Mamiya 645 80mm f/4 macro lens-thoughts?

[altair]

I'd like to get people's thoughts, views and experiences of using the said lens. Is it any good? What's the macro ratio without the special 'mag spacer'? Would it be more adviseable to use ext tubes on the normal 80mm lens instead? KEH has a couple for sale, so I'd appreciate any feedback before I plonk down the moolah...

 

[crumpet8]

Hey altair,

Did you ever get one of these lenses? If so, what did you find out? Im thinking about getting one as well...

 

[mweintraub]

I have one that I used on the 645 Pro a few times, but now on a Nikon body because I've sold off the Mamiya 645 system. This is the last lens from this system because I like it as a macro on the Nikon.

Here are two photos I took on the 645 Pro.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mrdat/7722268426/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mrdat/7722268230/


On the Nikon system, I love the look you get from it.
Photo taken with a FF Nikon *igital:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mrdat/17108435918/in/dateposted-public/

 

[RalphLambrecht]

never had or used uno but, Mamiya lenses have an outstanding reputation and with KEH's return policy ,I wouldn't hesitate. ext tubes are a 2nd choice.They don't give the same optical quality but aren't far behind f stopped down to f/8-11.

 

[jwd722]

I have it both ways, 80 2.8 w/all three extension tubes and the 80 f4 macro w/the mag spacer. The f4 is going to be better because it is a purpose built macro. It goes to 1/2 life size alone and to 1/1 with the mag spacer. It is better but at a cost, not only monetarily but size and speed as well. If you want a true macro go with the f4, if you only occasionally want a macro, it's still a better choice but the 2.8 is lighter, faster and a whole lot cheaper. The 2.8 with three tubes takes up a bit more room in your bag than the f4 w/the spacer but are much lighter if that's important. I carry two bodies, one w/a wlf and one w/a metered finder, the macro w/spacer, a 55mm, a 150, a 210, a grip, meter, extra film and a few more pieces...yeah, it weighs a ton so I have a fold up dolly that I strap it to and roll it behind me, so weight is not that much of an issue.
Sorry for running on but my recommendation is get the macro and spacer, you will be happier.

(I think I just convinced myself to sell the 2.8 and tubes)

 

[Neil Grant]

A few things to bear in mind when it comes to 80 vs 80 macro.....

the standard lens doesn't focus all that close, and the extension tubes are small and fiddly. Just try comparing what the big RB can do. Bellows focusing straight down to half life size with the 90mm. It's just so easy. Also, the tubes are massive and easy to install. I'd consider the 80 macro as the best 'all rounder' and get the 1.9 for speed. I believe it's a floating element design, of course with extensive helicoids - possibly prone to stiffness or dumping oil on the diaphragm like the Nikon 55 macro? Anyone know about this??

 

[jwd722]

My f4 focuses smoother than my other lenses (55, 80, 150, 210) and the blades are extremely clean, no oil of any kind.
The f4 focuses down to 18.3cm covering an area of 8.3x11.2cm alone and down to 10.1cm covering an area of 4.2x5.6cm with the spacer needing 2.0 stops of added exposure.
The f2.8 w/ nos.1,2,3-S focuses down to 1.03cm covering an area of 10.2x11.5 needing 1.5 stops of additional exposure.

 

[altair]

Hey altair,

Did you ever get one of these lenses? If so, what did you find out? Im thinking about getting one as well...

Wow, an old thread, revived

I never did get the f/4 macro. I made do with the standard 80mm with extension tubes. For my purposes, they're good enough.

 

[crumpet8]

Yeah, what a great response, thanks everyone!