Bronica SQ - 150mm + extension tube or 180mm for portraits

[hoffy]

Hi Folks,

I want to replace my broken 150mm PS lens (flash circuit won't fire). One thing I have never been happy with this lens is its reasonably long minimum focus distance. I have now, though, got my hands on a S-18 extension tube, which should help out.

But

I have always thought that the 180mm would also be a decent replacement.

Given the choice (& considering a replacement 150 is going to be approximately 1/4 the price of a 180), which would be the best option?

Cheers

 

[mweintraub]

The 150mm is a fantastic lens... but the 180mm, from what I hear, is amazing. Let your pocket book figure this answer out.

 

[wiltw]

An extension tube on the 150mm does allow you to 'focus closer' to get tighter framing of the subject, but the 180mm allows you to get tighter from a somewhat more distant camera position -- 20% farther...important because camera position changes the facial perspective captured!
For example, 6x6 frames 2.5' x 2.5' from a shooting distance of 8.1' with 180mm vs. shooting distance of 6.8' with 150mm...the facial perspective obtained with 6.8' distance might not be quite as pleasing to the person photographed or their immediate family members. To us, the shooter, it may 'not matter', but OTOH we have witnessed when [a mother did not like the captured facial perspective of portrait photos of her son] due to camera position.

This series of shots shows how the same framing of the face alters its portrayal, because the camera position was changed appropriate to the FL of the lens.

http://stepheneastwood.com/tutorials/lensdistortion/index.htm

The standard close focus distance on the 150mm SQ lens is 1.5m...already veeeeerrrry close!

 

[hoffy]

The 150mm is a fantastic lens... but the 180mm, from what I hear, is amazing. Let your pocket book figure this answer out.

Yeah, the pocket book is going "150, you only need the 150". I have actually never asked, but I am curious to understand what makes the 180mm an amazing lens (yes, I have heard this before as well).

An extension tube on the 150mm does allow you to 'focus closer' to get tighter framing of the subject, but the 180mm allows you to get tighter from a somewhat more distant camera position -- 20% farther...important because camera position changes the facial perspective captured!
For example, 6x6 frames 2.5' x 2.5' from a shooting distance of 8.1' with 180mm vs. shooting distance of 6.8' with 150mm...the facial perspective obtained with 6.8' distance might not be quite as pleasing to the person photographed or their immediate family members. To us, the shooter, it may 'not matter', but OTOH we have witnessed when [a mother did not like the captured facial perspective of portrait photos of her son] due to camera position.

This series of shots shows how the same framing of the face alters its portrayal, because the camera position was changed appropriate to the FL of the lens.

http://stepheneastwood.com/tutorials/lensdistortion/index.htm

The standard close focus distance on the 150mm SQ lens is 1.5m...already veeeeerrrry close!

Thanks for your reply. Perspective is something worth considering and I'll look through this some more.

In regards to the 1.5m minimum focal lenght, the biggest issue is you can't get a decent headshot in at that distance and that lens.

Cheers

 

[M Carter]

The 180 isn't necessarily "amazing" - it's just got a really nice look for people shooting. I don't own the 150, but to me, the 180 is a just-right sweet spot for telephoto compression and background blur without having to be on the other side of the room. Really nice sized lens, too. In the 90's, I shot tons and tons of catalog and fashion stuff with it, it probably didn't come off my camera for years at a stretch.

 

[hoffy]

The 180 isn't necessarily "amazing" - it's just got a really nice look for people shooting. I don't own the 150, but to me, the 180 is a just-right sweet spot for telephoto compression and background blur without having to be on the other side of the room. Really nice sized lens, too. In the 90's, I shot tons and tons of catalog and fashion stuff with it, it probably didn't come off my camera for years at a stretch.

View attachment 173003

Nice - thanks for your reply.

The 180 is tempting. I see that KEH have one currently listed. Hmmmmm

 

[RichardJack]

Hi,
I own all the S & PS lenses. My favorite for portraits is the 135mm which focuses as close as the 180mm. I love the 150mm S as well. It's not as sharp in the corners as the PS which makes it perfect (its also f3.5 vs f4.5 of the 180). Both lenses should get you close enough. IMO the 180mm is nice but overrated and expensive. Bronica should of made the 180mm f3.5 or f4 for shallow DOF. The 200mm PS is half the price and will give you great head shots.
Instead of tubes, why not try Bronica's CU1 and CU2 close-up lenses? I find them much handier and great for portraits. If your shooting a 3/4 length or a bust shot the 105mm S is great, it's very sharp and gets you pretty close. And cheap!
my two cents
Rick

 

[mweintraub]

Nice - thanks for your reply.

The 180 is tempting. I see that KEH have one currently listed. Hmmmmm

Make sure you look at their SQ version and not the ETR series lens they have.

 

[hoffy]

Hi,
I own all the S & PS lenses. My favorite for portraits is the 135mm which focuses as close as the 180mm. I love the 150mm S as well. It's not as sharp in the corners as the PS which makes it perfect (its also f3.5 vs f4.5 of the 180). Both lenses should get you close enough. IMO the 180mm is nice but overrated and expensive. Bronica should of made the 180mm f3.5 or f4 for shallow DOF. The 200mm PS is half the price and will give you great head shots.
Instead of tubes, why not try Bronica's CU1 and CU2 close-up lenses? I find them much handier and great for portraits. If your shooting a 3/4 length or a bust shot the 105mm S is great, it's very sharp and gets you pretty close. And cheap!
my two cents
Rick

Thanks Rick. Yeah, I have contemplated the 135 in the past, but that seems to be harder to find than the 180. The lens I currently use for this type of photography is the 110 F4 PS.

So, for portrait work and the 150mm, you suggest the S over the PS? (I could buy one of each and still have plenty of change over the cost of a 180!)

BTW, I have never heard of the Bronica CU1 and CU2 close up lenses. I assume that they are attachments for the front of the other lenses?

Cheers

 

[David T T]

If its just that the flash won't fire, it's probably carbon buildup. That was the case with my RB67 lenses. The cla cost as much as another used lens, but that would in turn need a cla and sooner rather than later. Just a thought!

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hi Folks,

I want to replace my broken 150mm PS lens (flash circuit won't fire). One thing I have never been happy with this lens is its reasonably long minimum focus distance. I have now, though, got my hands on a S-18 extension tube, which should help out.

But

I have always thought that the 180mm would also be a decent replacement.

Given the choice (& considering a replacement 150 is going to be approximately 1/4 the price of a 180), which would be the best option?

Cheers

a 180mm lens would be preferable for portraits due to the increased distance from the subject but, some times economy rules our choices.

 

[hoffy]

If its just that the flash won't fire, it's probably carbon buildup. That was the case with my RB67 lenses. The cla cost as much as another used lens, but that would in turn need a cla and sooner rather than later. Just a thought!

Ahh, yes - the old conundrum. Fix or ditch.

18 months ago I went through it and had 2 of my lenses CLA'd - the camera was gone for nearly 12 months as the tech tried to source parts (not easy to find people willing to work on Bronica's where I live). I decided with this one, that I would go the second hand route and see how I went.

If I get the chance, I'll strip down the other lens and try my luck.

Cheers

 

[RichardJack]

Thanks Rick. Yeah, I have contemplated the 135 in the past, but that seems to be harder to find than the 180. The lens I currently use for this type of photography is the 110 F4 PS.

So, for portrait work and the 150mm, you suggest the S over the PS? (I could buy one of each and still have plenty of change over the cost of a 180!)

BTW, I have never heard of the Bronica CU1 and CU2 close up lenses. I assume that they are attachments for the front of the other lenses?

Cheers

Hi,
If your primary usage for a 150mm lens is portraits you can save lots of money buying the "S" instead. BUT, the PS is better made and a tad sharper and is newer. I found my 150PS for $65 a month or so ago. I used the 150 S for years when I shot weddings and it always made beautiful portraits. But honestly it all comes down to your skill, technique and lighting.
I didn't know it at the time I bought my 110mm macro that there are two versions. A f4 that focuses to 1:4, and newer f4.5 that focuses to 1:1. I only bought the 110mm PS from the same guy as the 150mm because it was about $60 (bought a 50PS for $70 as well) to upgrade my old "S" lenses. The 110mm f4 doesn't really get you any closer than the 135 or 180mm do, IMO it should not be called a macro. The f4.5 version is a true macro and I have not seen one for under $300. I think the 110 f4.5 is really the "holy grail" of the PS line, few were made and it was released after the 180 & 135mm lenses. There was a Tilt/Shift lens on the drawing board but thanks to Tamron never made it (they did make one for the ERTS).
The CU1 & CU2 are close up lenses made by Bronica. But any +1 or +2 close up lens in 67mm will do the same thing. Here is one on Ebay now (but too expensive), look at item # 162002419449
BTW, Bronica made CUL1 and 2 in 62mm, 67mm, and 72mm for the different series cameras.
And as mentioned, for a fraction of the price of the 180mm you can have a 200mm S or PS and use a close up lens and get the same end result and have money left for another lens.
regards,
Rick

I just stated this project last fall, no portraits yet. Mostly just evaluating Bronica lenses and different films.
http://www.pbase.com/rick_jack/bronica

 

[hoffy]

Well, I have now passed on the information to the minister for fun and finance - apparently I have another anniversary of my birth coming up and she wants to purchase me some kind of gift. I sent her links to both lenses on KEH, so she can choose!

 

[yessammassey]

Can I jump into this thread and ask a related question? Not sure if the etiquette dictates this is a better option than just making another thread, but it's a pretty similar matchup so maybe it can be excused...

For the PG (GS-1) lenses, same applications as the OP, 150mm or 200? I could swing the 18mm extension tube to help with the MFD of either. It's a significant difference in reach between the two, but I'd choose one over the other if one had better background defocus and smoothness (bokeh, I guess) than the other. Although all other things being equal I'd go for the 150 for the more manageable size...

But what I really need is an experienced opinion on either of those, vs the RB67 180mm K/L.

It seems like the close focus distance of the RB67 and good reputation of the 180mm K/L are enough to recommend it over the PG lenses, but I'm definitely open to going with either of the Bronicas due to the ease of use and weight savings... But is the 200mm PG kind of missing the point on ergonomics, especially with the extension tube, and/or is the 150mm good enough to fill the shoes of the 180 in most cases.

So bokeh, and ergonomics are my two highest priority factors. Any advice?

 

[wiltw]

Let us first consider the fact that countless professional photographers shooting head and shoulder portraits in 135 format found that 100mm gave them great facial perspective from typical studio shooting distances in the range of 8-10'. In addition to great facial perspective, shooting from 8-10' provided sufficient space for separation to backdrop for lighting equipment and room for the photographer to maneuver without the need of super long portraiture studio spaces. Assuming they used the same shooting distance (for continued good facial perspective), what FL would frame sufficiently tight for a headshot? First let us establish the following facts:

• When we shoot from 9' with 100mm we frame an area 2.1' wide within the short dimension of the frame...
• so when we continue to shoot from 9', we need to use 150mm to frame an area which is 1.36' wide (I presume this is 'tight enough' for discussion) to fit within the short dimension of the frame

Now, to deal with the different aspect ratios of 135 format vs. 6x6 format vs. 6x7 format, let us relate FL of lens to the Short Dimension of the frame to later figure out 'equivalent FL' for other format cameras...

100mm = 24mm * 4.2
150mm = 24mm * 6.25​

• So head & shoulders shots with 6x6 or 6x7 format (which share the same Short Dimension of the frame!) are best done with 235mm (56mm * 4.2)
• and headshots with 6x6 or 6x7 format are best done with 350mm (56mm * 6.25)

and the same 9' shooting distance yields the same facial perspective as achieved with 135mm format cameras. Anything shorter in FL will not be as tightly framed, so will entail cropping in the darkroom!

Why is 150mm such a 'popular' FL 'for portraits' with 6x6? At 9' (the distance for good facial perspective) 6x6 frames an area which is 3.4' x 3.4'...which gives a reasonable framing for a waist-up portrait of two people when they are not literally shoulder to shoulder but somewhat offset fore and aft for composition. We should not forget that moving in closer for head and shoulders or headshots requires longer FL in order to preserve good facial perspective!

 

[mshchem]

I picked up the 180 ps, really sweet, I paid what I think is a good price. Very happy, I have a set of tubes as well, I used with the 500 mm fluorite lens to take candids of chickadees. . I sold the big lens, and my 150 kept the 180. A wedding photographer who I know said that the 180 you could take pictures of the couple's hands to show the rings, all in one telephoto.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hi Folks,

I want to replace my broken 150mm PS lens (flash circuit won't fire). One thing I have never been happy with this lens is its reasonably long minimum focus distance. I have now, though, got my hands on a S-18 extension tube, which should help out.

But

I have always thought that the 180mm would also be a decent replacement.

Given the choice (& considering a replacement 150 is going to be approximately 1/4 the price of a 180), which would be the best option?

Cheers

money-wise,it's a no-brainer but the 180mm Zeiss Sonar(I'm assuming you're talking Hasselblad here)is really an amazingly sharp lens.