Bronica GS-1

[Bruce Osgood]

Does anyone have first-hand information on the 100mm versus the 110mm Macro lenses? Or, for that matter, second-hand information?

I'm interested in building a GS-1 kit and wonder if they are of equal sharpness/contrast/resolving power and saturation, under 'normal' conditions and the 110 simply offers the advantage of Macro focusing.

 

[whlogan]

I have them both and the 100mm is as sharp a lens as ever was made. I have only used the 110mm for close up stuff and it, too is very, very sharp, though I have used it a good bit less. Depending on your uses either will give you good service. If it is big landscapes I'd go with the 100mm. Otherwise either should do fine. With a 6x7 neg you'll do fine, I'm sure

Logan

 

[Tony-S]

The 110 is a higher resolving lens, but it may not mean anything in day to day usage. Remember, "sharpness" is a function of two things - resolution and contrast.

The 100 gives much better bokeh, IMO. It's an easy lens to use at f/3.5.

 

[whlogan]

I think I shorted you... mostly what you will really need for landscape work is the 50mm, which in that case you might get it and have it welded. The 65mm is good, but in comparison, the 50mm is head and shoulders above the 65. Again, of course it wants some huge filters... right now I can't recall what sizes, but I am always getting and using #29'S FOR RED ONES SINCE THEY WORK SOOOO much better than 25's.... be a dog? be a bulldog, says I. or a #22 sometimes. But above all get a 50mm. You'll never look back....

Logan

 

[craigclu]

What they said... The 50 is solid, especially for an SLR wide. Frankly, I've never used my 110 for general duty (only close proximity work) but should try it. The 100 is great. With a little patience, this stuff can be had for very little outlay. Join the lens of the month club!

 

[Bruce Osgood]

Logan and Tony-S,
Thank you both. I feel comfortable with your advice. I may be back for some more.

 

[Tony-S]

I think I shorted you... mostly what you will really need for landscape work is the 50mm, which in that case you might get it and have it welded. The 65mm is good, but in comparison, the 50mm is head and shoulders above the 65. Again, of course it wants some huge filters... right now I can't recall what sizes

The 50mm takes 92mm filters, IIRC. The bigger problem, though, is its thread pitch is unusual so it's virtually impossible to find filters for it. I just use Cokins for mine.

The 50mm and 200mm stand out from all the rest, IMO.

 

[Bruce Osgood]

Craig,
I think you are right regarding the lens of the month. And regarding the 50 I knew that would have to be apart of the kit.

 

[wildbill]

the 50mm takes 95mm filters.

 

[johns photos]

For me the choice was easy. My 100mm had an unacceptable amount of distortion. Not just my copy but its part of the design as Bronica used to publish official curves on the tamron website that clearly illustrated the difference between the 2 lenses. The 110mm has virtually none that I can see. As far as sharpness they seem equivalent. Either are good glass but the distortion characteristic to the 100 (which is significant) bugged me enough to purchase a 110mm and sell the 100mm.

 

[Tony-S]

For me the choice was easy. My 100mm had an unacceptable amount of distortion. Not just my copy but its part of the design as Bronica used to publish official curves on the tamron website that clearly illustrated the difference between the 2 lenses. The 110mm has virtually none that I can see. As far as sharpness they seem equivalent. Either are good glass but the distortion characteristic to the 100 (which is significant) bugged me enough to purchase a 110mm and sell the 100mm.

If it has distortion it's irrelevant in the great majority of shots. Unless you shoot brick walls or something.

the 50mm takes 95mm filters.

Yes, that's right. But the pitch is wonky.