sf
Veteran
The Mamiya 7II and the RF645 have nearly the same effective base length - the Mamiya wins by 1.4 milimeters. 33 vs 34.4.
My question is, should I avoid the 100mm lens for the RF645 if tack sharp images are vital to me? Or should I just make a point of stopping down and using hyperfocus whenever i can?
And is my assumption that wide angle lenses with shorter baselengths will be much more accurately focused than longer ones? Will I be best served to use the 45mm primarily (if sharpness is my only concern)?
just thinking about what i want to do with the two lenses that come with my RF645. Will I bring both or just one with me to Europe?
My question is, should I avoid the 100mm lens for the RF645 if tack sharp images are vital to me? Or should I just make a point of stopping down and using hyperfocus whenever i can?
And is my assumption that wide angle lenses with shorter baselengths will be much more accurately focused than longer ones? Will I be best served to use the 45mm primarily (if sharpness is my only concern)?
just thinking about what i want to do with the two lenses that come with my RF645. Will I bring both or just one with me to Europe?
Last edited:
sf
Veteran
Is hyperfocus the secret to sharp detail with short baselengths? As soon as my RF645 arrives ( week from now), I will shoot a very comprehensive test roll.
I think you'll need to reassure yourself about these issues with that comprehensive testing you mentioned. I'm not terribly critical about focus, at least in better light, and have not seen any problem focusing the 100mm lens. All three lenses are excellent, and honestly I don't know which of the three is sharpest.
It is certainly true that hyperfocal setting gives the fastest reaction to sudden photo opportunities, and I do tend to focus out there somewhere in hopes the DoF will handle the range I want. Clearly this is easier with smaller apertures, longer distances, and wider lenses. The baselength is not an issue with these three lenses, all of fairly modest aperture, and not focusing closer than a meter.
I'd suggest taking both lenses with you on the trip. The 45 will be perfect for interiors and narrow streets and courtyards, while the 65 will be good for a bit narrower view, say of people. It's like having a 28 and 40mm along with your 35mm cam, a very useful combination!
Here's a rather unremarkable photo in which I focused the 100mm to its nearest distance, then moved so that the wire fence was in sharp focus. Fairly wide aperture too as I recall, as it was getting late on a dull afternoon.
It is certainly true that hyperfocal setting gives the fastest reaction to sudden photo opportunities, and I do tend to focus out there somewhere in hopes the DoF will handle the range I want. Clearly this is easier with smaller apertures, longer distances, and wider lenses. The baselength is not an issue with these three lenses, all of fairly modest aperture, and not focusing closer than a meter.
I'd suggest taking both lenses with you on the trip. The 45 will be perfect for interiors and narrow streets and courtyards, while the 65 will be good for a bit narrower view, say of people. It's like having a 28 and 40mm along with your 35mm cam, a very useful combination!
Here's a rather unremarkable photo in which I focused the 100mm to its nearest distance, then moved so that the wire fence was in sharp focus. Fairly wide aperture too as I recall, as it was getting late on a dull afternoon.
sf
Veteran
thanks
I love how images from that camera jump off the page. The DOF effect with that wood is nice too. Feels alot shallower than f4.
I love how images from that camera jump off the page. The DOF effect with that wood is nice too. Feels alot shallower than f4.