Mamiya C-series toughness

MattKing said:

???
My 135mm lens is a high resolution lens with medium contrast. Excellent for portraits, and excellent for just about everything else as well!

View attachment 190146

Click to expand...

Hmmmm!. Your image is sharper than I suspected!

I've read over and over again about the 135mm not being as popular as most of the other C lenses with most photographers because of it's lack of razor sharpness and medium to low contrast. It was a popular portrait lens among wedding photographers who prefer a sharp lens but not razor sharp just like Karsh and his 14" Commercial Ektar for 8x10. Of course the Ektar is plenty sharp for other things but not as clinically sharp as a modern lens.

Sorry about that. I wrote that the 180mm is "said" to be the sharpest C lens but I didn't make it clear that the 135mm is "said" not to be the sharpest lens.

I've also read that the 250mm isn't razor sharp either. It looks like we need to try these lenses out and find out for ourselves instead of trusting the internet like I did. Do you own the 250, Matt?

Alan:
I think this is another example of the "woolly" nature of the term "sharpness".
Perceived sharpness has a whole bunch of components, each of which have different effects on different people. In most cases, resolution isn't the most important - contrast is. In particular, edge contrast or accutance.
I would never use my Mamiya 135mm lens for copying line art - accutance isn't what it excels at. But it offers good contrast, and excellent resolution.
Over the years I have owned lenses of 4 different focal lengths for my Mamiya TLR(s) - 55mm, 65mm, 80mm and 135mm. All have performed well, although I found the 55mm harder to work with due to its relatively small maximum aperture. I've shrunk my kit down now to one body, two finders and two lenses - 65mm and 135mm - and they continue to serve me well.
If I didn't have longer lenses for other medium format cameras I would be interested in a 180mm lens for my C330. The 250mm lens is inconveniently large.

My father started with the C2 in the 1960's [maybe earlier] and migrated to the series with the C3 and C330. He traveled all over the world taking photographs and he never had problems with the C series in the four decades.

MattKing said:

Alan:
I think this is another example of the "woolly" nature of the term "sharpness".
Perceived sharpness has a whole bunch of components, each of which have different effects on different people. In most cases, resolution isn't the most important - contrast is. In particular, edge contrast or accutance.
I would never use my Mamiya 135mm lens for copying line art - accutance isn't what it excels at. But it offers good contrast, and excellent resolution.
Over the years I have owned lenses of 4 different focal lengths for my Mamiya TLR(s) - 55mm, 65mm, 80mm and 135mm. All have performed well, although I found the 55mm harder to work with due to its relatively small maximum aperture. I've shrunk my kit down now to one body, two finders and two lenses - 65mm and 135mm - and they continue to serve me well.
If I didn't have longer lenses for other medium format cameras I would be interested in a 180mm lens for my C330. The 250mm lens is inconveniently large.

Click to expand...

Yes, sharpness can be in the eye of the beholder especially when it comes to portraiture. From what I have read I expected the 135 to be a little softer.

The 180 Super is said to be sharper than the regular 180mm. I wonder if the older chrome 130's are less sharp than the later black ones. Right now I own the 105mm DS lens for my C220f. It is sharp and has a nice bokeh. I've read that it is a Heliar design. I've also read that the original 105 was a Tessar design. Someone said it was changed because it was too sharp for wedding photographers. That doesn't seem right to me because Tessar lenses usually make great portrait lenses. The Heilar design is also said to have better bokeh which is possible. As cheap as they are, I need to try out some of these lenses. I also have an Autocord that I picked up cheap. I need to get it CLA'd and repaired to try it out. I came down with Acute Rheumatoid Arthritis so I haven't taken any pictures for a while. I'm feeling a lot better but I am so back logged that I haven't had the time yet.

I used chrome lenses to shoot expensive weddings, and sometimes made very large prints from them. I also had black lenses but I never found any real difference in results using them versus the chrome. Yes the 105mm is particularly good but they are all quite usuable, as long as you find good examples.

For personal shooting I used to like C2 (Midwest Photo gave me the body one Saturday morning) with the 105mm chrome lens. And the original hood of course.

Nokton48 said:

I used chrome lenses to shoot expensive weddings, and sometimes made very large prints from them. I also had black lenses but I never found any real difference in results using them versus the chrome. Yes the 105mm is particularly good but they are all quite usuable, as long as you find good examples.

For personal shooting I used to like C2 (Midwest Photo gave me the body one Saturday morning) with the 105mm chrome lens. And the original hood of course.

Click to expand...

Thank for relating your experience!

I also read somewhere (possible here in fact) that the older chrome finish lenses were sharper then their newer black finish lenses. However, as described above there's lots of factors that go into perceived sharpness. The main reason why I went with a chrome 80mm lens (I do now own a black version however) is because my friend I mentioned above said that the chrome lenses were built more sturdy specifically the shutter. According to him the shutters in the newer black lenses were made with cheaper materials as a cost saving measure. As a result, if any of these shutters were to go bad, rather then service the shutter as was the case with the chrome lenses, Mamiya would simply replace the shutter at a substantial cost. Anyway, I wasn't surprised that my 80mm chrome lens needed some TLC. I picked it up today, apparently there is a spring involved with the shutter cocking mechanism that needed replacement as well as general cleaning. So hopefully it will work, I'll take it out this weekend and see. Besides, I still haven't found a lens hood for the newer black lenses.

By the way, I also have the 55mm lens and yes, at f/4.5 it's excruciatingly slow. I tried to shoot with it hand held indoors with 400 speed film and it was near impossible, so it's an outdoor lens unless I can use a tripod and cable release. with it indoors.

The black body lenses were made for the last quarter century of the line's production. They are robust and the shutters in them are somewhat more modern than the old chrome lenses. In some cases, they feature improved optical construction and better coatings. As I understand it, there are more parts available for their shutters than for the older chrome lenses. To date, my black lenses have never needed more than routine maintenance, and infrequently at that.
The chrome lenses (and included shutters) were of excellent quality in their day, but they are half a century old or older.