Cheap way for fast lenses in medium format

[franciscojhh]

Hi to all,

I really like my Yashica 124G, which I am using these days. The results of its 3.5 lens on 6x6 for restrictively unfocusing (low DoF) are similar or superior to what I get on my Nikon D90 (crop factor 1.5) with the 35mm 1.8 normal lens.

That makes me think of going further... How expensive would be a TLR with a bigger aperture than 3.5? And (although I am not on the right section of the forum) what about other Medium Format type of cameras?

Thank you,

 

[Peter_wrote:]

there is the Mamiya 645 with the 80/1.9 lens.

take a look at this thread about this combo http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=61046

 

[Peter_Jones]

Mamiya 220/330 as mentioned - or perhaps a Bronica SQ ?

If 6x4.5 is OK then Mamiya 645 (the ones without interchangeable backs are very cheap) or ETRS have reasonably fast lenses for (comparatively) little money.

 

[KoNickon]

A Mamiya C220 (simpler/lighter/cheaper than a C330) with a Mamiya 80/2.8 would be a relatively inexpensive way to get a TLR with a faster lens. You might well be able to get this combination for $250. And of course you can interchanges lenses with the Mamiyas.

I am not up on all the different lens options with folding cameras, but I know of at least one, a Balda Super Baldax, that can be found with an f2.8 lens (Schneider Radionar, I think) -- however, it's a 3 element lens so the quality at maximum aperture may not be terrific.

Another possibility is a Mamiya, Pentax or Bronica SLR in 6x4.5 format. All three have standard f2.8 lenses; there's an 80/1.9 Mamiya also for that format. Any of these with a waist level finder would run at least $250, and probably higher for the Pentax.

 

[oftheherd]

If you want interchangable lenses, go with the C330, or perhaps a C220. But to get it for the 80mm f/2.8 lens versus the Yashica f/3.5 wouldn't make a lot of sense to me. That's what, 2/3 f/stop? I think a better solution would be pushing the film.

 

[Calzone]

One of the fastest and cheapest is the Pentax 105/2.4 on a Pentax 6x7. Both are cheap. The bodies are rugged and the glass is superb. One of the reasons they are inexpensive is that the bodies have proven themselves durable, and they made the glass for a long time period for the 6x7, 67 and 67II. The 105/2.4 is a very sharp lens but the DOF is very-very shallow. Also know that the close focus is limited to only 1 meter.

Just be aware that the difference you see in DOF between formats is about two stops less for medium format for the same equivilent FOV.

If you are considering a Rollei know that the 2.8's are not as well balanced as the 3.5's and that there is a considerable weight gain. I prefer a Rollei 3.5F over any 2.8.

I also own some old Fuji's that use interchangable lenses. The 100/3.5 is kind of wonderful because it can close focus to produce really great OOF and bokeh. I assume you are interested in the shallow DOF for these reasons and this is why I mention it. An old Fuji with a 100/3.5 close focused and shot wide open is a wonderful bokeh machine.

Cal

 

[S.H.]

With a Pentacon 6 you can have a full range of usable to very good Zeiss 2.8 lenses (65, 80, 120, 180). They can mount on Kiev 60 bodies, same mount. There are adapters to mount the lenses on other mounts. Bodies are the weak link, you should know a repairman able to work on it if you want to use them seriously.

According to this site : http://www.rolleiclub.com/cameras/tlr/info/A-F_tlr.shtml, there is no difference in weight between a 2.8f or a 3.5f (1.220g). Except for your wallet of course 😀 I find my 2.8c more balanced than my prewar automat, the weight helps to keep it stable.

 

[msbarnes]

depends on what you want. I've had a few cameras mentioned here but I would definately consider the price and pros/cons of the camera type. You don't want a Pentax 67 for low light.

Pentax 67: haven't owned but it was really large/heavy from when I tried it out. However, the lenses are fast. Moderately priced.
Pentacon 6: I own the 50mm, 80mm, and 180mm. This camera is alright. The 180mm is one of a kind. Really fast but really big. Moderately priced.
Mamiya C220: I didn't like the ergonomics of this camera. While it is lighter and easier to use/handheld than the other cameras, it is no Rollei. Fairly inexpensive.
Rolleiflex 2.8c/2.8e: I love my Rollei's! I prefer the 2.8E because of the WLF but the 2.8C isn't so bad but it'll cost you $500, I think. Might be able to get it a little cheaper but this is the more expensive option. The other options are cheaper and give you more flexibility.

There are also 645 cameras but I never messed with those, I prefer 6x6. As many have mentioned, you can look into Mamiyas and Pentax's. Better handheldability than the 6x7 SLR's.

If you want low light/handheld, then I'd get a TLR for sure. If not, then most SLR's will provide you with wide apertures and will usually let you focus closer than TLR's.

 

[S.H.]

If you want low light/handheld, then I'd get a TLR for sure. If not, then most SLR's will provide you with wide apertures and will usually let you focus closer than TLR's.

+1 .
But I was surprised with my Praktisix, the mirror is well damped and I had very good results at 1/50 or 1/30 fully open with a Biometar. (a shame that this darn thing needs a shutter overhaul to actually work :bang: . as I said, bodies are the weak link)

 

[mfogiel]

I have been through some shallow DOF considerations for MF.
In 645 you get the mamiya 80/1.9 and Contax Planar 80/2, with the Planar much preferred by most shooters ( there is also a 140/2.8 and 210/4).
In 6x6 you get the Norita with a 80/2, but the camera reliability is scarce, then you get Hasselblad F series, for which you can get Planar 110/2, Sonnar 150/2.8 and 250/4.

There is also Pentacon 6 with a Biometar 120/2.8 and Sonnar 180/2.8, and I believe Schneider has done some lenses that share this mount, where you could find a Xenotar 80/2 (very rare) and 110/2,8

In 6x7 you get Plaubel Makina with an 80/2.8, Then you get Pentax 67 with 75/2.8 AL, 90/2.8, 105/2.4 - great lens, 150/2.8, 165/2.8, 200/4 and 300/4.

Best bang for the buck, the Pentax 67 with 105/2.4 or 165/2.8, while the most admired lens remains the Planar 110/2, although the bokeh is not always easy to tame. You could also consider a Pentax 645AF with a Pentax adapter, that will let you use Pentax 67 lenses.

 

[venchka]

I am a bit confused by the original post. Are you looking for more or less depth of field than your f/3.5 lens on the Yashica?
f/1.9, f/2.4 & f/2.8 lenses are pretty much the limit for medium format. All will give less depth of field wide open compared to the f/3.5 lens you have now. Is that what you are looking for?

Wayne

 

[franciscojhh]

Sorry for being a bit confusing in the opening post.

What I was interested in is a MF camera (TLR or other) that can give me a shallower DoF than my Yashicon 80mm 3.5. That was because I potentially expect DoF to be shallower in MF because we use longer lenses as normal lenses. I don't really care about extra light.

Thanks to the people who suggested Mamiya interchangeable TLR and the Kiev 60 system. Rolleiflex 2.8c seems to be on the expensive side. I'll appreciate more options (Maybe a folder?).

Thanks

Fran

 

[S.H.]

A classic folder : the Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta 6x6 (tessar 80mm 2.8). But post war coated ones can be pricey, and beware of the mechanical condition. The Certo Six has a fast lens also, it is pricier and scarce.

 

[msbarnes]

Untitled by Michael_Sergio_Barnes, on Flickr

All the suggestions are good. I'm not sure what your particular application is, but it also helps to get closer. This is with a Rolleinar 1 on a Rolleiflex 3.5E (75mm f3.5). You can get them for your yashica for $20-$50, I think.

 

[Dave Jenkins]

I used a Pentax 6x7 with the 105mm lens for about 20 years. I had no trouble getting sharp photographs hand-held at 1/60th second.

 

[keytarjunkie]

Absolutely the Pentax 6x7 w/ 105/2.4. Amazing combo, if lack of depth of field is your thing. And fairly cheap!

Back when it was my thing...(it's not anymore)

Maybe more depth of field than the Mamiya 80/1.9 on 6x4.5. It's hard to tell, I'm sure someone who's good at math can figure that out. I doubt you'll find anything comparable until you get to 8x10".

 

[xxloverxx]

A Balda Baldax with a 2.9 lens can be had for not too much. A little fussy in use though, and the viewfinder would take a bit of getting used to…

Update: Just searched That Auction Site. I got my Baldax for $30 a while ago…but now there don't seem to be any below $100.

 

[hanskerensky]

A Franka Solida III can also be had with the Schneider 1:2.9 Radionar lens. They are (normally) a bit cheaper then a Balda.

 

[oftheherd]

Well, if you aren't stuck on TLR, then there are a lot of possibilities. In folders as you mentioned, there are many 6x6 that are really good. I like the Weltas, but also have a couple of Fujis that I like. You just have to be careful and expect to do some work on the shutters to clean them.

I think if you want shallower DoF, you need to go to telephoto lenses, and then to SLR or RF with interchangeable lenses. Again, there are many to choose from.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Sorry for being a bit confusing in the opening post.

What I was interested in is a MF camera (TLR or other) that can give me a shallower DoF than my Yashicon 80mm 3.5. That was because I potentially expect DoF to be shallower in MF because we use longer lenses as normal lenses. I don't really care about extra light.

Thanks to the people who suggested Mamiya interchangeable TLR and the Kiev 60 system. Rolleiflex 2.8c seems to be on the expensive side. I'll appreciate more options (Maybe a folder?).

Thanks

Fran

Dear Fran,

Use a longer lens. Such as my 300/4... (150-180m equivalent on 35mm)

Cheers,

R..