Would like some RB purchase advice, specifically about 90mm 3.8 sekor

[Markok765]

Hey all!

I found today in my local classifieds a rb 67, back, and 90mm sekor lens for cheap.

Specifically I wanted to know your experiences with the lens, do you like the way it renders scenes, is it sharp, etc.. sharpness is a big thing for me.

This will be my first MF camera apart from my Holga, and will be used largely in studio and for fine art work.

I'm excited!

 

[Dan Daniel]

.... sharpness is a big thing for me.

... my Holga...

Thanks for the laugh!

( I don't know anything about the 90mm lens. I do know that if sharpness is critical you should plan on using a good tripod to get the most out of a camera like the RB67.)

 

[MattKing]

Hi Marko - long time no see.

The RB lenses are pretty consistent across the range. I've been very happy with the rendering and sharpness of all the ones I've used.

At one time I had two versions of the 90mm lenses - the "C" and a "NB". Both served me well.

I don't have a 90mm right now, but only because I have settled on a 50mm, 65mm, 140mm and 180mm "kit".

The two "standard" focal lengths for the RB are 90mm and 127mm. If you prefer wider lenses, the 90mm may suit you best. If you prefer longer lenses, the 127mm may suit you best. They are both of similar high quality, although the 127mm is a bit lighter and smaller.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I have a 90 myself, very good lens. i also have a 50, 180 and a fisheye. Like it was mention before use a tripod.

Jeff

 

[Kyle M.]

I have the 90mm C lens and it is tack sharp, I'm very happy with it.

 

[analoguey]

Buy a ProSD or ProS - much better because of the interlocks.
If 90mm, check for whether its a K/L lens as you can use that with the RZ - if you move onto an RZ further on. I haven't used the C lenses but the 90KL is pretty sharp - but not wide enough for my tastes - kind of a 'neither here nor there' in focal length terms - a little frustrating that can be.
Got a 180 but havent used it much.

 

[Jeff Searust]

Its a bellows camera -- so it's up to you to focus. Not just reading numbers of a helical.

 

[renowood]

+ get the Pro S or SD lots of improvements over the Pro. I picked up a Pro S, 2-120 backs, 1-220 backs, 65mm, 90mm, 180mm, carrying case, filters, cable releases and film for $300 off Craigslist locally and am very happy with it. The 65 and 90 are non-c lens but very sharp to me. I've heard the 50mm has lots of distortion. Lenses are still reasonable on ebay or at least until someone makes an adaptor for the Sony NEX.

 

[MattKing]

Buy a ProSD or ProS - much better because of the interlocks.
If 90mm, check for whether its a K/L lens as you can use that with the RZ - if you move onto an RZ further on. I haven't used the C lenses but the 90KL is pretty sharp - but not wide enough for my tastes - kind of a 'neither here nor there' in focal length terms - a little frustrating that can be.
Got a 180 but havent used it much.

I agree with the recommendation for the Pro S or Pro SD, but a Pro body is functional.

Almost all of the RB "C" series lenses are also usable with the RZ cameras - it is not just the K/L ones.

The only exception is the 75mm Shift lens.

The older, pre-1978 non-C RB lenses are not compatible.

 

[TareqPhoto]

I just bought RB ProSD and used it this month for first time, and i tested 2 lenses only so far, 90KL and 65KL, i did post results out of 90mm on my thread, but i did shoot with 65mm and soon i will process/develop the film and post later, another day i will test 127KL.

The results from 90mm were nice to my eyes, maybe the film or developer wasn't at best or something else so that i didn't get amazing dramatic results, i can do that with scans digitally, but overall it works fine, i bought it brand new so i should expect it to function at best.

If you prefer slightly long sides then go with these combo of lenses: 65, 127, 180
If you prefer shorter sides then go with followings: 37 fisheye or is it 40? 50 if not choosing fisheye, 90, 150 or 140 macro

 

[David T T]

I have had a 90 C and a 90 non-C, and I feel that the contrast and saturation are noticeably better using the C version.

 

[Markok765]

Thanks a lot for all the advice guys! It ended up being sold the day before I called so I ended up buying a 645. The lighter weight was a consideration as I am a smaller guy.