Mamiya Sekor 65mm vs 50mm

I have the 65mm and am looking at the 50mm with no floating elements. Looking a this for lamdscapes only using primarily Acros and Delta 100. So image quality is important. I want something wider than the 65 but is the 50 a big trsde off in terms of IQ?


Read the oldermthread on this and only got the idea that the 50 with floating elements is the way to go .

Sorry, forgot to mention I'm shooting the RZ67.

I have the 50mm C lens with floating element for the RB67. I have used it for client interior images and like it. Sharp and good contrast. I have not used it for a landscape, and your post will motivate me to do so. I have used it for still life and there is some distortion in table top subjects, with approximately 1m subject to camera distance. This can be addressed in post processing if that fits your philosophy and workflow.

My lens lineup is 50mm/90mm/180mm. I want to add the 75mm KL non-shift lens. To me the 65mm doesn't fit in the lineup because it is not wide enough, and the 75mm fits the long-wide or wide-normal niche. Plus, the 75mm is a target focal length for me, for the type of still life work I am trying to develop.

Chassis, really don't plan to shoot anything that close with a 50mm, the 110 is a different story. I like my 65mm but there are times when I want something wider.

Get the 50mm. you'll never regret it.

If you don't want to fuss with the floating element.. just set it to infinity... you will never notice the difference.

I have had both the rz67 50s. Image quality is great on both, hard to go wrong. That said, the 50ULD is not much more $ than the non-ULD these days, so I would go for the floating one if you can swing it.

I owned the 50mm ULD for the RZ. It's a peach of a lens!