rb67 wide angle lenses

[nwilkins]

hello everyone,

I have an RB67 ProSD with 90mm KL and 180mm KL lenses. Both lenses are great, but I would love to get a wide angle for shots which require greater DoF. Right now the 90mm is not doing it for me - in order to get close foreground objects in focus I have to give up focus at infinity (see attached picture for an example).

I am unsure whether to get the 65mm KL, or get a C or non-C 50mm. I would like to hear people's experiences with these lenses, or any examples of pictures taken with them. Really any input you can give would be helpful. Thanks!

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I have a 50 mm c lens which I like very much. There are a few who prefer the 65. I always like the wide angle lens.

Jeff

 

[sharris]

Great photo. I just bought the 65 but haven't used with film just yet. I will say though that the min focus distance is amazing and I look forward to the opportunities it will provide. I don't recall whether same thing with 50mm, but may be a factor for you; maybe not. Look forward to your result!

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

I also had 180mm and 90mm lenses and was looking for a wide angle. I choose the 65mm because of the significant distortion of the 50mm. If you are planning on using it primarily in the landscape this might not be an issue, and the 50mm would give you greater depth of field for shots like the one you posted.

Either way I would not get a Non-C wide angle lens as they are only single coated and wide angles are more prone to flare and more difficult to shade properly.

Search Flickr for some examples from each lens...

 

[Alan Klein]

Here's my 50mm. I don't have 65mm. Good luck on whatever you decide.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/tags/50mm/

 

[nwilkins]

thanks for the replies everyone. I will definitely look for at least a C lens. Does anyone have any experience with the 65mm C vs the KL? I know the KL was a different design than the C in 65mm.

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

I only have the 65mm C and have never used a KL lens of any variety. My understanding is the 65mm C & non C were identical except for coating while the KL is an entirely new lens design. Search APUG, RB wide angles have been discussed quite a bit.

Good luck!
Shawn

 

[paul ron]

Get the 50mm lens, you will never regret it. That lens can hyper focus from a few inches to infinity with less distortion than most wide lenses and has a look unique all it's own.

The beauty of the RB is that is has can focus so close with any lens, the bellows is over extended by 43mm as it is.

.

 

[nicholai]

Yeah, the 50 is my recommendation too. The close-focus is amazing.

 

[MattKing]

I'm using a 65mm/140mm macro lens set as my "basic" kit - but I tend to use a 35mm as a standard lens on 135.

I really, really like my 50mm C lens too - unfortunately the shutter needs service

 

[homeiss]

I really, really like my 50mm C lens too - unfortunately the shutter needs service

Time to give Horst Wenzel a call?

I also really like my 50mm C lens!

Regards,
Cory

 

[MattKing]

Time to give Horst Wenzel a call?

I also really like my 50mm C lens!

Regards,
Cory

I stopped putting it off - Horst has it on his workbench as we speak

 

[polyglot]

I have an RB67 ProSD with 90mm KL and 180mm KL lenses. Both lenses are great, but I would love to get a wide angle for shots which require greater DoF.

I have (perhaps) bad news for you: DOF depends on optical magnification, not focal length. If you use a wider lens and get up closer to the "subject" so that it's the same size in the frame, the DOF will be the same as if you'd used a longer lens from further back. The background blurs will look smaller but the truly sharp region of the frame will be the same. So if you like the dramatic in-your-face wide perspective, you're not going to fix DOF problems by going wider.

Of course if you keep the same camera position (subject/camera distance), the DOF will be greater on the shorter lens because the magnification is lower and for a near-infinity scene (at or near hyperfocus) you obviously get more DOF from the wider lens.

 

[nwilkins]

I understand exactly how depth of field works, so there is no bad news. I was speaking of needing greater DoF in shots like the one I posted. In practical terms using hyperfocal focusing, the 50mm at F32 can focus from a little over 1.5 feet to infinity, whereas the 90mm at F32 is a little over 5 feet to infinity.

 

[porkphoto]

Would focus stacking help you to achieve your goal?

 

[dnjl]

I have the 65mm C. The K/L version of that lens was twice as expensive on eBay, so I went ahead and bought the C instead. It's a great landscape/tripod lens, but not really suited for quick snaps because of the floating element that needs individual adjustment. Basically, it adds another step to the already long procedure: cock shutter and advance film, compose, focus, set exposure and then don't forget about adjusting the floating element. It's not a drama if you don't, but the difference is discernible.

I shot this with the 65mm C:

(Adox CHS 50 in Rodinal, green filter)

Don't worry about the older lens coatings. As you can see, I shot it directly against the sun (no lens hood), and there's no flare to speak of. If you decide to get the 65mm, consider the C as a much cheaper but equally impressive alternative to the K/L.

 

[markbarendt]

Would focus stacking help you to achieve your goal?

Morning porkphoto, welcome to APUG.

Yes it could work, but APUG is a site dedicated to traditional non-digital photographic methods and stacking negatives for that effect is problematic.

In the case here the OP is essentially wants to use optics to improve his or her depth of field on a single frame of film, in a single shutter drop.

 

[nwilkins]

yeah I don't know anything about focus stacking but if it involves digital post work I am not really interested. Thanks for the suggestion though.

waltereegho thanks for that - that is a lovely photo too! My 90mm KL apparently has a floating element so I am familiar with the process.

 

[MattKing]

I don't find the floating element adjustment to be all that difficult, but that may be because I generally just scale focus that setting before composing and fine focusing the rest.

I don't think the floating element adjustment is particularly critical except when you are working at close focus or near macro distances, and generally at those distances I have lots of time to make extra careful adjustments.

 

[bushpig]

I own the 90 C, the 180 C, and the 50 C.

The 90 is my most used lens, followed by the 50. The 50 is a fantastic lens (but which RB lens isn't?). I went with the 50 (despite it being more expensive and me being very frugal) because I enjoy shooting inside unsafe, abandoned, decrepit buildings and wanted the widest, non-fisheye I could get. (Although I'd like to try shooting with the fish-eye someday. Just don't wanna pay as much as it usually goes for)

I don't think you're really going to go wrong with either lens. If money's an issue, the 65 is usually cheaper.

Good luck and happy shooting.

Oh. And I just bought a backpack that'll hold all my RB gear (my current shoulder bag is a small bag made for a 35mm SLR. Barely holds the RB with one lens and some film.)

 

[rhcgn]

Apart from the various and valid points already made, I would like to point out that the non K/L lenses do not have the second remote socket, with exposures longer than a second you will have to turn the ring or operate the cocking lever to close the shutter, whereas you just use the second cable on the lens on the K/L's. Depending on your style of shooting and personal preference this might be an issue.

 

[paul ron]

When using the T function I generally use the lens cap over it then just cock the shutter or move the speed ring to reset.

The 50mm will focus as colse as a few inches to inf at ƒ32 since the bellows of the RBs can be over extended by 43mm, you already have a built in extension tube, which is one of the nice features of the RB that other camera can't do.

The floating lens can be set to inf n left alone without any ill effect. It eliminates (ever so slightly) the barreling at the corners of the image. If you are very fussy, play with it by setting the distance of your subject.

also get teh user manual for the RB. It has the lenses n their DOF scales.

http://www.cameramanuals.org/mamiya_pdf/mamiya_rb67_pro-s-2.pdf

 

[nwilkins]

that is something I hadn't thought about - I do generally use a cable release to end a T exposure, but Paul Ron's suggestion of putting something over the lens would work. Is that feasible at smaller time exposures though? I can see it working well for multi minute exposures, but what about 4 or 6 seconds?

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

that is something I hadn't thought about - I do generally use a cable release to end a T exposure, but Paul Ron's suggestion of putting something over the lens would work. Is that feasible at smaller time exposures though? I can see it working well for multi minute exposures, but what about 4 or 6 seconds?

Yes, I always have a Mamiya ruber lens hood attached and carry a black stocking cap with me which I use to cover the lens before cocking the shutter. I've done it without issue for exposures as short as two seconds.

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

I shot this with the 65mm C:

(Adox CHS 50 in Rodinal, green filter)

Don't worry about the older lens coatings. As you can see, I shot it directly against the sun (no lens hood), and there's no flare to speak of. If you decide to get the 65mm, consider the C as a much cheaper but equally impressive alternative to the K/L.

First of all, I remember this picture from the gallery, it's in my favorites. FANTASTIC!!!

Secondly, I have all C lenses (including the 65mm C which you used for this picture). The C versions are multi-coated. The older NON-C lenses are single coated, I used to have a couple and they were much more prone to flare.