100mm RF645 lens again. . . . . $$$$

[Michael P.]

It's ironic that one reason I bought the RF645 was to get the 100mm lens. But it was quickly discontinued and now it's priced out of reach.

 

[bjorke]

Frankly, the 100mm seems desirable to me exclusively because it's a rare item -- not for the sake of making pix. If I really wanted a tight headshot lens the RF seems significantly less useful and a perfectly good 120mm makro-Planar costs about $500 -- mounted on an older body, not much more, total (if any!) than that RF100mm alone

 

[sf]

Frankly, the 100mm seems desirable to me exclusively because it's a rare item -- not for the sake of making pix. If I really wanted a tight headshot lens the RF seems significantly less useful and a perfectly good 120mm makro-Planar costs about $500 -- mounted on an older body, not much more, total (if any!) than that RF100mm alone

what I use the 100 for, and what anyone should use it for, is getting shots on the street that would otherwise be difficult. There are times when you DON'T want to be in your subject's face with a camera, and being just a tad farther away helps. The 65mm brings you just too close sometimes, and the 45mm is, well, 45mm.

I do use the 100mm for portraits because it has very beautiful OOF characteristics compared to the other two lenses (thanks to its narrower DOF).

But mostly, it is just perfect for street shooting. Big, though.

it is very sexy, though : http://www.shutterflower.com/RF645.jpg.

 

[Talisker]

what I use the 100 for, and what anyone should use it for, is getting shots on the street that would otherwise be difficult.

That's a bit perscriptive for those of us who aren't into street shooting! (and I don't do portraits either...)

Seriously, I used the 100mm on about a quarter of the landscapes I shot on the Bronica on my recent trip to Svalbard (and I've finally got access to a scanner that will take 645 slides so I can post some of them soon!) As has been said in other posts elsewhere, you don't always want a wideangle for landscapes, and you can't always 'step forwards', particularly if you are on a boat or a cliff...

I'm sure there are collectors and completists out there driving the price up which is a shame - I paid £350 (mint - boxed) for mine last year, and its definitely worth that in the context of the rest of the camera system. Out of interest, does anyone know how much they were new, before they were discontinued?

 

[jtm]

When they were new and not discontinued, B&H and Adorama in the U.S. normally listed them at $450 or $500. Bronica usually had a $50 rebate (mail in, after sale), too, that would be mentioned on the B&H and Adorama web pages. I think the 45mm lens was priced similarly, or maybe $50 more, and also with a $50 rebate.

The 100 and 45 are both spectacular lenses, though. And the 100 does have amazing flare resistence.

 

[jdos2]

I'm looking hard for a 100/135.

If I find a cache of 'em, I'll post here.

 

[sf]

what I use the 100 for, and what anyone should use it for, is getting shots on the street that would otherwise be difficult.

That's a bit perscriptive for those of us who aren't into street shooting! (and I don't do portraits either...)

Seriously, I used the 100mm on about a quarter of the landscapes I shot on the Bronica on my recent trip to Svalbard (and I've finally got access to a scanner that will take 645 slides so I can post some of them soon!) As has been said in other posts elsewhere, you don't always want a wideangle for landscapes, and you can't always 'step forwards', particularly if you are on a boat or a cliff...

I'm sure there are collectors and completists out there driving the price up which is a shame - I paid £350 (mint - boxed) for mine last year, and its definitely worth that in the context of the rest of the camera system. Out of interest, does anyone know how much they were new, before they were discontinued?

yeah, my quote is a bit prescriptive. Kind of dumb, actually. Of course the focal length should be used for whatever it fits well. I don't know why I said that. To me, the value of a longer lens on a rangefinder is that it allows for distance between subject and shooter.

 

[Dougg]

In early 2003 when I got my Bronica gear, the 100mm was $489 from Adorama before the $50 rebate, and the 45mm was $499. The 100mm is a nice focal length for this camera, and does indeed reach out somewhat while still having a normal lens look.

 

[jdos2]

Would folks in Europe mind looking about for one for me/us?

I heard from another stateside camera store that reports that they've none, even though they do have a new camera/65mm lens in the box.