Mamiya 65mm C or KL

[Required]

I only have the 127/3.8 C today for my RB67 pro s and would like to go wider. I’ve looked at both the 50mm and 65 and I’m a bit torn.
Even though I believe the 50 would work great for landscape and architecture, my impression is that 65 would cover a wider range of usage for me. And as I understand it, the 65
Is sharper with less distortion.

But I’m torn if it’s worth hunting and pay for the 65/4 K/L or if it’s just more expensive then the f/4.5 C and not really worth the additional cost.

 

[WilmarcoImaging]

No complaints with the 50/4.5 C lens.

 

[MattKing]

I use both - 65mm as a wide "standard" lens, and the 50mm as a wide angle lens.
Both C versions, and I'm happy with both.

 

[Required]

Thanks guys.
Those images and statements are both reassuring. Thanks a lot.

 

[MattKing]

Here is an example from the 65mm lens:

 

[Deleted member 88956]

For the 50 you have no choice, 65 KL is rather hard to get (only 75 KL is harder). When I got into RB67 it was partly because for under a grand I got a mint SD body with 3 SD backs and 3 KL lenses (2 of them as new). So I decided to stick with KL just for that reason. But form I've been able to determine there is not going to be many times and places when a KL would be all that critical. There is no question they are newer designs with more modern coatings. More importantly, KL lenses have not had as much time for a pro abuse and thus are easier to find in great to even pristine condition. Not always are they priced al that much ower form C lenses ... with luck of course.

Also, don't be too hung up on KL floating element feature as it is only marginally useful and only in closer focusing applications. It also makes using that feature a longer focusing process, as you need to focus / move floating element / refocus ot complete the process. The latter not so much a drag anyways, as it's meant for close focusing implying tripod, mirror lock up, still kind of imaging.

If you decide to go for the 65 KL, don't forget looking for the camera instead, especially the SD body. This is how I wound up with second pristine SD body / SD back / WLF with a 75 KL on it for a mere $100 more than 75 normally sells for. But, 65 KL is just not around so much and grab it if price is acceptable.

Also (and off the subject somewhat), when shopping KL lenses, they came with compensating ring from factory. While not essential (and only "needed" on SD body) it is a pricey piece of metal for what it is and it is worth asking seller if it is not shown. Again, not essential for any application, but good to have it, if SD body ever comes into play. You can manage with just one of these for all lenses, since it is not difficult to switch from one lens to another. BTW, hood was also part of factory packaging.

 

[Required]

Thank you a lot Witold for the thoughtful insight.
Fortunately I payed a mere $100 for my Pro-S with a 127mm C in very good condition and with your and the previous posters info I can’t see any reason for me to hunt down and pay premium for KL lenses at this stage.
I will go for a C and be more then satisfied and also able to buy more film for the money instead. And perhaps a RRS qr plate for it.

Thank you!

 

[Required]

I use both - 65mm as a wide "standard" lens, and the 50mm as a wide angle lens.
Both C versions, and I'm happy with both.

Both the 50 and 65 looks really nice.
Gives me a couple of options to choose between.

When shooting with my F3 I mostly use my 35/1.4 and like that a lot but I also switch between the 20 and 28mm as well.

Would not surprise me if I end up with both the 50 and 65 in the end anyway.

Thanks.

 

[WilmarcoImaging]

Both the 50 and 65 have floating element rings, so from that point of view there is no difference in user interface.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Just came across this place of few talking about the 50 C. It reminded me of a number of places stating pretty much the same: QC of C line was all over the place and of unknown performance until actually tried. I never had any C lenses so it would be interesting to see if anyone with similar BAD "C" experience comes in here. Perhaps it was less about quality control, but more about pro-abuse and perhaps design being prone to going bad after rough time at a pro site, then ending up on second hand market.

 

[Required]

Thanks for interesting link!
I’ll do some reading and unless I actually can try the 50 out or at least get a trustworthy word or see a photo result of it - I might get the 65mm to begin with.

 

[MattKing]

It is always interesting to read reviews.
But my experience with new Mamiya medium format equipment, when it was new and current, was that it was consistently excellent.
One must remember though that RB67 equipment was used mostly by professionals, and professionals themselves are consistently inconsistent. Some would use their equipment carefully, and keep it well maintained.
Others were incredibly hard on their equipment, and would sell them rather than maintain them.
So if you buy an RB lens, look at its condition carefully.

 

[WilmarcoImaging]

The comments represent a small dataset. The negative comments give the impression of not knowing how to use a lens in the 50mm focal length. I have 3 C lenses and 1 KL lens, all are good performers. Best results are achieved with a tripod and cable release, as is the case with all camera/lens combinations irrespective of format.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

The comments represent a small dataset. The negative comments give the impression of not knowing how to use a lens in the 50mm focal length. I have 3 C lenses and 1 KL lens, all are good performers. Best results are achieved with a tripod and cable release, as is the case with all camera/lens combinations irrespective of format.

Fist, you're making a lot of assumptions on what and why. Secondly, my linked is in itself a small sample of very common comments on C lenses. It is not some sort of different science to properly using these lenses, reason I see them as result of either inconsistencies in production quality, or pro abuse prior to landing on used market.

 

[John Koehrer]

For assumptions. I'll assume that many complaints about the C lenses is people assuming the floating element doesn't
have a visible effect on sharpness. If you watch the corners when you adjust the FE it's very noticeable.

 

[narsuitus]

I only have the 127/3.8 C today for my RB67 pro s and would like to go wider. I’ve looked at both the 50mm and 65 and I’m a bit torn.

I do not have the 127 for my RB67. I have the 90mm. I purchased the 50mm to work with my 90.

If I had the 127, I would select the 65 to work with it.

This is based on my personal preferences developed after using similar focal lengths on Mamiya TLR cameras and based on using equivalent focal lengths for 35mm film cameras.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

For assumptions. I'll assume that many complaints about the C lenses is people assuming the floating element doesn't
have a visible effect on sharpness. If you watch the corners when you adjust the FE it's very noticeable.

In close focusing it is quite clear, in general photography I did not see it as "very noticeable". Going by Mamiya's instructions for lenses with FE, it states " peripheral image quality will deteriorate significantly" if FE is not used correctly. Part of that experience is related to subject matter, part of it is to a ... BAD floating element (so seeing an effect or not may be for the broken FE?). It can go bust and it is not easy to figure out when it is. The FE adjustment is in itself very gentile with almost no resistance, and while it certainly does alter optical alignment, its effect is not always as clear as Mamiya states, given the "significant" reference.

RB67 was never meant as a snap shooter and FE process does another step backwards in that sense. I always adjust FE even if I cannot confirm it did jack to focus precision. But I trust the maker here.

 

[John Koehrer]

In close focusing it is quite clear, in general photography I did not see it as "very noticeable". Going by Mamiya's instructions for lenses with FE, it states " peripheral image quality will deteriorate significantly" if FE is not used correctly. Part of that experience is related to subject matter, part of it is to a ... BAD floating element (so seeing an effect or not may be for the broken FE?). It can go bust and it is not easy to figure out when it is. The FE adjustment is in itself very gentile with almost no resistance, and while it certainly does alter optical alignment, its effect is not always as clear as Mamiya states, given the "significant" reference.

I guess like in other things. Image quality is in the eye of the fuzzygrapher. Or, some are either more or less critical of their pitchers.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

I guess like in other things. Image quality is in the eye of the fuzzygrapher. Or, some are either more or less critical of their pitchers.

no idea what you're driving at, something I said? it's common to state what I said, outside of critical close focusing FE effect is not all that apparent and I am not the first one who said that, far from it. Then again, read my whole thing and don't be selective in what I said in some parts.

 

[Required]

I just wanted to post back.
I ended up with a 65mm C in good condition for €70.

I've not been able to shoot with it yet but next time I'm out.

 

[Neil Grant]

Just came across this place of few talking about the 50 C. It reminded me of a number of places stating pretty much the same: QC of C line was all over the place and of unknown performance until actually tried. I never had any C lenses so it would be interesting to see if anyone with similar BAD "C" experience comes in here. Perhaps it was less about quality control, but more about pro-abuse and perhaps design being prone to going bad after rough time at a pro site, then ending up on second hand market.

....i've seen the aforementioned Mamiya variable QC wrt to the C lenses for the RB 67. Best to try the lens - ideally with film, but just a look through the viewfinder will probably confirm. The RB screen is pretty clear - a lens should have a pronounced 'pop' about it and snap in and out of focus quite noticeably. Given good samples, both 65 and 50mm C lenses are very good lenses. Their performance is fairly similar.