Mamiya Sekor 2/50 - cheap normals can be great

[luisalegria]

This came in a lot with other camera stuuff some time ago, the usual common sort of lens that just seems to turn up in old garage-sale boxes, sometimes with the old Mamiya 500TL's they came with -





Here it is besides its usual alternative the 1.8/50. Both lenses were made in the all-black or chrome trim versions, I think the chrome trim types were earlier production. Interestingly, the mechanics of the lenses are identical, all dimensions match precisely. However, the optical layout is different. The 1.8 has a wider front element and it is not recessed as far, indicating probably a different optical formula. Why have both an f/2 and an f/1.8 ? Possibly marketing.

Pentax had a similar case, where they provided both f/1.8 and f/2 Super and S_M_C Takumars for different versions of the Spotmatic. In the case of Pentax the lenses were optically identical, except for an aperture restriction on the f/2. Its interesting that Mamiya saw fit to make different lenses.

It is properly compared to the Super Takumar line, with which it was intended to compete as a lower priced alternative. Its got the same mount, A-M switch, etc., and it came on the same kind of focal-plane shutter match-needle metering SLR. Its not quite as nicely made as the Takumar, these are more likely to get loose and rattle (and lose infinity focus btw) but it is still exceptionally well made.

Who made this ? Or, perhaps, a better question would be who designed this, as it was probably really made by the decentralized Japanese subcontractor network. The easy answer is that most mysterious source, Tomioka, and thats a pretty good suspicion.

Similar well made standard lenses were provided for all Japanese SLR's of the 1960's-70's, and they are still very cheap now as everyone is chasing the f/1.4's. Its still easy to find an old body with a fine lens attached for beer-money.

But there is very little if any real functional difference between the $10 f/2 and the $50 f/1.4 in reality, it is 1/2 a stop and a nearly imperceptible difference in DOF. And its hard to find a case where f/1.4 works better artistically than f/2.

Image quality is, I think, superb. This is just a great lens to use at f/2, it is sharp as I can detect at f/2, bokeh is smooth and creamy, contrast is great, etc. Its colors are a little more cool than a Takumar I think. A perfectly fine portrait lens really, all I would ever really need in a 50mm on a crop sensor.

These are at f/2, some taken with an extension ring -













Its very nice stopped down too -

[LucisPictor]

Very, very nice!

These 50mm Mamiyas are often fab lenses. I've got a Mamiya 1.8/55 that I will never part with.

[estudleon]

Excelent job, again and again.

The F/2 mamiya with the neutral contrast and very good resolution (special for portraits like yours) was very well considered in one test did is Argentina (with the mamiya troupic cams = 500 and 1000 dtl) in 1966/7 in magazine "fotografía universal". And better than the 1,8/55.

Rino.

[patrickh]

I have the f1.7 and the f2 - both are really quite excellent lenses and really cheap. Great value.


patrickh

Luis
Thanks for the reminder, another oldie but goldie

[spiralcity]

i also have both these lenses and find them to be surprisingly very nice.

[ManualFocus-G]

Wow @ that last shot

[ramiller500]

What strange force causes people to attribute all lenses like this one to Tomioka? Were there not other companies with the ability to design and make it, such as Mamiya itself, its often-sidekick Tokyo Koki (=Tokina), etc.?

All claims about Tomioka pedigree need to be substantiated.

Anyway, I have a Mamiya M42 50mm/2 lens, too, and it's great! It's now mounted on my Pentax H1a camera body.

[spiralcity]

[luisalegria]

Some of these Mamiyas/Yashions/Rikenons/Chinons, etc., certainly were made or designed by Tomioka, there are actual Tomioka-branded Tominon 1.4/55's at least (though rare) and they do seem identical to the equivalent Mamiyas/Yashinons/Rikenons.

As for the other "normals" made by or for these second-rank Japanese SLR manufacturers, who knows.

I certainly have no idea if this is made by (or designed by, or inspired by, or breathed on by the office boy of) Tomioka, but its fun to attach the name. It adds a touch of mystery, like saying it was made by elves and fairies. And for all we know ...

[Univer]

Hi,

Thank you so much for giving this lens a moment in the spotlight. The M/S 50/2 - the chrome-nosed version in particular - has a permanent place in my heart.

Long, long ago, when I bought my very first SLR - a Praktica Super TL - the camera-store fellow persuaded me to substitute the Mamiya (at modest additional cost) for the standard Domiplan. That camera/lens combo is long gone, but it served me very well indeed for many years. I have hundreds of irreplaceable photos taken with it, and I was always very pleased with the lens's performance.

(As a side note, I was part of a loyal M42 family; my brother had a M/S 1000DTL, and his wife, a semi-professional photographer, had a Spotmatic.)

A few years ago I reacquired a 50/2, along with its 55/1.8 and 55/1.4 siblings. I like 'em all. (I wound up eventually picking up a Domiplan, too.) These beautiful shots remind me that my affection for this lens is a function of its IQ, and not just my own personal sentimental associations.

Am I right, by the way, in remembering that the chrome lens was normally sold with the TL series, and that the DTL series switched to the all-black version?

Cheers,

Jon

[luisalegria]

Hi Univer,

I suspect you may be right about the chrome vs black on the TL/DTL. Or possibly the early TL came with chrome and Mamiya switched part-way ? In any case the black are more common than chrome it seems.

[ramiller500]

Since we're guessing about lens origins, here's a claim, supported by lens diagrams, that the 55mm/1.4 Mamiya lens design was very similar to that of the Carl Zeiss Planar 55mm/1.4 lens for the Contarex:
http://www.taunusreiter.de/Cameras/RolleiflexSL35E.html

There was also a Carl Zeiss Planar 50mm/2.0 lens for the Contarex, so, conceivably, the Mamiya 50mm/2.0 lens design was very similar to this.

This provides background on Contarex lenses and includes factory test results for these two Planar lenses:
http://www.imx.nl/photo/zeiss/zeiss/page67.html

[estudleon]

[estudleon]

[Obi-Wan]

I know I'm reviving a 9-yr-old thread here, but there isn't much info out there on the M-S 55/2. I just picked one up today off Craig's List for $5, including the body. Haven't gotten a chance to play yet. The aperture sticks, but at least it's usually wide open. It should be easy enough to clean & lube the innards when I have time. I thought from the photos from the ad that it was a 55/1.2, so I was a little disappointed when I saw it first hand. Still looks nice at a good price, though.

The reason I'm posting is because I'm wondering if somebody can tell me what year (or range) this silver-trimmed lens was made. Mine's s/n 40015. I suspect it's always been mated to the pictured body, which doesn't appear to have a model number.

[luisalegria]

Your Mamiya is the CWP model, predecessor to the much more common TL and DTL lines, but after the Prismat line.

The CWP has a built in integrated lightmeter but it is not a through-the-lens type, it just measures ambient light - that is the black thing on the left side.

The later TL models had through-the-lens meters.

Camerapedia says it was sold 1964-66, so that would date the lens too I suppose.

Butkus has a manual for the Mamiya CWP.