Mamiya TLRs: Building a kit

[Stephanie Brim]

I've had a Mamiya C3 for about a year now and I like it. It has the 80mm blue dot Sekor-S so I've been kind of spoiled. I find the weight of the camera perfect when I'm shooting with the prism, and the ergonomics are not at all distracting. It may not be a Hasselblad, but the glass is actually very good.

I'm pondering adding a portrait lens to the 80mm. I'm narrowing down to either the 135mm or the 180mm. I'm trying to figure out which of the various types of the lenses were best and which to avoid.

Anyone here used either the 135mm or the 180mm and would you care to share your experience?

 

[tessar]

It depends on how tight a portrait you want to shoot. I like the 180mm (very roughly about equal to a 105 on 35mm) for head & shoulders. The version I have is the late model 180 Super, which does a fine job. I've heard FWIW that this was one of the best lenses made for the Mamiya C series.

 

[darinwc]

The 180mm super has an excellent reputation. I havent heard much about the 135mm. Hevanet lens tests seem to favor the 135mm, but it is not mentioned if the 180mm is the old style or the super. http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/MF_testing.html

 

[MattKing]

I've used a 135mm as my telephoto for the Mamiya TLRs for 30 years or so .

I've never found it too short for portrait work. I don't shoot many really tight facial portraits though.

I also tend to use a 65mm + 135mm kit a lot when I take out the TLR. The two together make for a really nice and small combination.

 

[Mark Fisher]

I had the 180mm and liked it, but it always seemed long (80 to 180 is a big jump) and heavy for the camera. Never used the 135mm.

 

[fschifano]

I have both the 180 and the 135, and prefer the 135 over the 180 for portraiture. The 180 is just too long. unless I want to get in really tight.

 

[benjiboy]

Hi Stephanie, I've used Mamiya TLRs for more than twenty years I have the 55mm, 80mm, 135mm, and 180mm Super lenses they are all the latest black type. For portraits especially indoors where space can be limited my favourite is the 135 you can shoot beautiful head and shoulders or head to waist, for outdoor tight head shots or head to waist I like the 180, I tend to use the the 135 most and if you are buying a lens mainly for portraits that's the one I would recommend , (if you buy one don't be alarmed if the rear element of the taking lens is missing and the diaphragm is exposed, there all like that) it uses the same hood as the 80mm and is easier to handle than the 180mm with the bellows extended to focus close makes the camera quite front heavy and a bit of a handful with the prism, although it's not too bad if you use the L grip with trigger release. They are both very fine lenses Stephanie and both capable of good portrait shots, but personally if I could only have one it would be the 135.
If I can help you any further please send me a P.M and I will be happy to answer of you're questions.

 

[grahamp]

The 135mm is a decent portrait length, particularly for indoor work - 3/4 to tight head shots. The 180mm is a big jump from the 80mm. As a general tool, I tend to use my 180mm as my long lens (though I have also opted for a 65mm/135mm duo for traveling) .

I suggest you grab the PDF of the sportsfinder masks from here Dead Link Removed and cut out the 135mm and 180mm masks on dark card (the masks are 105, 135, 180, and 250) and get a feel for the effect. You could also do the combined mask on transparent sheet.

The 180 Super is probably the best lens. The design is slightly different than the earlier 180 versions. The 135mm was pretty consistent over time. Obviously try for blue dot Seiko shutter models, though an earlier Seiko at a decent price and in good condition is an option.

My usual working kit is 55mm, 105mm, and 180mm. The 80mm gets used when I need the speed or just want a general purpose lens. The 65mm (mine's an old Seikosha shutter model) and 135mm tend to be little used. The real prima donna is the 250mm. I only carry it when I expect to need the reach.

My experience is that the 180mm Super has a definite edge for micro-contrast. The 135mm is actually a long-focus lens, not a telephoto, and resolves well but lacks the contrast of the later lens. Depending on the type of portraiture this may not be a bad thing. All of these lenses have seen some use, so the quality owes more to use and care than it does to age.

 

[fotch]

I always chose the 135mm for portraits.

 

[benjiboy]

The 135mm is a decent portrait length, particularly for indoor work - 3/4 to tight head shots. The 180mm is a big jump from the 80mm. As a general tool, I tend to use my 180mm as my long lens (though I have also opted for a 65mm/135mm duo for traveling) .

I suggest you grab the PDF of the sportsfinder masks from here Dead Link Removed and cut out the 135mm and 180mm masks on dark card (the masks are 105, 135, 180, and 250) and get a feel for the effect. You could also do the combined mask on transparent sheet.

The 180 Super is probably the best lens. The design is slightly different than the earlier 180 versions. The 135mm was pretty consistent over time. Obviously try for blue dot Seiko shutter models, though an earlier Seiko at a decent price and in good condition is an option.

My usual working kit is 55mm, 105mm, and 180mm. The 80mm gets used when I need the speed or just want a general purpose lens. The 65mm (mine's an old Seikosha shutter model) and 135mm tend to be little used. The real prima donna is the 250mm. I only carry it when I expect to need the reach.

My experience is that the 180mm Super has a definite edge for micro-contrast. The 135mm is actually a long-focus lens, not a telephoto, and resolves well but lacks the contrast of the later lens. Depending on the type of portraiture this may not be a bad thing. All of these lenses have seen some use, so the quality owes more to use and care than it does to age.

I would agree with Graham that in absolute terms the 180 lens pair overall is sharper and more contrasty and that as a general purpose telephoto lens is the best choice, but I as primarily a portrait photographer prefer the more gentle contrast, less biting sharpness and plasticity of image that the 135 lenses provide especially when shooting women and children and honestly think that this IMHO is the best portrait lens.

 

[Christiaan Phleger]

Another for the 135 for portraits. Very nice at 5.6, great smooth bokeh.

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

Everything has been more or less said, but I will add my voice to those encouraging the 135mm for portraits. It gives an angle of view similar to the 85mm in 35mm, which allows to keep some volume in facial features. The 180mm lens is very sharp, well colour-corrected, and does not flare much, but the 135mm is just a nicer focal length. The 135mm can flare quite a bit, so I would be careful with it if you're using in the studio with strobes.

Weight is also a big difference: the 180mm is a brick, whereas the 135mm is much lighter, equivalent to the shorter lenses. Finally, the 135mm has the standard for the C-system 46mm filter ring diameter, whereas the 180mm requires 48mm (not 49! unless you really want to remove the silver rings) accessories. It's much easier to find 46mm filters than 48mm ones. Oh, and the 135mm is just cheaper!

Here's a shot I did with the 135mm, KR 1.5 filter on Ektar 100:

It lacks neither sharpness nor good colour!

 

[grahamp]

The silver thread protection rings are not threaded (take a close look - the insides are stepped). You will also have a lot of fun finding 48mm filters, it is not a standard size. The later TLR lenses are either 46 or 49mm threads.

The point about using a hood is worth taking to heart. I use a 46-49mm step ring and just use 49mm thread hoods and filters most of the time.

 

[Stephanie Brim]

Maybe I should just try to find both.

 

[Loren Sattler]

I did some b&w portraits with my 135mm a couple years ago and was very impressed with the sharpness and detail in the finished 8 x 10 prints. Attached are three of those prints scanned. These were taken at some distance (can't recall how far) and probably do not do justice to the quality of the original prints. My 180mm lens feels too long to me for portraits.

 

[benjiboy]

Everything has been more or less said, but I will add my voice to those encouraging the 135mm for portraits. It gives an angle of view similar to the 85mm in 35mm, which allows to keep some volume in facial features. The 180mm lens is very sharp, well colour-corrected, and does not flare much, but the 135mm is just a nicer focal length. The 135mm can flare quite a bit, so I would be careful with it if you're using in the studio with strobes.

Weight is also a big difference: the 180mm is a brick, whereas the 135mm is much lighter, equivalent to the shorter lenses. Finally, the 135mm has the standard for the C-system 46mm filter ring diameter, whereas the 180mm requires 48mm (not 49! unless you really want to remove the silver rings) accessories. It's much easier to find 46mm filters than 48mm ones. Oh, and the 135mm is just cheaper!

Here's a shot I did with the 135mm, KR 1.5 filter on Ektar 100:

It lacks neither sharpness nor good colour!

How much better would this picture be if it had been shot with a Hasselblad is the question I ask myself ?, the Mamiya TLR system is a versatile system that's very underrated able to produce images of a high standard at a very reasonable cost that more photographers should explore.

 

[Steve Smith]

How much better would this picture be if it had been shot with a Hasselblad is the question I ask myself ?

Probably none whatsoever.


Steve.

 

[benjiboy]

Probably none whatsoever.


Steve.

That's what I thought Steve, I bought all my Mamiya TLR equipment second hand more than twenty years ago and It's been utterly reliable and produced the best work I have ever shot.

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

The silver thread protection rings are not threaded (take a close look - the insides are stepped).

"Stepped" ? Does that mean some kind of bayonet-y mount, or a different system?

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

PS: Thanks for the kind comments on the photo, guys!

I do lust for a Hasselblad (and a Rollei, and a Leica, etc etc), but since the only contract work I tend to do can be done very well with 35mm, I did not invest into a hardcore MF pro kit. The Mamiya is my art camera, the one I use for anything that requires image quality, tripod work, detail, and handheld too.

Of course it's a bit big for a TLR and quirky as a system, but unless I can actually justify plunking down a significant sum on a Hassy, it will serve me right for a long time.

 

[grahamp]

"Stepped" ? Does that mean some kind of bayonet-y mount, or a different system?

Several of the TLR lenses have very thin filter thread metal. The lenses are only a millimetre larger than the filter thread diameter overall. This does mean the lenses are about as fast as they could be for the size, but that filter rim is vulnerable to denting, particularly with the mass of the camera behind it.

The lenses originally come with a pair of silver rimmed keeper rings. These stiffen the lens rim when filters are not fitted. And are often removed and lost...

The inside of the keeper rings is matt black, and has a set of steps (concentric circles of reducing size closer to the lens) to reduce reflections. Superficially it looks like a filter thread. You can use a Mamiya clamp on type hood with the rings in place, but filters will not fit inside the keeper ring unless you bodge it.

 

[benjiboy]

"Stepped" ? Does that mean some kind of bayonet-y mount, or a different system?

No, I just took a look at mine, all the silver metal ring is for is to protect the filter thread the "stepping" on the inside appears to be purely cosmetic, and not to attach anything to it.

 

[narsuitus]

Anyone here used either the 135mm or the 180mm and would you care to share your experience?

I built my kit using the 180mm f/4.5, 80mm f/2.8, and 55mm f/4.5 on a Mamiya-Sekor C220 and C22 TLR. All three lenses had lens shades.

The 135mm and the 180mm were good portrait lenses for the 6x6cm format. The 135mm lens was close in performance to an 85mm lens on a 35mm camera. It was good for half-length, head & shoulder shots, and head shots.

The 180mm was close in performance to a 105mm lens on a 35mm camera. It was good for head & shoulder shots, head shots, and tight face shots.

Since I needed tight face shots more than I needed half-length shots, I chose the 180mm.

 

[darinwc]

While the rims of these lenses are thin and easy to dent. They are also easy to bend back into place. On a couple of these lenses I was able to use a wooden dowel to bend out a dented rim. Then by rolling the rim on a hard surface I was able to get it nice and round. This is very hard to do on other lenses that have thick rims.

 

[Andrew K]

I've just gone back to using Mamiya TLS's after several years away from them (used Hasselblads, RB's, plus a couple of different 645's), and I've just bought a 105mm lens for it, as for the way I shoot I find it the ideal portrait lens (not too tight, not too wide, great for indoor portraits, and super sharp)

Might be worth considering as a all round "standard" lens?