600, you will be hard push to get a decent Re-furbished digital back for the RZ for £6,000. While you can get very good condition RZ lens from ebay for about £200, the best quality Canon lens are 3 - 5 times that as second hand. For RZ there is only 1 tier of lenses.<br>

2) And then you will find that the digital back out there all have sensor smaller than the 6x7 format. So your standard RZ lens will be cropped to, a rough calculation, around a 75mm (in 35mm camera terms). Although thatmay not be a hugh problem if you don't intend to shoot too wide.<br>

3) The sheer weight and un-ergonomical shape of the RZ means that it will push you towards a different kind of photography compare with the 5Dii. With the 5Dii you can move around so quickly, and the lenses focus so fast, and no worry of film cost, you will find yourself shooting more, quicker.<br>

On the other hand, you will probably find yourself spending more time to consider everything before you push the shutter of the RZ, like direct the model in more detail etc.<br>

Not one kind is better, just different.</p>

<p>I think you can judge for yourself if you look at David Sims and Rankin's photos, the 2 of them are among the elite fashion photographer in Europe if not the world, and are known to almost always shoot with RZii digital.<br>

Terry Richardson have in the last 1 year moved on to 5Dii, he has been shooting the cover for Purple fashion magazine with it, you can find a youtube video of him at that shoot. And while not fashion photos, Max Wagner shoot on a 5Dii too.</p>

<p>And also, I had tried both the Mechanical and the multi-exposure mode, the shutter works, but when i push lever the frame counter still stuck. </p>

<p>Hi all, I recently bought a RZ pro (version one) 220 back to use with my RZ pro ii. Loaded film and the first 10 frame was fired as usual, no problem. Then when I push down the cocking lever (all the way) I notice that the resistance is not there any more. The film back still winding the film forward with my every push of the lever, but the frame counter stuck in between 10 and 11. (yes, it was a 220 film in there) </p>

<p>I tried the shutter, nothing, the orange light with the Lever logo in the viewfinder grow. I changed to another lens, same. I changed to the Pro ii 120 back and everything work as normal. I then loaded up another roll of 220 in the 220 back, the same situation, the lever will wind film but doesn't seems to cock the shutter. And also, the counter is still stuck between 10 and 11.</p>

<p>Do you guys think that it is simply this 220 back is faulty, or that a version one RZ back will not work with a RZ pro ii body?? OR may be this can be solve if I can "reset" the frame counter? (Don't know how to do it though.) Hope to hear your opinions, thanks.</p>

<p>Thank you Dave, but you have misread my question, I DO NOT want to give the extra third to half a stop, BUT want to fill the frame with an object the size of a typical adult's head in 6x7. So may be I need a 150mm, or a 180mm or a 210mm, I don't know, thats what I am trying to find out. Cheers.</p>

<p>Can I ask you guys who have used the 150mm and the 180mm, using this 2 lenses, can I fill the frame with just a typical adult's head, WITHOUT having to give the extra half step exposure (using the bellows)?</p>

<p>Thanks guys, indeed looking at the shape of the 2 cameras, it is physically impossible, sigh....</p>

<p>Like Kevin said, it may be worth prioritising the lens.... I am also gonna rent a 110mm of the RZ, which is as fast as the Pentax's f2.8, and HOPE that it may perform better than the RZ's 90mm. Wonder if you guys can recommend a RZ lens in terms of good bokah or Sharp-even-wide-open ?</p>

<p>Here is a pic I took with the Pentax 67 90mm </p><div></div>

<p>Hi guys, I have been looking for an adaptor to use Pentax 67 lens on my RZ 67ii (Love the bokah and the creamy texture of the Pentax, especially the 90mm), been to ebay, amazon, google but still no luck. Would really appreciate if anyone has any suggestions! Thanks a lot! </p>

<p>and here the Mamiya's</p><div></div>

<p>Rough scan of the control test, both using 80mm, 1/125 around f8 i think:<br>

First is Hasselblad 503cx and then Mamiya 645 AFD</p><div></div>

<p>Hi Adam, I bought a Mamiya 645 AFD about 2 months ago, after previously using Hasselblad 503 and Canon. Similar to you, I was very happy with the Zeiss glass on the Hassey, but crave a faster work flow, wanting to get more spontaniety in my portraits and fashion work. Plus, the increasing film and processing cost in London, and it's competitive industry, means that i need every way to cut cost, and the 16 frames per roll that the 645 give makes a difference. The Mamiya's back can use both 120 or 220, so I save time changing film, and overall the 645 greatly speed up my shoots. <br>

It's auto focus is just OK (i suppose the AFD 2 and 3 will be better) compare with Canon, useable. But I do have some rolls that's suprisingly out of focus, I think that a big part is me needing more practise with the 'focus in the middle then recompose' trick. I hope it is. Otherwise there is either something wrong with the body or the glass. (Or may be the mamiya demand a faster shutter speed than Hassey?)<br>

Of the rolls that's perfectly sharp, it is very close to the result from the Hassey which I was using at the same aperture and speed as a control test. Just tiny tiny touch less sharp and less pleasing with the colour. <br>

I have just ordered a adapter to use the Hassey 150mm on the Mamiya, hope the zeiss glass will give me the best of both world (minus AF but has in-focus indication). <br>

The metering is excellent, 95% of the time is perfect, only in tricky light condition that it was a bit off, but as i shoot negs, the latitude can compensate that. <br>

All in all, i am 90% happy with the move I will say. If more practice make my use of focus-look better thus getting sharp picture constantly, I will probably truly retired the Hassey. <br>

Hope it helps a bit.</p>

 

<p>Hi all, I am a new Metz CL-4 user, and I mainly use a Mamiya 645 afd and Canon for portrait and fashion work. <br>

I have a impression that the bracket mount on the CL-4 may be adjustable by unscrewing the 1 screw on it side? Please can some one tell me if that's true or just my fantasy... and if it can be unscrew, can i move the mount, say, to to middle of the handle? <br>

Any comments most appreciated, Thank you!</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thank you guys for your responses.<br>

HAving read your comments and tried out an AFD in the shop, now i have decided I WILL get the Mamiya 645 system. Just trying to find out in the web if the AFD is significantly better than the AF, in terms of auto-focus and metering accuracy. As there is a 50% difference in price.<br>

Cheers</p>

 

<p>Hello, I am about to buy the Mamiya 645 AF second hand from a shop in London, but they also has a 645 AFD available, for about 50% more in price. Now, i am on a really really tight budget, so i would like to know if the 645AFD is that much different to the 645AF?? I am most concern with the speed and accuracy of the Auto-focus and metering, but please feel free to comment on any other significant difference.<br>

Digital back compatibility is not really a concern as I can't afford one right now anyway...<br>

Thanks a lot!</p>

<p>Hello, my name is Kevin. Please, can anyone tell me if i can use a digital back, especially the ZD with a Mamiya 645 AF?? <br>

My guess is that it can but only just that it won't give the digital back information like shutter speed, lenses focual length etc?</p>

<p>While i am at this, any of you guys been using BOTH a Hasselblad 5xx and Mamiya 645 AF?? I've been using a Hassey but would like the AutoFocus and spot metering, hence the interest in Mamiya. How do you feel about the differences between the resulting photos from the 2 cameras? (any sample photos from you guys will be great...) I assume Hassey's will be sharper.</p>

<p>Many thanks for your responds, really appreciated!</p>

Hello, I use a Hasselblad 503cx with a 80mm and a 180mm. With the standard view finder. My work are

mainly portraits or Fashion shoot for magazine and catalogs, and often find the 6x6 images i submit being

crop to fit standard magazine page.

 

So my aim here is to shoot 6x4.5 image plus increase the number of frames to 16 per roll, to be more

cost effective of cause. So my questions are what Back do i need exactly? And is there any equipment i can

replace/cover my screen so to limit myself to the 6x4.5 image area?

 

Thanks, any information much appreciated.

Thank you all for your advice, really helpful. With my current volume of shots, it will translate

to about 7,8 rolls of 120 a month, and the money for process, contacts and then scanning 1

frame per roll will be about $450 every month, so i guess my choice is really either sacrificing

some image quality and go for a Canon 1DsMKII, or get a bottom end MF body + bottom

end digital back.

 

What in your opinion will be acceptable "bottom end MF body + bottom end digital back"??

Cheers~

Hi all, I have been doing portraits and fashion work with 35mm, and want to move into medium format,

digitally. My budget is basically the bottom end of it, any suggestion? Someone suggested Mamiya

645AFD II, any thoughts? Any opinions much appreciated!!

I am in the hunt of a wide lens in the range of 24mm - 35mm for my canon digital SLR. As I will

occasionally use it in low light condition, large aperture is important too, so I suppose will have to be

prime lens. I went on researching about Canon compatable lens, but all the more affordable one like

Canon EF 28mm f/1.8, EF 35mm f/2 and Sigma 28mm f/1.8 all had rather bad review and comments like

they don't focus well and are soft unless stopped down a lot, kind of lost now...

 

Please help, your advices are most appreciated!

I have a Canon 350D with a 50mm f1.4, a 24-85mm f3.5 -f4.5 (which i am not happy with, as i am fond

of getting shallow depth of field). Portraits and fashion shoot for magazines are what I am aiming at, with

that in mind, should I add a 85mm f1.8 or a 28mm f1.8??

 

A lot of advice I have got are 'Of course a 85mm' but since mine is digital, after the 1.6 factor I already

find my 50mm very narrow and I have to stand about 4m from the model/sitter to get all head to toe into

the frame. I feel like i work better when i am closer and can talk most naturally to the sitter/model, hence

the thought of getting the 28mm, which pretty much are like looking with my own eyes in terms of area.

 

Any comments are most welcome!