MAMIYA TLR

[anthonym3]

I have a MAMIYA C3 and 80mm lens. What other lens would you use for all around and portrait photography and why?

 

[jim10219]

https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/mamiya-tlr-portrait-lens.7715/

 

[MattKing]

I've been happily using the 135mm lens for portraits since I acquired it new in the 1970s.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Wide angle 55mm, the 65mm is too close to the 80mm
Portraits 135mm
Telephoto 250mm, the 180mm is too close to the 80mm for telephoto work. The 250mm is a great telephoto lens.

 

[Luckless]

As a photographer I typically lean more towards the telephoto end, and as such my Mamiya TLR is mainly made up of the 80mm, 180mm, and 250mm.

I find that these are all lovely and wonderful lenses to work with, and have been very happy with them all. However I do find the 250mm to have a bit of a long working distance compared to the others. [Plus it does feel a bit 'long' compared to what most other photographers reach for. But I'm mildly biased and would love if they had even longer options.]

I've not yet added a 55mm or 65mm to my collection, as I find my 80mm is already as wide as I personally want to go. However I find wide angle shots feel far too 'cluttered' for the most part, with 'excessive content and information' beyond the subject of my photo. As such I lean towards narrow fields of view to keep backgrounds tight and confined, rather than allowing things to wander too much. [However I will freely admit to this possibly being due to some laziness on my part, as a tight field of view reduces the odds of some weird or distracting background element being overlooked during composition... The wider the field of view on the shot, the more of what's in front of the camera can be captures, and the higher the odds of something I don't want being there... So apparently I've just said 'screw it', and hoped onto a tight field of view mindset.]

Only reasons why I don't use the 105mm or 135mm is down to not yet having come across good examples of them at nice prices. Technically I do have a 135, and I like the look of it, but it is a very first generation model that the auto-cocking mechanism of my late model bodies interferes with... So it sits on a shelf waiting for me to spot a C220 or something in a local shop at the same time I have some spare cash...

While I would suggest keeping an eye out for the later model shutters, I've personally been happy enough with the glass I've used that came with the earlier versions. Main different in my mind has been that the early chrome shutters put the aperture scales opposite side of the lens from the shutter speed, while the later model moved them both to one side where they're easier to read at once.

 

[Dennis-B]

For head and shoulders portraits, I always preferred the 180mm. For waist-up, I used the 135mm The 180mm has a nice compression to it, and folks who were self-conscious about long noses or chins were usually very pleased. Of course, the lens isn't the only factor; you have to flatter subjects with complimentary lighting, also.

The 135mm provides great proportions and I often thought of it as a most flattering focal length.

The 105 worked well with multiple subjects for waist-up portraits; the only down side was additional working room.

The 80mm was perfect for single or dual full length portraits. The 65mm made great group photos at weddings.

 

[Nokton48]

At one time I owned every body and lens from Mamiyaflex C2 to latest C330.

Portraits? 80mm, 105mm, 135mm, 180mm, 250mm. I favored the 105 when shooting handheld.

Depends on what look you would like to achieve. See if you can borrow and try what you fancy.

I have noticed ZERO difference between chrome and black lenses in actual heavy use.

 

[narsuitus]

When I shot with a Mamiya TLR, I used the following lenses:

Mamiya-Sekor 180mm f/4.5 for head&shoulder and face shots of individuals

Mamiya-Sekor 80mm f/2.8 for full-length portraits

Mamiya-Sekor 55mm f/4.5 for group-portraits

 

[anthonym3]

A thank you to all.I have been involved in photography since I purchased a LEICA 3c in 1965,soon sold it and bought a LEICA M-3 mainly for family photos,went on to years of street shooting in my home town,ALBANY,N.Y. and N.Y.C. I am so fortunate to have found PHOTRIO and it's wealth of generous,helpful and enlightened people

 

[mrosenlof]

I think you could be happy with either the 135 or the 180. I have both, they are both good lenses.

I've heard reports that the 135 is not very sharp, but my purchased new in 1982, with the famous but meaningless blue dot has always been sharp unless I've messed up in some way. I'll admit if I want sharpness -- which is nearly always -- I don't shoot with many lenses wide open.

 

[Sirius Glass]

As a photographer I typically lean more towards the telephoto end, and as such my Mamiya TLR is mainly made up of the 80mm, 180mm, and 250mm.

I find that these are all lovely and wonderful lenses to work with, and have been very happy with them all. However I do find the 250mm to have a bit of a long working distance compared to the others. [Plus it does feel a bit 'long' compared to what most other photographers reach for. But I'm mildly biased and would love if they had even longer options.]

I've not yet added a 55mm or 65mm to my collection, as I find my 80mm is already as wide as I personally want to go. However I find wide angle shots feel far too 'cluttered' for the most part, with 'excessive content and information' beyond the subject of my photo. As such I lean towards narrow fields of view to keep backgrounds tight and confined, rather than allowing things to wander too much. [However I will freely admit to this possibly being due to some laziness on my part, as a tight field of view reduces the odds of some weird or distracting background element being overlooked during composition... The wider the field of view on the shot, the more of what's in front of the camera can be captures, and the higher the odds of something I don't want being there... So apparently I've just said 'screw it', and hoped onto a tight field of view mindset.

A wide angle lens allows one to move in closer and exclude telephone and power wires, cars, signs, ... from the field of view.

Only reasons why I don't use the 105mm or 135mm is down to not yet having come across good examples of them at nice prices. Technically I do have a 135, and I like the look of it, but it is a very first generation model that the auto-cocking mechanism of my late model bodies interferes with... So it sits on a shelf waiting for me to spot a C220 or something in a local shop at the same time I have some spare cash...

While I would suggest keeping an eye out for the later model shutters, I've personally been happy enough with the glass I've used that came with the earlier versions. Main different in my mind has been that the early chrome shutters put the aperture scales opposite side of the lens from the shutter speed, while the later model moved them both to one side where they're easier to read at once.

There were two major reasons I sold my inherited C330:

1. While I liked the ability to focus with either hand, I found that it was too fiddly, I disliked flipping the camera from side to side to make settings. ===> Main different in my mind has been that the early chrome shutters put the aperture scales opposite side of the lens from the shutter speed, while the later model moved them both to one side where they're easier to read at once.
2. The 65mm and the 80mm lenses cocked when the film was advanced, while the 250mm lens did not. I was changing lenses often and would loose shots exactly because the 250mm lens was not cocked or I would be trying to cock the 65mm and the 80mm lens.

 

[anthonym3]

A wide angle lens allows one to move in closer and exclude telephone and power wires, cars, signs, ... from the field of view.
Thanks to all,I have bought a 135 late model black lens for a good price $80.00. The seller said it had spots on the viewing lens and something in the taking lens. It turns out that something had been spilled on it. I took it apart and used a little HYDROGEN PEROXIDE on the glass,now the lenses are perfectly clear. The only reason that I took a chance is that the seller offered a 30 day return period.


There were two major reasons I sold my inherited C330:

1. While I liked the ability to focus with either hand, I found that it was too fiddly, I disliked flipping the camera from side to side to make settings. ===> Main different in my mind has been that the early chrome shutters put the aperture scales opposite side of the lens from the shutter speed, while the later model moved them both to one side where they're easier to read at once.
2. The 65mm and the 80mm lenses cocked when the film was advanced, while the 250mm lens did not. I was changing lenses often and would loose shots exactly because the 250mm lens was not cocked or I would be trying to cock the 65mm and the 80mm lens.

 

[Joel Pickford]

Are blue dot lenses really any better than earlier black finish lenses?

 

[grahamp]

The blue dot indicates the version of the Seiko shutter. It does not guarantee anything about the optics mounted to it. The glass is probably contemporaneous to the shutter, but exchanges are not especially difficult.Some lenses got redesigns (the 105mm, 180mm and 80mm) over time, and the later ones have some improvements. Bear in mind that even end of production items are something over 40 years old now, so individual condition is important from a usage basis.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The earliest lenses had the shutter speeds and f/stops were on opposites sides so one would need to flip the camera from side to side every time one needed to change settings. That is the basis of my comments about the camera being fiddly.

 

[Luckless]

To make things more fun, the 'Blue Dot' is also a replaceable part - Some lens assemblies that came from the factory as a "Blue dot" version have since lost it, and some that were made from before the blue dot was a thing have apparently since gained them.

I have an 80mm in both older Chrome body, and a newer blue dot black body version, and while I've not used the chrome body nearly as much as the newer lens, I can't say that I'm disappointed with the results I've been getting from the older chrome lenses.

I would consider a blue dot lens a 'nice to have', and would prefer black bodied lenses over the older chrome styles, but I can't say I would deem them important enough to pay an excessive premium for or hunt endlessly for one over a clean and working copy.


Also watch out for "Mamiyaflex-C" lenses - Same basic pattern as the 'chrome' bodies, but the shutter release and cocking lever are slightly different. The cocking lever sits higher than the later lenses and interferes with the auto-cocking lever on bodies like the C330. Or don't watch out, and use it as an excuse to eventually buy a C220 or similar body without the auto-cocking function.

 

[Moose22]

The earliest lenses had the shutter speeds and f/stops were on opposites sides so one would need to flip the camera from side to side every time one needed to change settings. That is the basis of my comments about the camera being fiddly.

I have a 135mm in chrome that I got cheap. That's THE problem with it, it's really just harder to read and fussy with all the back and forth one side and the other to set it. Image quality (Once I'd cleaned it) was good. I'd maybe have liked a black body just for consistency in use, but the different shutter is the only mechanical difference and if it works, it works. I'm pretty sure a good, clean copy of either will be optically just as good.

My blue dot 80mm is stellar image quality, super sharp. Blue dot 180 is also good image quality, but fussy as sometimes it doesn't fully cock it when winding on -- the lever will slip and it'll fire a shot just before the wind is finished. This is a recently CLA'd lens, too. The solution for me is just to cock it before I wind the frame, but the point is, even blue dots on a well used body might not be perfect and have quirks. Or they might, that 80mm amazes me every time I use it correctly and is pretty flawless. But the blue dot is just the newest setup is all.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have a 135mm in chrome that I got cheap. That's THE problem with it, it's really just harder to read and fussy with all the back and forth one side and the other to set it. Image quality (Once I'd cleaned it) was good. I'd maybe have liked a black body just for consistency in use, but the different shutter is the only mechanical difference and if it works, it works. I'm pretty sure a good, clean copy of either will be optically just as good.

My blue dot 80mm is stellar image quality, super sharp. Blue dot 180 is also good image quality, but fussy as sometimes it doesn't fully cock it when winding on -- the lever will slip and it'll fire a shot just before the wind is finished. This is a recently CLA'd lens, too. The solution for me is just to cock it before I wind the frame, but the point is, even blue dots on a well used body might not be perfect and have quirks. Or they might, that 80mm amazes me every time I use it correctly and is pretty flawless. But the blue dot is just the newest setup is all.

The 250mm lens I had required hand cocking while the 65mm and 80mm lenses cocked on film advancement. I would loose shots because I wound the film and forgot to separately cock the lens. I prefer the Hasselblad because if I do not advance the film the mirror stays up; when I advance the film the mirror goes up and the cocks the lens.

 

[Sirius Glass]

For the Mamiya TLR I recommend the 55mm, 80mm and the 250mm as an all round set to general photography including traveling. I used that set up.

 

[Sirius Glass]

aww... a rare moment when @Sirius Glass and Old Gregg are in agreement.

Much like certain rare astronomical alignments.

 

[MattKing]

FWIW, after using them for ~ 45 years, I've settled on a blue dot pair - 65mm and 135mm. Those lenses, with a C330 body and a nice collection of accessories, fit nicely together in a very reasonably sized bag. At one time I also had a C220 body.
I've also owned the 55mm and 80mm lenses in the past. Both were excellent performers, although I found the view through the 55mm a bit dark.
My decision to pare down my TLR kit to the single bag size were influenced by the expansion of my M645 Pro kit - particularly the bright and relatively tiny 55mm f/2.8 N series lens in that series - not to mention the very nice 45 mm f/2.8 N lens.

 

[markjwyatt]

I have a MAMIYA C3 and 80mm lens. What other lens would you use for all around and portrait photography and why?

I have a C330f and C220f. I have an 80mm f2.8, 55mm f4.5, 135mm f4.5, and Super 180mm f4.5. I have had this kit for a few decades and used it (minus the 135mm which I bought recently) a lot. The 55, 80, and 180 are a great kit. If I want to walk around lighter today, I can do with only the 80mm, the 80 & 55mm, or the 80, 55, and 135mm (depending on my tolerance that day). I feel like (but have not used) the 65mm and 105mm are too close to the 80mm, but am curios about trying the 105mm. The 250mm may be an interesting lens also, but I rarely feel a need for a longer lens than the 180mm. The 65mm might actually be a good one-lens walking around lens (I often find normal lenses a little narrow in view).

 

[grahamp]

I tend to use a 105mm as my default lens rather than the 80mm. It just works better than the 80mm for most of my subjects. But the 80mm is f2.8, and that extra half stop can be useful, so I keep one on my second body, and I am happy to use it as a single lens option. I usually use the 105mm with the 55mm and 180mm (substituting the 250mm if I think I need the extra reach).

I also used to use a 65mm/135mm combination. Sort of like the 40mm/90mm Leica CL combination - very portable, but flexible.

The nice thing is that there is a decent range (55mm to 250mm), so you can use whatever works.

 

[mrosenlof]

I've owned all of the black shutter lenses for the TLR system except the 250. I've always been happy with the lenses. I've never really warmed to the 65, but I think it's a fine lens, just not for me. I tend to use these cameras (I have 330F and 220F bodies) on a tripod, and the lenses mostly at middle apertures (usually the sweet spot) and let the shutter speed get slow if needed. I believe the blue dot is now a pretty unimportant point. The newest lenses are 40 years old so care and maintenance are going to matter more, but are harder to see at a glance. I've been tempted to get multi-colored nail polish and make super rare green and yellow dot lenses.

Three lens sets seem to be kind of the classic setup for many camera systems. 50 80 150 for the hasselblad, I think the 55, 105, 180 makes a great combo for the Mamiya TLR. Nothing wrong with 55, 80, 135 either. It's going to matter more how you see the world than differences between good copies of the lenses.

 

[markjwyatt]

@markjwyatt I clicked on your Flickr photostream and laughed in disbelief. I visited San Diego last weekend and took this very same photo. I haven't even developed that roll yet Small world!

Can't wait to see it! I could humbly offer that create minds think alike, but it is probably a tempting shot for many photographers.