boilerdoc2
Well-known
Wondered if anyone has used the long lens on the M7. Seems to be a less than useful lens and questioning why mamiya ever came out with it.
Steve
Steve
S
StuartR
Guest
It is a rather weird design choice. The only real markets I can think of for it are aerial photographers and mountain climbers who want to shoot from one peak to another. And even given that, it is not that long of a lens on 6x7...very strange. I wonder how many they sold...ten? Fifteen?
boilerdoc2
Well-known
210 mm
210 mm
Enjoyed your website. Did you have any trouble focussing the 135 with the Konica? Iceland is on my list.
Steve
210 mm
Enjoyed your website. Did you have any trouble focussing the 135 with the Konica? Iceland is on my list.
Steve
sf
Veteran
companies do strange things.
Look at Bronica and the RF645. Very messy ordeal.
The 210 does seem like a very odd creation.
More odd even than the 135 on the Bronica.
Look at Bronica and the RF645. Very messy ordeal.
The 210 does seem like a very odd creation.
More odd even than the 135 on the Bronica.
Will
Well-known
Quoting from: http://www.mamiya.com/lenses.asp?id=1&id2=24&id3=26&id4=936&id5=938
The Mamiya 210mm f/8 lens is a compact 17 ounce, 4.9 inch lens designed to meet the needs of Mamiya 7II owners who like travel, backpacking and desire a lightweight telephoto to capture distant landscapes. This lens in not coupled to the rangefinder, and must be set for the estimated distance of the subject.
Applications include distant landscape and aerial photography.
Equivalent to 105mm in 35mm format.
The Mamiya 210mm f/8 lens is a compact 17 ounce, 4.9 inch lens designed to meet the needs of Mamiya 7II owners who like travel, backpacking and desire a lightweight telephoto to capture distant landscapes. This lens in not coupled to the rangefinder, and must be set for the estimated distance of the subject.
Applications include distant landscape and aerial photography.
Equivalent to 105mm in 35mm format.
S
StuartR
Guest
Thanks Steve,
No, I did not have any trouble focusing the 135 on the Konica. That said, I have pretty good eyesight (with my contacts), and I am careful. Iceland is great. I am going to be there from June 9th to July 25th, so hopefully I will bring back even more this time!
No, I did not have any trouble focusing the 135 on the Konica. That said, I have pretty good eyesight (with my contacts), and I am careful. Iceland is great. I am going to be there from June 9th to July 25th, so hopefully I will bring back even more this time!
boilerdoc2 said:
keithwms
Established
I'll play the role of Mamiya's advocate here and say I don't think it's so odd!
If the distance markings are good, who cares that you can't focus in the viewfinder? The thing is probably only going to be used at or near infinity anyway. Sure, I wouldn't use it for birding or sports or whatever. But for landscape I imagine it could be quite useful. For that, DOF is determined hyperfocally anyway, right? So as long as the VF gives the centrepoint and I know the FOV, I think this would be a cool thing to have.
When I first got my mammie 6, I spent a roll or two just trying to focus without the VF, relying on the distance markings, just to test them. And the result was amazingly and consistently good. Try it... go blind for a roll!
If the distance markings are good, who cares that you can't focus in the viewfinder? The thing is probably only going to be used at or near infinity anyway. Sure, I wouldn't use it for birding or sports or whatever. But for landscape I imagine it could be quite useful. For that, DOF is determined hyperfocally anyway, right? So as long as the VF gives the centrepoint and I know the FOV, I think this would be a cool thing to have.
When I first got my mammie 6, I spent a roll or two just trying to focus without the VF, relying on the distance markings, just to test them. And the result was amazingly and consistently good. Try it... go blind for a roll!
S
StuartR
Guest
What I don't get is why they didn't just make it RF coupled and say: "Be careful, this might be inaccurate at close distances and wide aperatures." For people who have trouble telling the difference between 20m and 35m, it would be a useful tool. Also, I figure if you are going to make a long lens, 105mm equivalent is pretty short. The telephoto effects only really start to show up poignantly at 135-180mm...anyway, it just seems like a strange choice to me, which it wouldn't if it were coupled because at least then you could use it at shorter differences with a modicum of confidence.