Help Me Choose: A Moderate Wide Angle Lens

[yessammassey]

Let me see what you think of this list of lenses of roughly equivalent angle of view. The question is primarily about the lenses. The cameras themselves are of secondary consideration, although I have some trepidation about going in on a plastic rangefinder like the Mamiya 6 or 7, or a super heavy focal plane shutter SLR like the Pentax 67. Nevertheless...

• Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 50mm f/4 (Hasselblad 50X/20X)
• Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 50mm f/4 (Rollei SL66) (Or other Rollei SLR 50mm lenses? Don't know much about this camera system or it's successors)
• Mamiya K/L / L-A 65mm f/4 (RB67/RZ67)
• Mamiya G 50mm f/4 (6/6MF)
• (Mamiya 7 is out of my price range. Capping out at $2K here.)
• Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 50mm f/4 (Pentacon Six/KievXX)
• Zenzanon PG 65mm f/4 (GS-1)
• Nikkor-O 50mm f/2.8 (Bronica EC/S)
• SMC Pentax 55mm f/4 (Pentax 67/6x7)

I think I can guess that the Hasselblad Distagon and Mamiya G will get the most praise out of the entries in this list. I wonder, though, if the retrofocus Distagon really does match the performance of the Mamiya rangefinder lens.

And what about the rest? What are the standouts among those 'lesser' lenses?

I realize that hardly anyone will be able to claim to have in-depth expericene with all of these lenses, but that shouldn't stop you from taking a shot. Come on, let me know what you think!

 

[MattKing]

All of them will give you really good, professional level results. The differences will be slight, and more likely related to condition than design.
Questions like whether you prefer a leaf shutter or a focal plane shutter will have far more importance than the design differences of the lenses.
As will questions of ergonomics.
As will questions of size of format - 6x7 has real advantages over the smaller 6x6.

 

[Colin Corneau]

The Mamiya 6 lens is one of the sharpest ever. The question of leaf shutters vs focal plane shutter is also worth keeping in mind.

 

[ac12]

Hasselblad has 2 different 50s, in the CF model. The standard, and the FLE (Floating Lens Element) versions.
The FLE has a 2nd adjustment ring for distance ranges to improve the image.
So given a choice, and a not large price difference, I went with the FLE version.

 

[etn]

When I read the original post, I thought, all will give good results, at the end of the day it comes down to which camera feels better in your hands. Then I saw Matt's answer: he couldn't have said it better! Keep in mind the potentially different film formats as well. For 6x6 you can also consider 60mm lenses whose wide-angle effect is not as extreme as with 50mm. The Hasselblad 60 is really good too.

Hasselblad has 2 different 50s, in the CF model. The standard, and the FLE (Floating Lens Element) versions.
The FLE has a 2nd adjustment ring for distance ranges to improve the image.
So given a choice, and a not large price difference, I went with the FLE version.

To add confusion: the CF FLE has B60 bayonet diameter. Then a CFi with B70 has been introduced. It has allegedly the same optical formula. My understanding is that the larger diameter of the CFi reduces vignetting when using filters.

Thinking out of the box, what about going wider with an SWC?

 

[Theo Sulphate]

I have the Carl Zeiss 50/4 CF FLE for Hasselblad and have had excellent results with it. One of my favorite photos, framed 16x20, is of the Columbia River Gorge and shot with Tech Pan film from the top of Crown Point. Aside from the beautiful tonality in the print, I am amazed that I can see individual cars on the highway that are over four miles away.

 

[trendland]

Think different - that will be my advice to you.

Never be focused on lenses of different manufactors first.

What aboud the size of format - there are
bigger diferences!

MattKing mentioned it before here.

6x6 is fine, indeed for many - its very fine. For me too, I like it.

But I is squere - when you later would
like it not so squerish you are beginning
to waste film.

Better use 4,5x6 at first.The next problem will be - your negatives are to smal in regard of your burning ambition.

Lets take 6x7 it is bigger than 4,5 x 6
but it is also a bit squerish - isn't it ?

It is therefore the best compromise to the most.

I forget - we have to think different.

What is about 6x8 ?

Not so many cameras to choose ?

There is one : Fuji 680 GX with wonderfull lenses.

with regards

 

[trendland]

That is little triky - indeed the fuji is bigger than the legendäre RZ 67, does
RB 67 have a Magazine in 6x8 ? I think
so.

Back to your list. The cheapest ones are
the CZJ lenses.
The findest qualtiy should come from
the Distagon orname me a liar.
The midt class is mamiya,pentax,nikon.

You know this at the time as we aĺl - I guess.
But what you might not know - I also
guess the differences are very small.

Within medium format one could say :
In general there are no bad lenses - they are still not existent.
Even older russian zorky lenses are not
so bad for medium format at f/8 .

Ok. - they are of a little pore in regard to their characteristic. Then you should have f/16 .

But notice : That is the fact I am trying to
cover out. The absolute best characteristics to all aspects of quality
you you have with the most expensive high end lenses at f/2.8.

With the outhers you can get a comparable quality at f/4.
So the differences are offen less than
one stop.

with regards

 

[hashtagquack]

Don't forget the 50mm for the mamiya press system which is nothing less than amazing. Plus it gives you the option of 6x9

 

[paul ron]

all those lenses will give you excelent results for their formats.

the differences would be more about personal preferences in how each camera fits in your hand and appeal to your viewing habbits.

for instance... the rb is heavy, bulky, but i love tge revolving backs n the huge view finders. i have a prism because i can get a better feel for focus n composition.

the hassie is a 6x6 and is much lighter n a bit more nimble.

the 645 s are exceptional for walk around cameras, especially in rangefinder models jst as the larger format rangefinders but its a peep sight in comparrison.

as for angle f view... again, it depends on the format.

as for sharpness... im more dissapointed in the lens on my enlager... no matter how sharp i make it, i always want more! all of your choices do well on my setups up to 16x20 enlargements.. thats as big as i go and dont see any differences.

just pick up any camera n start shooting.

 

[Steve Goldstein]

I've owned a Mamiya 7 since 1999 or 2000 and it's been all over the world with me with never a problem, so I wouldn't be too concerned about the plastic unless you intend to hammer nails with it (but there are better tools for that purpose). It is the camera I use the most. The 50mm lens is probably the least common in the M7's wide angle lineup, but mine is plenty sharp and is every bit as good as the other focal lengths I've got. The 43mm is a bit lighter and more compact, though it may be wider than you want. I would think you should be able to get a Mamiya 7 body and 50mm for under US$2k nowadays.

 

[Alan Gales]

Just remember that a 50mm is just a bit wider on a 6x7 camera then it is on a 6x6. I'd say a true wide angle over a moderate wide. I used to own a 50mm ULD for my RZ67 and it felt like the 25mm that I used to have on my 35mm Contax camera. I also owned a 40mm Nikkor for a 6x6 Bronco EC and it felt the same.

I'd be more worried about format choice and focal length choice. Most medium format lenses are really sharp.

 

[Leigh B]

The cameras themselves are of secondary consideration

The cameras are of primary importance.

More specifically, the format is critical to the discussion.

A 50mm lens is normal on a 35mm camera, wide on an MF, and very wide on an LF.

- Leigh

 

[destroya]

I have and printed negs from the mamiya 6 50mm lens and the pentax smc 55mm lens. both are great and produce amazing prints. the largest i have done is 16x20 for both of them and im very happy with the results.

The pentax system will cost half the cost of the mamiya, that pays for a lot of film.

you dont mention if you will be shooting off a tripod or handheld. that makes a difference to me as to which system I will be shooting.

 

[flavio81]

L

• Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 50mm f/4 (Hasselblad 50X/20X)
• Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 50mm f/4 (Rollei SL66) (Or other Rollei SLR 50mm lenses? Don't know much about this camera system or it's successors)
• Mamiya K/L / L-A 65mm f/4 (RB67/RZ67)
• Mamiya G 50mm f/4 (6/6MF)
• (Mamiya 7 is out of my price range. Capping out at $2K here.)
• Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 50mm f/4 (Pentacon Six/KievXX)
• Zenzanon PG 65mm f/4 (GS-1)
• Nikkor-O 50mm f/2.8 (Bronica EC/S)
• SMC Pentax 55mm f/4 (Pentax 67/6x7)

You have listed lenses by some of the best lens manufacturers ever: Carl Zeiss Oberkochen, Carl Zeiss Jena, Mamiya-Sekor, Nikon, and Asahi Optical (Pentax).

I believe all of them are excellent performers, so perhaps you should better focus on which camera you would like best.

On terms of absolute resolution perhaps the Mamiya 50/4 (for rangefinder) would be the best, but who cares when resolution is already extremely high for all of them, in practical terms. As mentioned above, your enlarger lens will have more influence!

 

[ac12]

When I read the original post, I thought, all will give good results, at the end of the day it comes down to which camera feels better in your hands. Then I saw Matt's answer: he couldn't have said it better! Keep in mind the potentially different film formats as well. For 6x6 you can also consider 60mm lenses whose wide-angle effect is not as extreme as with 50mm. The Hasselblad 60 is really good too.



To add confusion: the CF FLE has B60 bayonet diameter. Then a CFi with B70 has been introduced. It has allegedly the same optical formula. My understanding is that the larger diameter of the CFi reduces vignetting when using filters.

Thinking out of the box, what about going wider with an SWC?

I was originally planning on a 40+80+180 kit. I am of the school that I want the widest lens within my budget. Cuz sooner or later, my back will literally be up against the wall, and I need more coverage. For my 35mm camera, it was the 24mm lens. The 24 was also the widest Nikkor that took the standard 52mm filter.
But the extra cost and bulk of the 40 pushed me back to the 50.
SWC vs. 40, that was and still is a difficult choice.

For me, the 60 was getting too close to the 80, and was loosing even more coverage that I wanted. Though a 60+120, 2-lens kit would work. Kind of like the 35+105, 2-lens kit that was popular with the 35mm gang.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Let me see what you think of this list of lenses of roughly equivalent angle of view. The question is primarily about the lenses. The cameras themselves are of secondary consideration, although I have some trepidation about going in on a plastic rangefinder like the Mamiya 6 or 7, or a super heavy focal plane shutter SLR like the Pentax 67. Nevertheless...

• Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 50mm f/4 (Hasselblad 50X/20X)
• Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 50mm f/4 (Rollei SL66) (Or other Rollei SLR 50mm lenses? Don't know much about this camera system or it's successors)
• Mamiya K/L / L-A 65mm f/4 (RB67/RZ67)
• Mamiya G 50mm f/4 (6/6MF)
• (Mamiya 7 is out of my price range. Capping out at $2K here.)
• Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 50mm f/4 (Pentacon Six/KievXX)
• Zenzanon PG 65mm f/4 (GS-1)
• Nikkor-O 50mm f/2.8 (Bronica EC/S)
• SMC Pentax 55mm f/4 (Pentax 67/6x7)

I think I can guess that the Hasselblad Distagon and Mamiya G will get the most praise out of the entries in this list. I wonder, though, if the retrofocus Distagon really does match the performance of the Mamiya rangefinder lens.

And what about the rest? What are the standouts among those 'lesser' lenses?

I realize that hardly anyone will be able to claim to have in-depth expericene with all of these lenses, but that shouldn't stop you from taking a shot. Come on, let me know what you think!

Carl Zeiss and Mamiya take the cake for me;equally good

 

[Slixtiesix]

I would not choose a whole camera system just because of some specific focal length. Also, it would be interesting to know what you want to do with it. Traveling? If this is the case, maybe the Bessa 667W or the corresponding Fuji camera is for you?

 

[trendland]

I would not choose a whole camera system just because of some specific focal length. Also, it would be interesting to know what you want to do with it. Traveling? If this is the case, maybe the Bessa 667W or the corresponding Fuji camera is for you?

Nice idea Slixtiesix - in fact- it shurely depends on what to want to do with.

But then if you mentioned Fuji/Voigtländer 667W please,please do not forget Fuji 670/690 GW/GSW.

Somewhere more phanomenal cameras than many others of the modern types.

I have it in my hands in 2002 by a rental-service they were at least in produktion at this time.

And I would not give them back of my
hands

But the prices were also phaomenal
$2750 to each of them.

But its an absolute pity due to this type :

"You can not change the lens - so as with
the phantastic new bessa "

Predestinated for travel photography -
indeed - and out of produktion I have noticed.


with regards

 

[trendland]

I was originally planning on a 40+80+180 kit. I am of the school that I want the widest lens within my budget. Cuz sooner or later, my back will literally be up against the wall, and I need more coverage. For my 35mm camera, it was the 24mm lens. The 24 was also the widest Nikkor that took the standard 52mm filter.
But the extra cost and bulk of the 40 pushed me back to the 50.
SWC vs. 40, that was and still is a difficult choice.

For me, the 60 was getting too close to the 80, and was loosing even more coverage that I wanted. Though a 60+120, 2-lens kit would work. Kind of like the 35+105, 2-lens kit that was popular with the 35mm gang.

At first it is a quite good idea to choose
some lenses as a kit.

Many colleges of me are very interisted
in brand new lenses - most of them can't
realy affort them I suppose it but better asked not so.

Later they bought it and as I asked for
the correct type of lens - I can not belive:

"You got a new ZOOM LENS ?????"

So if you chose a kit neverless what length you need - there can't be made
any misstake (by focus length) at all !

Trust me that is the true.

Hope that I am not missunderstanding
your reply and you meant ZOOMS :-(

with regards

 

[yessammassey]

Hasselblad has 2 different 50s, in the CF model. The standard, and the FLE (Floating Lens Element) versions.
The FLE has a 2nd adjustment ring for distance ranges to improve the image.
So given a choice, and a not large price difference, I went with the FLE version.

Interesting. The more I learn about Hasselblad's, the more things I see that were adapted by Mamiya for the RB67, which is the MF camera I am most familiar with. The 65mm K/L for that system has made the sharpest and most detailed film photos I have taken, and it has a floating element system very much like the Distagon FLE. Leaf shutter, too. But my copy also shows some evidence of less than perfect QC.

Don't forget the 50mm for the mamiya press system which is nothing less than amazing. Plus it gives you the option of 6x9

This is enticing, but confounds me a bit.

You know, lots of well-meaning folks (some of them maybe with a touch of inveterate contrarianism) found fault with my question about lens quality. It's seen by some, apparently, as an unnecessary route of inquiry. I think I'm supposed to examine each camera system holistically. I do that, but I tried to make this is a thread about moderate wide angle medium format lens quality, or the qualities of different moderate wide angle medium format lenses.

Nevertheless, the didn't put any Mamiya Press lenses in that list. That's it's because I have crossed the Mamiya Press off my list of camera systems to consider, precisely due to the fact that I examined the system in its entirety and decided it wasn't for me.

I've already 'felt out' all of the systems to which the lenses in the OP belong, and decided than any of them would suit my needs. None of them would be my only MF camera system. And I think they could all do what I want, more or less.

Anyway, 50mm - even on 6x7 - is maybe a little wide for me. Let alone on 6x9.

I liked the look of the Mamiya Press, and I like the idea of a low-distortion, non-retrofocus wide angle lens. But a big complex rangefinder with lots of midcentury-era plastic parts and an odd shape just isn't for me. In my opinion they're really cool to look at. I'd maybe be too worried about breaking it in the field. I've also heard that they're lens QC wasn't that great. You have a good one though?

I have and printed negs from the mamiya 6 50mm lens and the pentax smc 55mm lens. both are great and produce amazing prints. the largest i have done is 16x20 for both of them and im very happy with the results.

The pentax system will cost half the cost of the mamiya, that pays for a lot of film.

you dont mention if you will be shooting off a tripod or handheld. that makes a difference to me as to which system I will be shooting.

Thanks! This is is helpful. Longer exposures on a tripod is one of the things I do, but I'd lean more towards something that would work well handheld in the field, at least in a pinch. Even if there are some limitations on slower shutter speed use with a handheld P67, I'd be very happy to take one over a Mamiya 6 if the SMC 55 was close to being as good as the M6 50. The cost savings would make up for the less friendly ergonomics.

 

[ac12]

At first it is a quite good idea to choose
some lenses as a kit.

Hope that I am not missunderstanding
your reply and you meant ZOOMS :-(

with regards

No, for the Hasselblad, I meant a 3-lens kit; 50 + 80 + 150. All prime lenses.
As I mentioned, I would have preferred 40 + 80 + 180, 3-lens kit.
I never looked into any of the Hasselblad zooms.

For my 4x5, a 2-lens kit: 90mm and 150mm.
Here the 90mm is the widest that I could go, as I cannot use a bag bellows to use a shorter lens.

For my 35mm, my primary and long lenses are zooms.
I have a 3-lens kit there also: 24 + 35-105 + 80-200/f4.5

For my DSLR I have 1 primary lens, a zoom, an 18-140 on a DX body.
I can add a lens on the long side, if needed.

 

[Sirius Glass]

With the Hasselblad I found that the 60mm lens was to close the 80mm lens and not worth carrying nor owning. The 50mm is wide enough compared with the 80mm lens and a good moderate intermediate wide angle lens. There are two combinations that I like:

• 38mm [SWE], 50mm, 80mm, 150mm, 250mm
• 38mm [SWE], 50mm, 100mm, 150mm, 250mm

When I had the Mamiya C330 I found that the 65mm lens was too close to the 80mm lens, and wished that I had the 55mm lens instead. [I also had the 250mm lens.]

In 35mm I found that the 35mm lens was too close to the 50mm lens [also the 58mm]. I traded it in for the 28mm lens which is a great moderate wide angle lens. I later bought the 21mm lens as a more extreme wide angle lens.

The OP can extrapolate for his camera of choice.

 

[Ai Print]

With the Hasselblad I found that the 60mm lens was to close the 80mm lens and not worth carrying nor owning.

Michael Kenna and the late Mary Ellen Mark would laugh heartily at that notion.

I no longer buy lenses with spacing as a consideration but rather how good they are optically and the 60 is by far and away one of Hasselblad's best. In fact, my all time favorite combo is the 60, 100 & 180. I have the aforementioned in CFi and my 80 is a CFe.

Back to the OP's inquiry, I also own and use the 40 FLE and 50 FLE and the 50 is simply superb. I had the Mamiya 6 kit that included the 50 and while I found the lens to be excellent, I found the camera's appetite for fresh batteries in cold weather to be a deal breaker. I also like very precise framing using medium format film so I replaced the Mamiya 6 with a Rolleiflex 2.8D as my super light carry. It's not as precise as using a Hasselblad but far better than the Mamiya 6.

 

[Alan Gales]

With the Hasselblad I found that the 60mm lens was to close the 80mm lens and not worth carrying nor owning. The 50mm is wide enough compared with the 80mm lens and a good moderate intermediate wide angle lens. There are two combinations that I like:

• 38mm [SWE], 50mm, 80mm, 150mm, 250mm
• 38mm [SWE], 50mm, 100mm, 150mm, 250mm

When I had the Mamiya C330 I found that the 65mm lens was too close to the 80mm lens, and wished that I had the 55mm lens instead. [I also had the 250mm lens.]

In 35mm I found that the 35mm lens was too close to the 50mm lens [also the 58mm]. I traded it in for the 28mm lens which is a great moderate wide angle lens. I later bought the 21mm lens as a more extreme wide angle lens.

The OP can extrapolate for his camera of choice.

Hi Sirius!

I know that you don't really shoot people. A normal lens is great for that but sometimes indoors you end up with your back against the wall with a normal lens and need something just a bit wider. A mild wide can also be great for large group shots of people.