When I had a 35mm lens, I need a 28mm. Then that wasn't wide enough so I got a 24mm. Then, I got a 17mm ... I think you see where I'm going here.
When I got my Mamiya 7II I got the 80mm and the 43mm ... because I knew that what I like to see in my wide angle shots is not available in the "standard" wide-angle lenses like a (in 135 equiv.) 35, 28 or 24.
Not saying that the "standard" wide-angles aren't useful. Just that sometimes ... they aren't wide enough. If you're going to have to use and external viewfinder anyway ... go for the 43 ... you won't be disappointed.
UPDATE ... about the Hyperfocal issue with the 7II
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica] I'm a die-hard RZ fan. I love the 6x7 neg and the results from that camera. That said, lugging it around Italy for three weeks in the early summer of 2004 was a chore. I've never regretted taking it because of the 20x24 images I now have hanging on my walls are amazingly sharp and contrasty ... results I'd not have seen in a 35mm or high-end digital.
I'm headed back to Europe this summer. Not wanting to give up the 6x7 neg and not wanting to carry my very heavy RZ ... I bought a Mamiya 7II with a 43mm and 80mm lens. My testing of this camera has proven that I made a wise decision for a travel camera.
Image quality from the 7II is just as amazing as from my RZ. True there is a hyperfocal issue ... but the answer is not shooting at f/22 with your infinity mark at f/16 or f/11 as most people suggest. This is a little off-topic, but I think someone looking at the 7II, or using a 7II might want to know.
The problem with this shooting at f/22 or f/16 approach is the distortion caused by stopping all the way down. Two generally accepted rules-of-thumb are that a lens is sharpest two-stops from wide open and that stopping down to the minimum f-stop actually reduces sharpness while maximizing depth-of-field.
My testing has shown that using the guide in the lens manual gives you a good starting point for getting proper hyperfocal results. Though, those results need to be tested too.
I found that the 43mm lens, focused at 7m and stopped down to f/11 produced the best hyperfocal results with that lens ... just slightly better than f/8.
With the 80mm lens, also stopped down to f/11, the point of focus setting on the lens is a little more tricky. The right side of the infinity mark needs to rest just inside the right-side f/11 marking on the lens. The focus point is on the far-right edge of the zero on the 10m mark.
My best suggestion is testing it yourself and get truly sharp results with maximum depth-of-field without gaining the distortion caused by stopping down to f/16 or f/22.
I find that both of these lenses produce the best results between wide open and f/11. f/16 and f/22 were softer at the point-of-focus, even though they obviously had more depth-of-field. And, when shooting things that aren't hyperfocal ... I've found that f/8 on both of those lenses really is the sweet spot on those lenses.
Just my 6x7 cents worth ...[/FONT] [/FONT]
