TJV
Well-known
Am I mad? I've been whining for weeks about the state of all things film and now I'm tempted by a new lens for my Mamiya 7ii - the 50mm ultra wide. I love the 6x7 format and find the challenge of composition more rewarding that the 35mm, 3x2 format. I was also thinking about taking the plunge on a ZM C Sonnar 50mm for my Leica kit, but now I think I'd be better served with the Mamiya lens to go along side my 60mm and 80mm lenses.
I've heard the 50mm viewfinder is not necessarily needed for composition with the M7ii, but I'd like to know how close the camera viewfinder is to what the external one shows. Do you get more, or less on film that you see?
Normally I don't mind using these viewfinders but I often find I use flash with the slower MF lenses and I'd appreciate the use of the flash mount.
Also, does the viewfinder have close and infinaty focus frame masks or do you have to dial in the focus distance in the viewfinder to get an approximate view taking into consideration parallax?
Lastly - POST SOME SHOTS FROM YOUR 50MM! I'd love to see them.
Thanks.
Tim
I've heard the 50mm viewfinder is not necessarily needed for composition with the M7ii, but I'd like to know how close the camera viewfinder is to what the external one shows. Do you get more, or less on film that you see?
Normally I don't mind using these viewfinders but I often find I use flash with the slower MF lenses and I'd appreciate the use of the flash mount.
Also, does the viewfinder have close and infinaty focus frame masks or do you have to dial in the focus distance in the viewfinder to get an approximate view taking into consideration parallax?
Lastly - POST SOME SHOTS FROM YOUR 50MM! I'd love to see them.
Thanks.
Tim
Turtle
Veteran
I can tell you that the 50mm is absolutely spectacular in performance across the board. I have not used my finder since day one as I find the entire surround of the integral viewfinder about smack on. I have tested this and can honestly say that it is so darned close the external viewfinder is superfluous...unless you want to see outside the lines, which the external viewfinder permits.
I do not have any images online from the 50mm, but would say that this lens has noticeably better edge/corner performance than the 65 (which I love for its wonderful perspective). It is a recent acquisition for me and is becoming a favourite with the 65. They are not too close IMO. I find I can hand hold it down to 1/30 is I can crouch or get steady and the images are tack sharp, good contrasty, free from flare etc.
As for your last point, I dont use mine so close that parallax is an issue. The external finder might ave an answer there but I dont use mine. For very close stuff I guesstimate or adjust the angle over a couple of frames to be sure i get on film what i want.
You will not regret this lens and I am finding it great for Kabul street photography set at f16, with 400-800 film and with focus set on the scale or adjusted by estimation (to save pointing the camera at everything and allowing snap shots). Only problem is the rapid film changes! I am not wondering whether the 43 would be worth a go, but is not not that much wider. a 38 would have been better.
I do not have any images online from the 50mm, but would say that this lens has noticeably better edge/corner performance than the 65 (which I love for its wonderful perspective). It is a recent acquisition for me and is becoming a favourite with the 65. They are not too close IMO. I find I can hand hold it down to 1/30 is I can crouch or get steady and the images are tack sharp, good contrasty, free from flare etc.
As for your last point, I dont use mine so close that parallax is an issue. The external finder might ave an answer there but I dont use mine. For very close stuff I guesstimate or adjust the angle over a couple of frames to be sure i get on film what i want.
You will not regret this lens and I am finding it great for Kabul street photography set at f16, with 400-800 film and with focus set on the scale or adjusted by estimation (to save pointing the camera at everything and allowing snap shots). Only problem is the rapid film changes! I am not wondering whether the 43 would be worth a go, but is not not that much wider. a 38 would have been better.
TJV
Well-known
I've got a feeling I'd love the perspective. With 35mm, 28/25mm is too long for my tastes but in 67 format I think it will be perfect.
Do you have any of your shots in Kabul on line?
Do you have any of your shots in Kabul on line?
Bob Michaels
nobody special
Here's the Mamiya 7 50mm wide open. Also using Delta 3200 as it was dim inside.
I have no problems shooting my Mamiya 7 with only the 80mm and the 50mm lenses. Both are spectacular.
I never use the external finder either.
TJV
Well-known
Nice pic Bob. It sounds like no one really uses the external finder. I'm more and more thinking it could be the lens to complete my kit.
As for pictures,
keep 'em coming!
As for pictures,
keep 'em coming!
kram
Well-known
It's a great lens, but I use the finder. After a while you get use to focus, then framing. You can do it, with the veiwfinder but I ind it hard to judge the right ahnd side of the photo.
waileong
Well-known
The superwide is 43 mm.
TJV
Well-known
Indeed. Care to share any other thoughts on the mentioned 50mm?
waileong
Well-known
I have the 50 mm in the M6. It's fine. What I like about the M6 system is that I can handhold to 1/8 or even lower if I support with a tree trunk, so I can maximise the dof by shooting at f11 or f16. Something I could not do with my Hassy.
Turtle
Veteran
I don't have any 50mm Mamiya 7 images from Kabul available. I printed some when in the UK a few months ago but with the rush to print old negs, none made it under the digital camera for copy and upload. Since coming back I have shot a load more on the 50mm and am finding it fantastic. The 65mm is still my most used by far as I find the combination of 65mm and the 6x7 ratio even better than my 35mm go to on 35mm format. It has more top to bottom depth and so seems to allow me even more compositions to work - I suppose the 65mm is equiv to 35mm left to right, and 28 on the vertical (I know equivs should be taken diagonally but I compose my images using the sides 
)
With the 65mm accounting for well over 50% of my images, the 50mm ends up on next. The 80mm is hardly used and the 150 has not been touched, but will come into its own for scenic/travel. In Kabul things are generally in closer with less distant shots. I shot quite a few images at 1/30 on the 50mm crouched or sitting for stability and they were tack sharp. When you ar able to shoot at f8 or 11, wait until you see the negs.... from what I have seen the 50mm has better edges than the 65mm wide open.
For me, the 65mm is not too close to the 50 at all - the two are very different. the 65 and 43 might seem more 'flexible' but I know that 50 and 65 get uses the most - kind of a 25-32 combo in 35mm.
I am not back in the UK for about 2 months so it will be a while before i can upload examples. I have about 25 rolls of 120 to develop and hope to spend 10 days in India soon, where I will be taking the mamiya 7 for some more relaxed/scenic photography.
PS, although I cant confirm, most say the light falloff with the 50 is far less than the 43 which makes sense as most say the same about 25/21 mm in 35mm format.
rgds
)With the 65mm accounting for well over 50% of my images, the 50mm ends up on next. The 80mm is hardly used and the 150 has not been touched, but will come into its own for scenic/travel. In Kabul things are generally in closer with less distant shots. I shot quite a few images at 1/30 on the 50mm crouched or sitting for stability and they were tack sharp. When you ar able to shoot at f8 or 11, wait until you see the negs.... from what I have seen the 50mm has better edges than the 65mm wide open.
For me, the 65mm is not too close to the 50 at all - the two are very different. the 65 and 43 might seem more 'flexible' but I know that 50 and 65 get uses the most - kind of a 25-32 combo in 35mm.
I am not back in the UK for about 2 months so it will be a while before i can upload examples. I have about 25 rolls of 120 to develop and hope to spend 10 days in India soon, where I will be taking the mamiya 7 for some more relaxed/scenic photography.
PS, although I cant confirm, most say the light falloff with the 50 is far less than the 43 which makes sense as most say the same about 25/21 mm in 35mm format.
rgds
TJV
Well-known
All good info, thanks.
I'm with you. I think I'd probably still use my 65mm most of the time but I'd love the option of going wider in a tight squeeze or on the street.
I reckon I use the 80mm lens, my only other for the M7ii, only 25% of the time. Odd seeing as the 50mm on 35mm film is my favourite FOV.
Tim
I'm with you. I think I'd probably still use my 65mm most of the time but I'd love the option of going wider in a tight squeeze or on the street.
I reckon I use the 80mm lens, my only other for the M7ii, only 25% of the time. Odd seeing as the 50mm on 35mm film is my favourite FOV.
Tim
I don't have any 50mm Mamiya 7 images from Kabul available. I printed some when in the UK a few months ago but with the rush to print old negs, none made it under the digital camera for copy and upload. Since coming back I have shot a load more on the 50mm and am finding it fantastic. The 65mm is still my most used by far as I find the combination of 65mm and the 6x7 ratio even better than my 35mm go to on 35mm format. It has more top to bottom depth and so seems to allow me even more compositions to work - I suppose the 65mm is equiv to 35mm left to right, and 28 on the vertical (I know equivs should be taken diagonally but I compose my images using the sides
With the 65mm accounting for well over 50% of my images, the 50mm ends up on next. The 80mm is hardly used and the 150 has not been touched, but will come into its own for scenic/travel. In Kabul things are generally in closer with less distant shots. I shot quite a few images at 1/30 on the 50mm crouched or sitting for stability and they were tack sharp. When you ar able to shoot at f8 or 11, wait until you see the negs.... from what I have seen the 50mm has better edges than the 65mm wide open.
For me, the 65mm is not too close to the 50 at all - the two are very different. the 65 and 43 might seem more 'flexible' but I know that 50 and 65 get uses the most - kind of a 25-32 combo in 35mm.
I am not back in the UK for about 2 months so it will be a while before i can upload examples. I have about 25 rolls of 120 to develop and hope to spend 10 days in India soon, where I will be taking the mamiya 7 for some more relaxed/scenic photography.
PS, although I cant confirm, most say the light falloff with the 50 is far less than the 43 which makes sense as most say the same about 25/21 mm in 35mm format.
rgds
Turtle
Veteran
and the great thing about the 50 is that you can use the entire finder and dont need to bother with the external finder as one must with the 43. I dont use my external finder at all and my negs are as I expect, give or take a small margin of error that I can live with for street work. if doing slow landscapes I would use it, however, just to have a better degree of accuracy.