Mamiya 7II : 80mm or 65mm

[Frederic]

What is the best lens?
I presume the 65mm can be used for reporting/journalism work and for portraits?

I first would buy a body with a 80mm... now i think of buying a65mm, what do you think?

 

[Todd.Hanz]

I like my 80mm, but would really like a 50 to go along with it.

 

[jdos2]

Both lenses are wonderful. What do you consider "better" in a lens? Both are kinda slow, both have rangefinder frames (so no external frame needed). The 80 is lighter, and has a tighter field of view.

 

[thefizz]

I had the same dilemma when getting my 7 and went for the 65mm lens as I usually prefer slightly wider lenses than the standard. Its not excessively wide, I love it.

 

[oftheherd]

I don't have the 7II. I have its older sibling, the Super Press 23. What is really boils down to is what others have asked or aluded to. What is your style? I personally prefer a wider view. I have a 150mm, but it doesn't get that much use. The 100mm, 64mm, or the 50mm get more miles. If you aren't going to get a 100mm (do they have that as a normal?) or longer, then the 80mm isn't going to be too wide. You might prefer the 65mm, or even a 50mm which is the 35mm camera equivalent of 28mm and 24mm respectively.

 

[kuzano]

What's the difference... If it's lens quality, go for the quality. 80 is considered normal lens for 6X7, and in the case of Bronica even for 6X6, where usually the normal 6X6 lens is 75mm. 65 in either case would be considered a short wide angle, but so short as to not want to pay for both lenses. The Fuji 645Zi has a zoom range from 45mm to 90mm and many owners complain that the zoom range there is too short to satisfy a real zoom need. I liked mine, but it was a very limited zoom range. For portrait lens, you usually go somewhat longer than the normal prime lens. For instance, if normal was 80, then a portrait lens would be 105mm or thereabouts, to avoid the "My God, Is her nose really that big" wide angle effect.

Personally I don't think it's a question of buying both lenses and that's probably not your question anyway. I tend toward a lens that's a little wide... so the 65 would probably be my choice IF... IFF the quality was equal to or better than the 80. A second lens for me would have to be 35 to 40mm different, one way or the other before I'd spend money for it, unless it blew the lens I currently owned away on quality. If I were ultimately going to get 3 lenses, I'd go 80 (normal), then 40 or 45, and then 105 or more (probably 150) for a third lens. If a portrait lens were a must, I'd go 105 before I'd go 150. But, I don't shoot people pictures under almost any circumstances. Only where they are needed for scale and even then absolutely unrecognizable.

 

[kuzano]

A more specific recommendation.... re-read your post.
65 for street photography
105 for portrait.

Those would be my choices based on your one line... "journalistic (street) and portrait (portrait)"

Portrait work with the 65 will have people not buying your prints. Big noses!

 

[TimBonzi]

Frederic - Remember that with a 6x7 format the 65mm lens is about a 32mm equivalent in 35mm film format. The 80mm lens is equivalent to about a 40mm lens in 35mm film format. I find the 80mm gives good body shots. You can move in a bit closer, but be careful of the camera to subject angles.

 

[Bob Michaels]

I have the Mamiya 7 with 80mm and 50mm. Good combo and I am happy with them.

If I could only have one lens, it would probably be the 65mm. But the 80mm and 50mm combo is very functional for me.

As someone said previously, don't forget the 80mm is like a 40mm lens on a 35mm camera. It's very functional.

But if I bought another lens, it would be the 65mm and not the 43mm or the 150mm as that's right in the sweet spot of focal lengths for me. Then I'm one of those that find I need a 28mm, a 35mm and a 45mm lens for 35mm use.

 

[PATB]

I hope the OP doesn't mind but I am also torn between 80mm and 65mm.

Would the lens choice affect how much of the frame lines you can see? I wear glasses and have trouble seeing all the 35mm frame lines on a .72 Leica MP. Would the result be the same if I use 65mm on the Mamiya?

 

[StuartR]

I have the 65 and 80mm lenses for the M7II...I do not have a problem seeing the framelines of the 65mm in the viewfinder, but I don't wear glasses. I will look again to check, but I think there is a fairly comfortable amount of room there. That said, if you can't see the 35mm framelines on the MP, that is pretty dramatic. Most people can't see the 28 framelines with glasses, but can see the 35's.

In any case, I got the 65mm for the M7II to get a more general wide angle, and I think it does well in this case. The 80mm is definitely versatile and reasonably wide, but I don't think it was a particularly good choice for the system when looked at as a whole. 80mm is not the normal lens for 6x7...it is the normal lens for 6x6. It is like a 40mm, not a 50mm if you are used to 35mm film. The Mamiya's biggest handicap is that it is difficult to fill the frame with someone's head and shoulders with any of the lenses. The 150mm only focuses to 1.8m and the 80mm is too short even at 1m.

Here is an example of the 80mm at 1m:

It is still a bit too wide for most portraits. If it were a 105 that could focus to 1m, it would be much better in this sense. But the Mamiya RF probably does not have the baselength for that.


ANYWAY, sorry for that huge digression. Basically, if you want something that feels like a wide 35mm lens or a narrow 28mm lens, get the 65mm. If you want something that feels like a tight 35mm lens or a 40mm lens, get the 80mm. Both are equally good, though the 80mm is a little smaller.

65mm:

80mm: