kevin m
Veteran
I'm thinking about getting a medium format camera and, naturally, I'm considering both SLR and RF models. Other than owning a Ricoh TLR briefly a decade back, I have no medium format experience. I'd like to shoot an RF for the compact size, but the faster lenses and greater versatility of the SLR's is appealing, too.
I'm looking at a Mamiya 645 and a Mamiya 7, too. I am aware that the 7 has a bigger negative area, but other than that, what are the pros and cons of both camera types? Thanks!
I'm looking at a Mamiya 645 and a Mamiya 7, too. I am aware that the 7 has a bigger negative area, but other than that, what are the pros and cons of both camera types? Thanks!
nikon_sam
Shooter of Film...
One you already mentioned..."Neg Size" another would be "Budget"...
Are you planning on wet printing and if so what size enlargements???
I have the Mamiya 645 and prefer to see the actual image being taken rather than a rangefinder...
Budget...do your homework and know what you plan on spending then see what's out there...
I haven't used the 7 or even handled one so I can't say one way or the other about them other than if Mamiya made them they should be solid cameras...
Are you planning on wet printing and if so what size enlargements???
I have the Mamiya 645 and prefer to see the actual image being taken rather than a rangefinder...
Budget...do your homework and know what you plan on spending then see what's out there...
I haven't used the 7 or even handled one so I can't say one way or the other about them other than if Mamiya made them they should be solid cameras...
dazedgonebye
Veteran
I went through this recently. I considered the Mamiya 645, Pentax 645 and Pentax 6x7 systems.
I ended up with a 6x7 because of the "larger is better" theory, and honestly, an impulse buy on a bargain condition camera.
Between a Mamiya 7 and a SLR, I think all the normal RF vs SLR things apply. I've been keen to do some close in portrait stuff with medium format, so the SLR was compelling. Price may also be a consideration. Mamiya 7s still command a premium, where one of the other mentioned systems can be hand pretty cheaply.
I bought the thing then got very busy, so I've only got a few rolls through it. I can't fault the quality, but I'm not sure I'm exactly bonding with the massive SLR form factor.
I hope to get more rolls through and give it a fair trial.
I ended up with a 6x7 because of the "larger is better" theory, and honestly, an impulse buy on a bargain condition camera.
Between a Mamiya 7 and a SLR, I think all the normal RF vs SLR things apply. I've been keen to do some close in portrait stuff with medium format, so the SLR was compelling. Price may also be a consideration. Mamiya 7s still command a premium, where one of the other mentioned systems can be hand pretty cheaply.
I bought the thing then got very busy, so I've only got a few rolls through it. I can't fault the quality, but I'm not sure I'm exactly bonding with the massive SLR form factor.
I hope to get more rolls through and give it a fair trial.
kevin m
Veteran
Steve, that's why I'm shopping the 645, so the size doesn't become such an issue. Pentax 6x7's are so big I think I'd just rather jump to shooting 4x5.
I would imagine the RF's have an advantage in hand-hold ability, just as in 35mm, but is it possible to hand hold 645 SLR's and get good results?
I would imagine the RF's have an advantage in hand-hold ability, just as in 35mm, but is it possible to hand hold 645 SLR's and get good results?
Thardy
Veteran
A Hasselblad 500 body is very compact.
lic4
Well-known
I use a Pentax 645nii (SLR), and it's very good for handheld shots - I have heard that Pentax designed the mirror brake to minimize camera shake on this particular model. I also shoot with a Fuji FA645 (rangefinder), basically the same lens (a 75mm), but I am using the SLR more frequently for serious shooting because a more deliberate emphasis on composition works better on an SLR and suits medium format more for me. For fast candid shooting, I prefer 35mm anyhow.
I do dark room enlargements up to 16x20 and have not felt the need to go to 6x7. 645 creates stunning prints at this size compared to 35mm.
I do dark room enlargements up to 16x20 and have not felt the need to go to 6x7. 645 creates stunning prints at this size compared to 35mm.
dazedgonebye
Veteran
Steve, that's why I'm shopping the 645, so the size doesn't become such an issue. Pentax 6x7's are so big I think I'd just rather jump to shooting 4x5.
I would imagine the RF's have an advantage in hand-hold ability, just as in 35mm, but is it possible to hand hold 645 SLR's and get good results?
I've hand held the 6x7 monster at 1/125 and thought I did pretty well. The mirror slap on the Pentax 645 is nothing compared to the 6x7, so yes, I'd say they are reasonably hand holdable.
T
Todd.Hanz
Guest
I've had a Mamiya 7 for a while now, excellent quality and even better pics. The shutter is quieter than my Leicas and I can shoot handheld at very slow shutter speeds. The image quality is excellent!
I just bought a Mamiya 645E, have shot a couple rolls recently. Great image quality but I give an edge to the Mamiya 7 in this aspect. The 645 is well built, like a tank and almost as heavy when compared to the M7.
You get closer focusing with the 645, alot more lens choices, and 15 images a roll vs. 10 with the "7II". The price for the 645 is pretty cheap, around $300, I picked up a 45/2.8 (28mm equiv) for just over $200 and a an 85/1.9 for about $160...the "7II" will set you back a bit more
Both are well made cameras, check out some pics on Flickr http://www.flickr.com/groups/mamiya_45mm/
http://www.flickr.com/groups/mamiya645/
Todd
I just bought a Mamiya 645E, have shot a couple rolls recently. Great image quality but I give an edge to the Mamiya 7 in this aspect. The 645 is well built, like a tank and almost as heavy when compared to the M7.
You get closer focusing with the 645, alot more lens choices, and 15 images a roll vs. 10 with the "7II". The price for the 645 is pretty cheap, around $300, I picked up a 45/2.8 (28mm equiv) for just over $200 and a an 85/1.9 for about $160...the "7II" will set you back a bit more
Both are well made cameras, check out some pics on Flickr http://www.flickr.com/groups/mamiya_45mm/
http://www.flickr.com/groups/mamiya645/
Todd
T
Todd.Hanz
Guest
a few 7II shots...
Krosya
Konicaze
I'd go with 6x6 format. SLR or RF. Easiest format to shoot with and looks good too. Plus you could crop. I had Mamiya 645 system with like 5 lenses, grips, etc. Good, but often with very dark VF and sold it. Plus IMO 645 is not big enough jump from 35mm to really appreciate MF. Had Hasselblad - great system, but not cheap and not light - sold it, as I found that my Kiev system is far cheaper and work just as well. I'd say Mamiya 6 is a good choice.
I'd also look into Fuji 67/69 RF cameras - never used them, but always liked results I saw from them. Fuji 645 series are good too, but it's 645 - I call all 645 systems - MF Limited - as it really is limited.
So, anythign you go with - I'd say go with AT LEAST 6x6. 645 is just not MF enough. Not to say it's bad, just you can do as well with Leica.
I'd also look into Fuji 67/69 RF cameras - never used them, but always liked results I saw from them. Fuji 645 series are good too, but it's 645 - I call all 645 systems - MF Limited - as it really is limited.
So, anythign you go with - I'd say go with AT LEAST 6x6. 645 is just not MF enough. Not to say it's bad, just you can do as well with Leica.
ferider
Veteran
I second the 500C or newer Hasselblad. Quite small (with a WLF not much bigger than the typical TLR), and easy to handhold down to 1/30 at least with a Planar. Also, you might be surprised how affordable these are nowadays.
Roland.
Roland.
Tuolumne
Veteran
I have a Fuji 645 RF, a Mamiya 7ii, a Rolleiflex TLR, and a Mamiya C330 TLR with replaceable lenses. The 6x6 TLRs have become my favorite MF camera. The others certainly take superb photos, but there's something about the 6x6 format projected on a focusing/viewing screen that just gives me goosebumps. You need to experience these cameras to decide which you like best. Fortunately, you can get Rolleis at very reasonable prices if you don't go after one of the collectible models. If you don't like it, you can easily resell it.
/T
/T
Last edited:
mbisc
Silver Halide User
Under the heading of "bigger is better" you may want to consider an (old) 6x9 folder, especially if you are planning to do the (B&W) printing yourself -- there was just a big discussion on this elsewhere on RFF...
Tuolumne
Veteran
I almost forgot. I have a Fuji 6x9, too. It is a monster which takes monster negatives. Great lenses as well, but they are fixed, if that matters to you. This is a really BIG camera.
/T
kevin m
Veteran
Thanks for the input, guys, keep it comin'!
Krosya, I think there's a big enough difference between 35mm and 645 to make it worth the effort. Particularly in B&W tonality. I'll have to check out the Pentax 645, too. Decisions, decisions!
Krosya, I think there's a big enough difference between 35mm and 645 to make it worth the effort. Particularly in B&W tonality. I'll have to check out the Pentax 645, too. Decisions, decisions!
David Goldfarb
Well-known
I've settled on a Linhof 2x3" Technika, because it's both a rangefinder and a view camera with the flexibility to take various rollfilm backs, sheetfilm holders, and any view camera lens that can physically be mounted to the camera, and some of those lenses can be shared with my large format cameras.
Among the cameras you're considering, I'd look take the Mamiya 7II for the first rate lenses and larger film size.
Personally, I don't find 645 enough of an improvement over 35mm to justify the bulkier system. I do shoot 6x6, but I usually print it square.
Among the cameras you're considering, I'd look take the Mamiya 7II for the first rate lenses and larger film size.
Personally, I don't find 645 enough of an improvement over 35mm to justify the bulkier system. I do shoot 6x6, but I usually print it square.
dazedgonebye
Veteran
I think I would have gone with the Pentax 645...doing it over again. Like I said though, I haven't given it enough of a go yet.
Tuolumne
Veteran
Thanks for the input, guys, keep it comin'!
Krosya, I think there's a big enough difference between 35mm and 645 to make it worth the effort. Particularly in B&W tonality. I'll have to check out the Pentax 645, too. Decisions, decisions!
My Fuji 645 (GW645zi) takes photos that are in a completely different league from any 35mm or digital camera I own. It's just that the format seems a bit "squnched" to me.
/T
gdi
Veteran
Even at small web sizes, Todd's shots look fantastic.
I doubt any MF lenses can beat the results of those for the 7. Other than close focusing, the only other reason I would go with the 645 (or even 6x6) would be price. The Mamiya 7/7II are steep! They also handle beautifully, I have handheld at 1/15...
I doubt any MF lenses can beat the results of those for the 7. Other than close focusing, the only other reason I would go with the 645 (or even 6x6) would be price. The Mamiya 7/7II are steep! They also handle beautifully, I have handheld at 1/15...
RObert Budding
D'oh!
A 645 negative is about 2.7X the area of a 35mm neg - it's a huge improvement in tonality. It is, in fact, a larger improvement than the jump from 645 to 67. All the same, I'm using a Mamiya 7 because it's a great system. I used to own a Bronica RF645 and I loved it - but I lost confidence in the film transport when it had to be replaced under warranty.
You may want to consider the Bronica GS-1. It's about the lightest 67 SLR, and the leaf shutter lenses flash sync at all speeds.
MF lenses are slower than 35mm lenses, but that's not a big deal as you'll be struggling to get enough DOF.
You may want to consider the Bronica GS-1. It's about the lightest 67 SLR, and the leaf shutter lenses flash sync at all speeds.
MF lenses are slower than 35mm lenses, but that's not a big deal as you'll be struggling to get enough DOF.