Jump to content

Medium format lenses!


Cheatah
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have ordered an P6/K6 > E-mount adapter to use my medium format 6x6 lenses, 2,8/80mm and 5,6/250mm lenses on my A7 and A6000!  The lenses are quite heavy, and comparable bulky, but having also an advantage! I am using the center of These medium format lenses only, so to speak the sweet spots! 

 

Optical may be not as crisp as 35mm glasses, but with high contrast, no distortions, no corner vignettings!

 

On my A6000, the 80mm lens is an 120mm lens with an close distance of 60cm. Not too bad für an 120mm focal length!

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Jaf-Photo

The top two photos are very contrasty and nice.

 

I've used my Mamiya 645 lenses adapted to Sony full frame and APS-C. To me, the disappointments was that you don't get a medium format look on a smaller sensor. Therefore, I don't really use them much. The 35mm lenses are smaller and often sharper on a small sensor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow - my text didn't show up in my post... Trying to edit...

 

Didn't someone (More edit - Rhinocam) make a rig that positioned the sensor behind all the areas the medium format lens covers? Essentially giving you the Brenizer approach to building up a medium format image by stitching together the pieces.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The top two photos are very contrasty and nice.

 

I've used my Mamiya 645 lenses adapted to Sony full frame and APS-C. To me, the disappointments was that you don't get a medium format look on a smaller sensor. Therefore, I don't really use them much. The 35mm lenses are smaller and often sharper on a small sensor.

 

Yes, the 35mm lenses are developed to be generally sharper on the 35mm format, but the medium format lenses providing all the goodies of an sweet spot, and in addition with APS-C more focal length!  The missing crisp sharpness can be easyly obtained in post processing!  It's not a must, but if you keeping some medium format lenses unused in your drawer, there is an clever possibility to use them now with your Sony E-Mount cameras!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Posts

    • Have you used and compared the FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS with the 2X teleconverter to the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS for birds and other wildlife?  I'm considering the FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS (I already have the 2x teleconverter) to replace the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS. I've scoured the web but can't find many helpful direct comparisons.  Application, Environment and Background Info I walk 10-20 kilometres every morning on the southwest coast of British Columbia. It's winter, and in my area that means it's dark and dreary with lots or rain. There are all kinds of birds, from Bald Eagles to Swallows, Hummingbirds and plenty of shorebirds, with many passing through on their migratory paths.  I carry an A1 and FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS and an A7 IV with a FE 24-105mm F4 G OSS or FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II for closer opportunities and landscapes.  I'm happy with the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS when the light is good, but I'm in the middle of six months of this rainy season, so I'm usually shooting at 600 mm, f/6.3, 1/500 sec for stationary subjects, and 1/2000-1/4000 for things on the move. My ISO is often above 6400.  I don't use a tripod or monopod. I'm always on the move. I frequently crop to 200%.  I rarely do videos. I don't shoot sports. The FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS serves me well for large birds like Bald Eagles when the light is good.  Although I'm almost always at the long end (600 mm) of the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS, I use the zoom when a large bird approaches or for distant landscapes. I don't mind the weight of carrying two cameras with these lenses. Things I hope to change or improve Greater agility with a lighter, shorter lens I struggle to move the lens fast enough to catch swallows and other small birds in flight. I do much better with the FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II, but I can't fill the frame with that lens.  I can sometimes keep up with those smaller, faster birds, even with the 2x teleconverter, but I still want more reach. Exploring with the 300 mm, fast prime lens I like the idea of expanding my photography as I look for subjects I can capture at 300mm at f/2.8 (people and pet portraits outside, musical acts on stage). Although I have tended to use zoom lenses (FE PZ 16-35 MM F4 G, FE 24-105mm F4 G OSS, FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II), I got the FE 50mm F1.2 GM and have enjoyed having to work with the fixed focal length and how that leads me in different directions. I wonder if I would find the same thing with the FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS. Depth of Field and Bokeh I'm unsure if the shallow depth of field and bokeh will make a big difference for me. But I may find that these attributes present new opportunities like the FE 50mm F1.2 GM. Here's what I think will happen. I'll use the FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS without the teleconverter on dreary days. I have used the FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II (sometimes with the 2X teleconverter) for those days. I'll use the FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS with the 2X teleconverter when there's better light.  Expectations of the FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS with 2X teleconverter  The focus accuracy and speed with the 2X teleconverter will match or better the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS  The image quality will be at least as good as the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS  I'm happy with the image quality using the FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II and 2X teleconverter and can tolerate the slightly slower focus speed. I imagine the results will be similar with the FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS but at least as good or better than the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS  It will be easier to track small birds in flight with the FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS with 2X teleconverter (1675 grams) vs FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS (2115 grams). The difference is 340 grams (12 oz) and 5.1 cm in length. That should make a difference, right?  Questions Have you tried both? What are your experiences? Will you keep the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS? Are my expectations realistic? Thanks for reading and thinking about this with me.
    • One post hit and run.  They must have figured it out. 
    • Other than your disapproval of the stripes.... they're kinda cool. 🫣
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...