360mm f/6.3 for RB67?

[Graham_Martin]

Anyone have opinions on this lens in terms of image quality, and its best uses? I have an opportunity to buy one for less than US$350.00 which seems like a reasonable price. It also seems that this focal length is not that common on the used market.

Thanks

Graham from St. Augustine, FL

 

[keithwms]

It's okay. Hood it and it's okay.

A 350 KL would be a much better choice, and frankly, that price is right on edge of what I'd pay for the 360. I mean, I have one and would part with it for roughly that price.

Trying to remember the last time I used the 360... I did some tele outdoor stuff. I can look it up if you wish. But generally I go to 645 format for longer focal length stuff... may as well let the format do the work for you

 

[keithwms]

Okay, this one was with the 360/6.3 at f/8.

http://s25.photobucket.com/albums/c76/keithwms/?action=view&current=jeffmem.jpg

 

[Graham_Martin]

As a newbie to Med. Format can you tell me why the 645 format is better for the longer focal lengths? I believe on can buy a 645 back for the RB67. What is the advantage of the KL version, and are you offering to sell yours to me for about that price? Wasn't quite sure if that is your intent or not.

Thanks!

 

[keithwms]

Well in 6x7 format you'd be lugging a lot of slow glass to get to that field of view. And furthermore, the top shutter speed on your rb is 1/400. So... the lens isn't fast and with that slowish top shutter speed, you're pretty tightly constrained. Finally, if you consider that we're talking about tele subjects here, the enlargement factor is not that different, comparing 645 and 6x7. By that I mean: if we were talking about a wider field of view, then I'd definitely argue that 6x7 is clearly superior. But for a narrower field of view and tele shooting in general, I just don't see much advantage in 6x7. Combining all these things, I do not think that you will see much format gain by shooting 360/6.3... as opposed to shooting 200mm in 645 format.

N.b. the [excellent] manual focus mamiya 200/2.8 apo lens (which I have and love) sometimes goes for $500 or so, and it's fast enough that I can shoot it at 1/1000 sec or faster routinely without going to ISO 400 film. It kicks the 360/6.3 all over the place. The 350 KL would have a better chance against it, probably.

For wider fields of view, I tend to go to larger formats; for tighter crops and tele subjects (sports, wildlife etc) I go to smaller formats like 645 and 35mm.

Mind you, for static tele, the 360 is peachy.

 

[Graham_Martin]

Thanks Keith. As with anything worthwhile I can see that I have quite a learning curve ahead of me.

 

[epatsellis]

Yup, the 360 is great, even my non C version (with a lens hood, naturally), amazingly with the 2x Kenko MC6, it's still pretty damn good. I'll have to dig up some negs I shot with the combo last summer and scan them.

 

[EdColorado]

I just got a 360 (non C) myself. First impressions are good. Only thing, I paid $99 for mine from KEH. Ugly grade but nothing wrong with it at all. Ugly grade is a crap shoot but even a bargain grade would be less than what your looking at. Pictures of mine are in an old thread: (there was a url link here which no longer exists) I guess it all depends on how patient you can be..oops, just looked. KEH has an EX grade for $325 so I guess mine was quite cheap. I'd expect the KEH lens to be pretty near perfect with that rating. Anyhow, I like mine so far but as I said haven't used it all that much yet.

 

[Graham_Martin]

Ed, you just found the lens I was referring to! Maybe I will wait until one with a few scratches comes on the market.

 

[keithwms]

Well I'll sell you mine for, I dunno, $275 +shipping? Poor thing just hasn't seen any action in ages.

 

[EdColorado]

This was shot with the 360 Graham. On Delta 400.

 

[Graham_Martin]

Cute little fella!

 

[Maris]

I'm amazed by how sharp and contrasty my 360 f6.3, non C version is. Sure I have to shade the front element properly and all exposures are from the top of a decent tripod. But that is routine for all my Mamiya RB 67 photography anyway.

Another virtue of the long focal length is the seriously thin depth of field available for portraits and close-ups when using 0.25D and 0.5D close-up auxiliary lenses.