Benjamin Marks
Veteran
I go in the "no" camp. But the question is really which camera fits best with the way you work. Other than the fact of their focusing systems, these are completely different cameras. Leica: low-light, fast lenses, close focus options, huge assortment of lenses, digital future. M7 = highest image quality I have ever seen in MF, slow lenses, no close focus ability to speak of (well, there is an auto-up monstrosity), small number of lenses, dead end system vis digital. I owned an M7 for a while. Beautiful camera; but its design limitations eventually forced me to sell it. I always wanted that extra stop or two in lens speed, that extra foot or two in close focus capability. Or put another way, I grew up with the sort of fast lenses and range of focal length that 35mm can provide; I just couldn't trade that for a medium format camera that I was always putting on a tripod or cropping the negative to get the image I wanted. If I was going to use a tripod anyway, no reason not to use a Pentax 6x7 or Hassie.
tj01
Well-known
I have both M6 and Mamiya 7. They are different tools for the job, and serve different purpose.
PatrickT
New Rangefinder User
I disagree. I have both. For day to day, general shooting, I'd take the M6 over the Hexar AF anyday. While the Hexar AF is a great camera, I feel that I am too far removed from the experience of shooting photos than I am with the M6. Then again, I prefer to shoot manual and be able to adjust the shutter, aperture, etc, instead of just pointing and shooting.
Your mileage may vary...
jarski
Veteran
why this is so ? been kinda noticing same, though am not doing consistent followup.
Jamie123
Veteran
There's no "digital future" for the M6 either. Sure, you can use the M lenses on digital M bodies and that's a good thing because the lenses can get very expensive but the same isn't true of the Mamiya lenses. Most Mamiya lenses (except the 43mm and maybe the 50mm) are quite cheap so you're not making that much of an investment. You can get a Mamiya 7 +80mm lens for the price of an M6 body. If film dies tomorrow you're basically losing the same amount of money either way.
Vics
Veteran
I'd keep the Leica and save toward the MF camera.
whitecat
Lone Range(find)er
Perhaps you'll consider trading it for the Bessa III. I have had both and like the Bessa better.
segedi
RFicianado
I had and sold a Mamiya 7II. Amazing kit with great image quality, but no way as portable as an M. Or the Bronica RF645 which I also have. But if you have tried the Mamiya 7 and like it then that's what matters. I've trade "down" to get rid of something that I didn't want to get something I did want and have been pretty happy!
Riverman
Well-known
No. If it were me I would keep the M6 and think about large format instead of the Mamiya. From 2007 to 2009 I shot a Mamiya 6 exclusively. It is a fine and pretty versatile camera. Once I started shooting the Mamiya I thought I would never touch 35mm again. How wrong I was. A 120 camera is not as versatile as a 35mm camera. Sure it is a step up in terms of image quality - but it's nothing compared to 4x5 or 5x7. Since starting in LF I hardly shoot any 120 at all. 35mm is now my go-to format for any hand held shooting. Thinking on it now, maybe you should go for the Mamiya but I would hazard a guess that within a few years of doing so you'll be itching both to shoot some 4x5 and to get your M6 back.
click
Established
How do you use your camera? Do you carry it everyday? Do you want to? An M is amazing in the ability to always have it with you, a larger camera is more to lug around and hassle with in my opinion.
If I lived in an ideal world I would have an 8x10 view camera with a few negatives in the trunk of my car for those rare moments where I see some spectacular light and scene that must be captured. The reality is that all I really need to make good pictures is my camera, one lens and an aware mind.
Do whatever makes you happy and suits your work.
If I lived in an ideal world I would have an 8x10 view camera with a few negatives in the trunk of my car for those rare moments where I see some spectacular light and scene that must be captured. The reality is that all I really need to make good pictures is my camera, one lens and an aware mind.
Do whatever makes you happy and suits your work.
Leigh Youdale
Well-known
Ummm. Did I miss something? You say you already have a Hasselblad 6x6 and you're agonising over whether to trade an M6 for a 6x7 camera?
What is the Mamiya going to do so much better or differently than the Hasselblad? I think that's the real question to be addressed, - whether you switch from 6x6 to 6x7 rather than the question of do you get rid of the M6 so you can have BOTH 6x6 and 6x7!
So, if you're fixated on getting the Mamiya, sell the Hasselblad - not the M6.
What is the Mamiya going to do so much better or differently than the Hasselblad? I think that's the real question to be addressed, - whether you switch from 6x6 to 6x7 rather than the question of do you get rid of the M6 so you can have BOTH 6x6 and 6x7!
So, if you're fixated on getting the Mamiya, sell the Hasselblad - not the M6.
perudo
Established
well, hasselblad is bulky, never had a mamiya in hand but thought it where a more "compact" kit compared to hassy? From what I am reading, a rf645 could be a better option?
Jamie123
Veteran
I don't agree at all. The Hasselblad and the Mamiya are quite different, not only in format but also in handling and application. And why would it be weird to have both 6x6 and 6x7? Certainly makes much more sense than having two 35mm cameras (M6 and Hexar) that use the same lenses. The M6 does nothing that the Hexar doesn't do while the M7 certainly offers advantages over the Hasselblad and vice versa.
cosmonaut
Well-known
I think it has to do with the price of getting film developed and the cost of film considering how many shots you can get from a roll. Plus the image quality for DSLRs have finally gotten so good and the cost of a good DSLR has dropped. If I pay $4.00 for a roll of film and $8.00 to have it processed that's a dollar a shot. It makes digital look so much more attractive.
Matus
Well-known
I had a bessa R3A and have Mamiya 6 now. It is fair to say the only thing these two cameras have is common is that they are rangefinders shooting film.
R3A (or Leica M6 for that matter) :
- is smaller, allows you to use very fast lenses,
- has TTL meter (!!)
- gives you 36 photos per roll.
- with 90 mm lens you can make a tight head shots.
- compact
Mamiya 6 :
- is more compact than Mamiya 7 thanks to the collapsible mount, but still MUCH larger and heavier than R3A. For me it is kind-off on the edge of all-day-long carry with all 3 lenses in a shoulder pack.
- the lenses are very good bot SLOW.
- he light metering is tricky as it is not TTL. For me the metering is the weakest point of the Mamiya 6 or 7. You either (1) master the built in meter or (3) you are OK using some external meter or (3) you will HATE the camera. I am between (1) and (2)
- the camera is MUCH quieter than any focal plane shutter 35 mm camera.
- No lens let you closer than 1 meter - the long lenses only about 1.8 m.
- in AE shows only full stops in viewfinder (why oh why ...)
I got the Mamiya 6 as I wanted larger film for larger prints, but if I were a more serious 35 mm RF user I would have kept the R3A (or replaced it with M or Zeiss Ikon).
R3A (or Leica M6 for that matter) :
- is smaller, allows you to use very fast lenses,
- has TTL meter (!!)
- gives you 36 photos per roll.
- with 90 mm lens you can make a tight head shots.
- compact
Mamiya 6 :
- is more compact than Mamiya 7 thanks to the collapsible mount, but still MUCH larger and heavier than R3A. For me it is kind-off on the edge of all-day-long carry with all 3 lenses in a shoulder pack.
- the lenses are very good bot SLOW.
- he light metering is tricky as it is not TTL. For me the metering is the weakest point of the Mamiya 6 or 7. You either (1) master the built in meter or (3) you are OK using some external meter or (3) you will HATE the camera. I am between (1) and (2)
- the camera is MUCH quieter than any focal plane shutter 35 mm camera.
- No lens let you closer than 1 meter - the long lenses only about 1.8 m.
- in AE shows only full stops in viewfinder (why oh why ...)
I got the Mamiya 6 as I wanted larger film for larger prints, but if I were a more serious 35 mm RF user I would have kept the R3A (or replaced it with M or Zeiss Ikon).
Last edited:
kipkeston
Well-known
I've had my 7ii for almost a year now and I'm just slowly starting to ease into using it frequently. There's no learning curve if you're coming from a Leica, whereas there certainly is with a 'blad or rollei.
I have three cameras now, 7ii, M6 and the D700. If I were forced to go down to two, I'd lose the M6 (despite it being the camera I'm most emotionally attached to). If I were forced to go down to one, I'd lose all but the M6
I didn't care about larger than 35mm formats until I got into the darkroom and really saw the difference.
I have three cameras now, 7ii, M6 and the D700. If I were forced to go down to two, I'd lose the M6 (despite it being the camera I'm most emotionally attached to). If I were forced to go down to one, I'd lose all but the M6
I didn't care about larger than 35mm formats until I got into the darkroom and really saw the difference.
Last edited:
Steve_F
Well-known
I've an M6 TTL & RZ67 and have been wondering about getting a MF RF instead of those two. I can't bear to part with either though. I know I'd go back as I sold my first RZ some years ago then bought another. I love to take it out with 110 lens, wlf and spotmeter. With a small bag it's quite compact and the interchangeable/revolving backs are great. Delta100 in one and Velvia in the other.
The other thing I'd miss is the ability to get in really close that you can't do with a RF.
All this without a tripod. Borrow one, you may just like it. And they are a steal now too.
Steve.
mbohara
Member
I'm going to echo a lot of the things already said.
This isn't exactly the same comparison, but I have both a M7 and Mamiya 7.
I would never get rid of the Leica for the Mamiya. Obviously the Mamiya produces technical images far and away superior to any 35mm camera. It does it in a relatively small package with zero learning curve coming from an M camera.
Regardless of this, it's a delicate camera that can't be thrown over your shoulder and forgotten about. It's transparent in use and there's no real hangups in shooting it, but it simply doesn't feel the same as an M body in practice. Not to mention there are no lenses faster than F4.
I view it as this: The Mamiya 7 is a more purpose driven shooter. I rarely just take this camera out on a whim. I have a specific set of images I have in mind when I do. The M7 exists to fill in the gaps, so it plays a much larger part in my life.
As you said though, you do have the Hexar.
This isn't exactly the same comparison, but I have both a M7 and Mamiya 7.
I would never get rid of the Leica for the Mamiya. Obviously the Mamiya produces technical images far and away superior to any 35mm camera. It does it in a relatively small package with zero learning curve coming from an M camera.
Regardless of this, it's a delicate camera that can't be thrown over your shoulder and forgotten about. It's transparent in use and there's no real hangups in shooting it, but it simply doesn't feel the same as an M body in practice. Not to mention there are no lenses faster than F4.
I view it as this: The Mamiya 7 is a more purpose driven shooter. I rarely just take this camera out on a whim. I have a specific set of images I have in mind when I do. The M7 exists to fill in the gaps, so it plays a much larger part in my life.
As you said though, you do have the Hexar.
Last edited:
vha
Isn't it coffee time ?
The quick answer is yes and No
Had M6 and some lenses for some years, sold all the leica for getting a car.
Have had a Mamiya 7II for 5 months now, like the image quality, dislike the handling compared to a M6 and even more compared to the RF645, or should i say more accurate, the feel and look of the camera.
It feels cheap, looks plastic (or as we said in the camera-stores before, polycarbonate ;D) but gives large negatives. It does not either require chiropractic treatment of the photographer after a walkabout compare to the Pentax 67.
So keep the leica and get a Mamiya 7II with a normal or wideangle lens.
Had M6 and some lenses for some years, sold all the leica for getting a car.
Have had a Mamiya 7II for 5 months now, like the image quality, dislike the handling compared to a M6 and even more compared to the RF645, or should i say more accurate, the feel and look of the camera.
It feels cheap, looks plastic (or as we said in the camera-stores before, polycarbonate ;D) but gives large negatives. It does not either require chiropractic treatment of the photographer after a walkabout compare to the Pentax 67.
So keep the leica and get a Mamiya 7II with a normal or wideangle lens.
kzphoto
Well-known
If you're switching from 35mm film to 120/220, you should consider your style of photography carefully. The DOF on a 120/220 camera is really narrow. I have been using a Fuji GW690 and I find I have trouble getting my focus exactly where I want it, without really stopping down the lens (RF alignment seems to be correct?). Sometimes I think the camera is designed for tripod use rather than hand-held use.
Having the DOF in mind, the larger negative is really really awesome. You can do some amazing things with a 6x6, 6x7 or even 6x9.
Having the DOF in mind, the larger negative is really really awesome. You can do some amazing things with a 6x6, 6x7 or even 6x9.
Last edited: