Close Focusing Distance - A Critical Feature?
by Robert Monaghan

Related Local Links:
Close Focusing Lens Issues
Diopter closeup lenses
Medium Format Macro Photography

Close focusing distance is often a critical dimension for not just macrophotography, but for other issues as well. Tight head shots for certain types of portraiture may be difficult or impossible on some camera systems. The lenses just won't focus close enough. Aaargh!!!

On other systems, you may have to use accessory closeup or diopter lenses to achieve closer focusing capabilities. For example, my Bronica S2A has a nice 67mm screw-in filter accessory that is a +1/2 diopter lens for the 200mm f/4 Bronica nikkor lens. This fractional diopter closeup lens provides a significantly closer focusing ability for tight head shots. Instead of focusing from five feet or so to infinity, I can focus from under 3 feet to about six feet using this closeup lens on my 200mm. Unlike an extension tube, I don't need to change the exposure factor, nor do I lose auto-diaphragm operation.

On other systems, such as the Hasselblad or Kowa 6/66, you may find that a thin extension tube is really useful or needed in order to get closer and tighter head shots in portraiture. This accessory tube can be cheap in some systems ($12 or so on Kiev 60), or pricey ($100 or so for Kowa 6/66) to outrageous ($600 on some auto-tube systems such as Bronica SQ). Ouch!

You can sometimes get more close focusing capability with a bellows system. But often the bulk of the bellows is so great that you can't get the ten or fifteen millimeters of extension you really need for a tight head shot. Instead, you can get 30 or more millimeters, but not ten or fifteen. You can't win on some setups, so check before you buy! Many systems will offer a chart of lens extension factors with various bellows and extension tubes, as well as a table of magnifications and image area covered with each setup.

Macro Lenses

Macro lenses are usually optimized for flat field response, meaning that there is minimum curvature of field and dropoff of resolution in the image corners. So the macro lens is optimal for copying flat documents and artwork, as one example. Most macro lenses provide an extended focusing range, from infinity to about 1/5th to 1/2 life size. In 35mm SLR macro lenses, you can usually get a 50mm or 100mm range macro lens which will focus to 1/2 lifesize on film. But in many systems, you need another extension tube (e.g., nikkor 55mm f/3.5) or an accessory closeup lens (Vivitar 100mm f/3.5 macro lens) to get to lifesize reproduction (1:1 on film).

Unfortunately, there are rather few macro lenses in medium format photography. Some systems don't have any macro lenses. My Kowa 6/66 system has a very nice 110mm macro lens, but it only focuses down to about 1/5th lifesize without extenstion tubes (drat!). The Hasselblad system has several macro (or makro as they are called) lenses, but one requires use on a bellows.

The best overall macro SLR system that I have seen is the Bronica S2/S2A series using the deluxe tilt/shift bellows (bellows 2). The Bronica bellows effectively turn all the Bronica lenses (e.g., nikkors) into continuous focusing from infinity to closeup macrophotography needs. In addition, the tilt/shift bellows provides for an extended range of front tilts and shifts which can be used to control placement of the limited depth of field on macro subjects on the desired plane (like a mini-view camera).

Finally, speaking of view cameras, you can use a range of 4x5" view cameras with roll film backs taking rollfilm. There are also a range of mini-view cameras and press cameras in 6x9cm and similar formats such as the Linhof and Horseman series. These technical cameras (and monorails as with arca swiss..) can provide a huge range of camera movements and extended closeup capability with standard lenses. With enough bellows, most standard lenses can be pressed into service as closeup lenses, though process lenses and others computed for these special purposes will usually provide superior results.

Good versus Very Good Lenses

On 35mm SLRs, I use close focusing distance as a simple way to assess good versus very good lenses, especially among third party lenses. For example, the popular and highly regarded first set of Vivitar Series I lenses had odd-ball f/stops (like f/1.9). But most of these cult classic lenses also had exceptional close focusing distances. This trick was achieved by various optical tricks. The simple approach also works, by having a larger, heavier, and longer lens barrel so you can rack the lens elements out farther and closer to the subject, producing closer focusing.

Lots of problems show up when you attempt to do close focusing. One solution to some of these optical problems is to add some corrective elements which come into play only at close focusing distances. For example, in the Nikon 35mm SLR wide angle lenses, you find CRC, a form of floating or movable optical elements which improve close focusing performance (esp. in the corners).

Similarly, some of the Hasselblad Zeiss 40mm wide angle lenses have a manually adjusted close focus system that improves the close focusing performance of this optic. The requirement for a leaf shutter in these Hasselblad lenses precludes an automatic adjustment system as on some other systems due to spacing issues.

Close Focusing on Rangefinders and Twin Lens Reflex Cameras

A few comments about close focusing on RF and TLR cameras is useful. You can use an accessory closeup or diopter lens(es) with RF and TLR cameras. The problem is knowing what will be in focus, and framing it accurately. One simple solution to this problem is a wedge or prism which slips over the standard viewfinder as part of the accessory lens system. This prism offsets what the user sees when framing the shot through the usual viewfinder window. So you get a form of parallax correction so what you see in the viewfinder is similar to what will be on film.

You can also use any closeup lens that will fit (in adapters..) over a TLR taking lens or rangefinder. But you will need an accessory framing tool. Such a tool is simply a wire U shaped frame which shows what will be in focus. A strip of metal or wire goes from the wire frame (usually the lower center of the U) to under the lens (usually mounting on the tripod mount screw). Using this simple setup, you can simply look over the TLR or RF at the subject (e.g., flower) and see with the framer what will be in focus. Using standard tables for diopter lenses on our diopter lenses pages, you can build such a framing tool and quickly test it to exactly match your camera and lens (set at infinity).

Another option is to use a "paramender". This device is often used with twin lens reflex cameras, where you have the viewing lens above the taking lens. What you need to do is to compose using the closeup lens on the viewing lens, then shift the camera upward. How far? The exact distance between the center of the taking lens and the viewing lens will put the taking lens at the same "spot", seeing the same composition as the viewing lens saw. Be sure to remember to switch the closeup lens from the viewing lens to the taking lens before taking the picture!

Recommendations

If close focusing and tight head shots are important to you, then you should definitely examine the specifications of any camera system from this viewpoint. Our medium format camera pros/cons section by Danny Gonzalez will often highlight and warn of limitations in close focusing distances. Be sure to check for the availability of needed thin extension tubes, as some systems make these very costly (Bronica SQ) or they may be unobtainable (cf. Bronica GS-1) in some ranges. Other cameras such as the popular Mamiya 7 rangefinder may be great landscape and general shooting cameras, but come up short (pun intended) when it comes to close focusing capabilities.

As Steve's posting below highlights, close focusing distance for different lenses can differ. But I find this approach confusing, since what I really care about is how much subject area (or magnification) I can get at the closest focusing distance. On our macrophotography pages, we highlight how some macro lenses can shift their effective focal lengths as you get into the macro range (e.g., 100mm at infinity may be 75mm at 1/2 lifesize). So lens to subject distance may also be a factor, especially for macro lenses. After all, if you are buying a 100mm or 200mm macro lens to get farther away from rattlesnake subjects, you don't want it to get shorter in focal length so you have to get closer to the snake!


Related Postings

From: "Bob Larson" [email protected] Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format Subject: Re: Close Focusing Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 The Mamiya RB camera has bellows focusing that will allow you to focus both the 90mm and 127 Sekor lenses fairly close, about 18 - 20 inches. This will give a magnification ration somewhere between .3 to .5 depending on the lens. Good Luck. "Martin Francis" [email protected] wrote > I'm trying to decide on which system to move to in MF, and the deciding > factor is likely to be close focusing on the standard lens. > Can anyone inform me as to the closest focus on the following lenses: > 80mm Bronica (SQ fit) > 80mm Zeiss (Hasselblad 500 fit) > 90mm Sekor (RB fit) > 127mm Sekor (RB fit) > Whatever the standard lenses on the Fuji GW670 and 690 are? > > TIA, > Martin

From: "Mark Williams" [email protected] Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format Subject: Re: Portrait lens close focusing, Mamiya 7 vs others Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2002 Hi Steve, Allow me to more specifically address the Mamiya 7, since I have one, and since the other posters are speaking more generally. The main issue you seem to have isn't an equipment issue. I suppose like most of us from the 35mm world, you're used to tight framing--to cropping in the camera. With the M7, this isn't possible for portraits. The lenses don't focus close enough for tight head shots--all lenses focus to about 3 feet, except the 150, which focuses to 6 feet, and the 210, which no one buys, and which focuses (as I recall) to about 12 feet. However, since you have all the real estate of a 6x7 chrome, you don't HAVE to make such tight in-camera croppings to get outstanding enlargements. A 6x7 is, after all, something like five times larger than 35mm. So when you asked if you were missing something, I suppose in a sense you were--the tight in-camera crops we all do with 35mm to get maximum use of the small image size is less important with 6x7. There is a close focus kit you can get for the 80mm standard lens that allows focus as close as 11 inches. But it ONLY focuses at 11 inches. It works well (I own one) for macro type images; but it is certainly less versatile than a macro lens on an SLR. If you mainly do macro, you would do better to get a different camera. The Mamiya 7, aside from being medium format, is also a rangefinder. For both reasons there are quite a few differences from what you're used to, and it can be invalid to reason through the lens, as it were, of a 35mm SLR when talking about a medium format rangefinder. The best thing about the M7 is the portability. You'll be able to have the thing along at times when no other medium format camera would be portable enough. For me, this is completely liberating. The other day I did a 40 mile ride with a bunch of bicycle racing friends. We hammer pretty hard (28mph average speeds), and usually stop at the end of Key Biscayne for a mid ride break. There's a lighthouse there that I've always wanted to photograph, but never seem to have the time. So before the ride, I strapped on a LowePro Photorunner with M7 and a couple of lenses, threw a Gitzo CF 1128 over my shoulder, and did the ride. My riding wasn't in any way negatively affected, and I hammered as hard as normal in a peleton of 8 aggressive riders. There is NO other 6x7 camera in the world for which this would have been possible. The next best thing about the M7 is the lenses. Across the board, they test out as if not the finest lenses ever made, then certainly the equal of the best from Schneider, Zeiss etc. I used a Mamiya RZ67 for years, and the M7 lenses are even better than Mamiya's Z series lenses, which are also outstanding. The third best thing about the M7 is how easy a rangefinder design is to use--for the sort of shots for which it is designed--candids, street, landscape. NOT African Safaris or macro. One of the things rangefinder users often find out is that they don't need all the added versatility of an SLR for the majority of their photography. And that it's quite liberating to work with a very simple, but very high quality camera. I'm giving a slightly long-winded answer to your question because I think you may want to shift your paradigm in looking at something like an M7. It does NOT do things that even the most modest 35mm SLR can do routinely. You need to know whether those are things you need. Close cropping is, ultimately, NOT the issue you suspect it is, what with your smaller format background. Last point. If you do decide to buy a Mamiya 7 II, you can save a fortune by buying it from Cameron Photo in Hong Kong instead of from B&H. Prices in Hong Kong for Mamiya are about 55 percent less than in NYC. For some reason, Gitzo is also considerably cheaper. This is what I paid for my Mamiya 7 stuff, which I bought new a few months ago from Cameron: Mamiya 7 II body US$ 923.00 50mm lens 1,089.00 80mm lens 551.00 150mm lens 807.00 65mm lens 743.00 43mm lens 1,153.00 Close up kit 237.00 Mamiya Polarizer 153.00 Gitzo G1128 307.00 B&H prices for the same items would be about $12,000. The best guy to deal with at Cameron is K.M. Chin. His phone # is 852-2369-1063. His fax is 852-2739-8575. Shipping the the States will be less than US$ 100 for an entire Mamiya 7 system. There is no American import duty on MF camera bodies; there is a 2.3 percent duty on lenses--but the lens ON the camera is considered part of the camera so incurs no duty. I'm paying about $80 in duty on the above items. Best of luck, Mark ... > I've been thinking about replacing my Yashica D with > something better and am considering, among others, > the Mamiya 7. I read through the archives, and have > seen a number of the reviews and comments. Thank > you all who wrote these as they are of value even though > I wasn't in on the original discussion. > > One of the major criticisms of the Mamiya 7 is that > its lenses don't focus close enough. The 150mm, > in particular, only focuses to 6 feet according to the > sales literature, which isn't close enough for a head > shot. > > First question. Do those of you who shoot a lot > of medium formats frame head shots in the camera? > Or is this a 35mm habit that I will have to grow out > of? I like tight head shots, but is it better for the > framing to happen in the darkroom than in the camera? ...


From: "Steve Dunlop" [email protected] Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format Subject: Portrait lens close focusing, Mamiya 7 vs others Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2002 Hi. My name's Steve Dunlop and I recently started reading this group. I post to misc.rural a lot and also some of the comp.* groups. I've been thinking about replacing my Yashica D with something better and am considering, among others, the Mamiya 7. I read through the archives, and have seen a number of the reviews and comments. Thank you all who wrote these as they are of value even though I wasn't in on the original discussion. One of the major criticisms of the Mamiya 7 is that its lenses don't focus close enough. The 150mm, in particular, only focuses to 6 feet according to the sales literature, which isn't close enough for a head shot. First question. Do those of you who shoot a lot of medium formats frame head shots in the camera? Or is this a 35mm habit that I will have to grow out of? I like tight head shots, but is it better for the framing to happen in the darkroom than in the camera? -- Below I list the close focus distances for portrait-length lenses for several major camera systems. I see that only the physically large and heavy camera systems, such as the bellows- equipped RB and RZ, have close focus that is significantly better than the Mamiya 7. The rest focus between 4'6" and 5'0", hardly a major improvement over the 6'0" of the Mamiya 7. Second question: Am I missing something? Bronica ETSRi (6x45), SQ-Ai, etc (6x6) ... 135mm focuses to 3'3" ... 150mm focuses to 4'11" Bronica GS-1 (6x7) ... 150mm focuses to 4'11" Hasselblad 501 etc ... 150mm sonnar focuses to 4'6" ... 160mm tessar focuses to 5'0" Mamiya 645 ... 150mm (any of several types) focuses to 5'0" Mamiya RB and RZ ... 150mm focuses 24" to 32" depending on type Pentax 645 ... 135mm focuses to 4'1" ... 150mm focuses to 4'7" Pentax 67 ... 167 focuses to 5'2" Rollei 6000 series ... 150mm sonnar focuses to 4'7" Rollei SL66SE ... 150mm sonnar focuses to 2'0" -- Steve Dunlop Nerstrand, MN Medium Format Site Startup Date: Feb. 14, 1998


End of Page