6x6 recommendations; Mamiya 6?

The Hasselblad for the overall experience, the waist level finder and the basic 45˚ prism finder. Wouldn't want a meter. Incident readings mostly with the hand-held meter.

Mostly I use the Hasselblad on a tripod or monopod. Changes what you look for and what you see.

Then the Rolleiflex for the lightness and quiet. And the interaction with a human subject. David Bailey's favourite, the "twin lens Rollei."

Can't see myself gelling with a Mamiya. Convenience and portability is not what MF is about. Not the greater resolution either.
 
The Rollei SL66e and se have built in coupled light meters, are 6x6 SLRs with ground glass waist level or prism eye level focusing, interchangeable film magazines 6x6 or 4.5x6 formats for switching film type or desired format at any time, use interchangeable Zeiss lenses ranging from a 30mm fisheye, 40 and 50mm wide angles, an 80/2.8 Planar normal lens, 120,150,250mm longer focal lengths (apertures f/4 or f/5.6 for all lenses but the 80mm) all readily available on the used market (500 and 1000mm as well, but rare, pricey and HEAVY), the 50, 80, 120 and 150mm lenses can be reverse mounted for macro. The camera uses bellows focusing which enables macro photography with the conventional lenses and no accessories (although such are available if you desire >1:2 magnification), as well as bellows tilt for some focus plane and perspective control (depending whether you tilt the lens or the camera body, gives a little bit of view camera type functionality). They are mechanical cameras with a focal plane shutter, everything but the light meters (not present on the SL66 non e or se) function without batteries. Built like bricks, weigh about as much, but can be shot handheld with proper care and weight lifting ahead of time. The full system can do almost anything. Prices have come down over the last few years. And the photos are beautiful. I also have the Mamiya 7 and a Rollei 3.5 TLR, but love the SL66, except for the weight of a kit for a day of shooting with a selection of lenses. Just another sign of my aging.
Larry
 
Majki, Thanks for the images. Clearly there's a difference between the Rollei & the Mamiya lenses. Strangely perhaps, i don't find the Mamiya 6 style offensive, but i don't own/wouldn't buy a single Leitz asph. lens..... preferring the older Elmar/Summaron/Summicron rendering.
 
6x6 recommendations; Mamiya 6?

Majki, Thanks for the images. Clearly there's a difference between the Rollei & the Mamiya lenses. Strangely perhaps, i don't find the Mamiya 6 style offensive, but i don't own/wouldn't buy a single Leitz asph. lens..... preferring the older Elmar/Summaron/Summicron rendering.

Hello Deardorff38- same story here. I am using summilux 1.4, I have used summicron asph 50, and 35, but the old lenses are more interesting.

James.liam- Take a look at the Bronica SQ- an even cheaper camera than the R and H, and it has super lenses!
 
Just for a bulk comparison ... These four photos were made with the same camera setup, at the same distance and angle, just this morning; the photos include weight in grams as well. I include the Leica CL digital plus lens as it is very, very similar in size and weight to my film Leica M4-2 (and that one isn't immediately at my fingertips to pull out and photograph...) and provides a basis for comparison.

50993802897_0e11ee9967_o.jpg

Leica CL + Summilux 35mm (24Mpixel digital)

50993687866_28b8a207c9_o.jpg

Voigtländer Perkeo II (deployed) (6x6 format film)

50993802912_e05dfe467f_o.jpg

Voigtländer Perkeo II (folded) (6x6 format film)

50993687891_5e187cdae8_o.jpg

Hasselblad 500CM + Planar 80mm (6x6 format film)​

Adding any prism finder to the Hasselblad increases weight by 400-600g or so, as well as bulk.

G
 
Thanks for the excellent size comparison Godfrey. The OP did say he wasn't keen on meterless cameras though. Although i haven't used a Perkeo, I have used various early '50s folder like the Ikonta and Super Ikonta but certainly didn't find them as versatile in use as moderns like the Mamiya 6 or Fuji 670GF.
 
Thanks for the excellent size comparison Godfrey. The OP did say he wasn't keen on meterless cameras though. Although i haven't used a Perkeo, I have used various early '50s folder like the Ikonta and Super Ikonta but certainly didn't find them as versatile in use as moderns like the Mamiya 6 or Fuji 670GF.

I know he said he wasn't keen on meterless cameras... The photos are just to give an idea of sizes and weights. I had the Voigtländer version of the Fuji 670GF ... lovely thing, but honestly I didn't see much point to its FAR greater bulk and weight compared to the Perkeo II ... It wasn't substantially faster in operation, didn't produce substantially better quality negatives, and the rangefinder/viewfinder was only so-so in accuracy. I have a Voigtländer clip-on rangefinder that's just as accurate. I can't see what makes the GF670 more versatile, other than being able to also capture 6x7 (which I never did): I found it significantly more awkward to use due to its size and weight, sold it.

The Mamiya 6 IS more versatile due to the interchangeable lenses, but its frailty with respect to the film transport system just turned me off to the camera entirely. The Mamiya 7 seems much more reliable, but bigger and 6x7...

Moving down to the 6x4.5cm format again, I really like my simple Fuji GS645S Wide 60, and the fact that it's entirely mechanical in operation means that service liabilities are slim. I had its viewfinder/rangefinder overhauled since that wasn't working due to crud when I bought the camera, but past that it is pretty much a use it forever camera. The Bronica RF645 is another modern beauty in this arena, with a small but excellent group of lenses available. And if you prefer to go up to a 6x7, there're also the Plaubel Makina cameras (one of which I'd be happy to buy someday...).

There are many options, and there are few options, depending on what you're after, how specific you want to be, and what you're willing to put up with. 🙂

G
 
Good points Godfrey. I have to say that i have a bias against electronic cameras for which spare parts are no longer available. Despite rumours and cases of advance problems on the Mamiya 6, i never had a problem. I avoided the Fuji 670GF...and did end up going to the Plaubel Makina 670.
I'm not sure which of the cameras originally mentioned will suit the OP, they all have their strong points and weaknesses, as suitability does depend so much on the user context. Since i travel and climb mountains...my ultimate choices inevitably default to size/weight/handling.
 
A quick size comparison: Mamiya C33, M262, Rollei 6008 Pro and 80 Planar, Nikon F6.
8oBfko4.jpg


And compared to the TLR in profile. From the front the Rollei looks deceptively small.
V4pabjc.jpg


The F6, while fairly bulky for Nikon's non-built-in-grip cameras, is almost as tall, but a downright featherweight in comparison.

Someone mentioned the SL66. Got to play with one not long ago at the inimitable Shot On Film Store a few months ago. Absolutely beautifully designed and crafted, all-out mechanical camera, and I entertained picking one up as well with my insurance money. Unfortunately like many cameras of Teutonic origin, they are fairly rare and seem to be more collectible—their production run went into the 90s but was fairly low volume. Finding additional lenses was nearly impossible when I searched.

Yet another that I recall: the later Hasselblad 200 series focal-plane shutter bodies. Again, pricey. Seeing a few in the $3-4k range on eBay right now. Inexplicably some including a metered finder—they already have in-body metering.

A couple people have also suggested Fuji's huge MF RF lineup, and perhaps some of those might interest you. However, the early interchangable-lens models don't have metering, I believe, and vice-versa; and the only 6x6 I can recall is the recently discontinued GF670/Bessa III folder.

Theres a couple other options out there—the Kowa Six and Mamiya Press series come to mind, but again, no metering. The later focal-plane Bronicas (EC-TL) offered TTL metering, but again, difficult to find and a reputation of conking out electronically.

I certainly appreciate Godfrey's closing quote. The film resurgence has bumped up interest in all cameras, but modern MF cameras were of lesser variety and lower production than 35s, of course.

Still think your best bet may be the Bronica SQ series with the later Ai prism. Affordable 6x6 SLR with electronic shutter speeds, shutter speed priority with a few prisms, and AEL plus spot metering with the Ai prism; stellar lenses and idiot-proof film magazines; motor-drive grip and TTL flash on the SQ-Ai body. Wouldn't hesitate to buy one again in a heartbeat. The only deficiency I ever came across was not having long speeds beyond 8 seconds, but its rare I needed them.
 
Maybe I missed it above, but do you have a sense of how you will be using it? I had a Mamiya 7 for a while. I loved the image quality, but I always had the urge to take a step closer to my subjects than the RF would allow. I couldn't get along with this limitation and I wound up selling it and not looking back. What I did like about though was that it was a modest size and weight and great for carrying all day.

My MF cameras today are: Pentax 67 (big, bulky, lots of shutter slap), Hassleblad 500 and 501 CM (modular, heavy, waist level finder), Fuji 6x9 RF (non-interchangeable lens, but light, and it produces nice big negatives), Mamiya RB67 (tripod only . . . might as well shoot LF).

Would you consider a Rolleiflex? Solidly built, but not too heavy. Designed to be used and repaired. No plastic. Quiet "snik" of a leaf shutter . . . .

The other easily toted camera that comes to mind is the Fuji 6x4.5. So light it is hardly there, and a super sharp lens. Took that one to Japan on my honeymoon along with a Leica. Near perfect combo for me.
 
Maybe I missed it above, but do you have a sense of how you will be using it? I had a Mamiya 7 for a while. I loved the image quality, but I always had the urge to take a step closer to my subjects than the RF would allow. I couldn't get along with this limitation and I wound up selling it and not looking back. What I did like about though was that it was a modest size and weight and great for carrying all day.

My MF cameras today are: Pentax 67 (big, bulky, lots of shutter slap), Hassleblad 500 and 501 CM (modular, heavy, waist level finder), Fuji 6x9 RF (non-interchangeable lens, but light, and it produces nice big negatives), Mamiya RB67 (tripod only . . . might as well shoot LF).

Would you consider a Rolleiflex? Solidly built, but not too heavy. Designed to be used and repaired. No plastic. Quiet "snik" of a leaf shutter . . . .

The other easily toted camera that comes to mind is the Fuji 6x4.5. So light it is hardly there, and a super sharp lens. Took that one to Japan on my honeymoon along with a Leica. Near perfect combo for me.


Well, won't be using it on a tripod or in a studio. Want it to be portable and light enough to take around for walks in the city but able to focus close enough for spontaneous portraits. Hate external meters. I did consider the Fuji GA645. Seems fun and lightweight but wonder how much more compelling the images would be when stacked against those from a top Leica lens on 35mm (i.e., I don't know).
And it ain't 6x6.
 
Pretty lady but image is a tad soft. Is this the characteristic of the lens at close distance and wide aperture?

James, it's iPhone photo of a fiber print....so the softness is in the digital copy but not in the 'real' print...combination of the iphone and operator.
 
Well, won't be using it on a tripod or in a studio. Want it to be portable and light enough to take around for walks in the city but able to focus close enough for spontaneous portraits. Hate external meters. I did consider the Fuji GA645. Seems fun and lightweight but wonder how much more compelling the images would be when stacked against those from a top Leica lens on 35mm (i.e., I don't know).
And it ain't 6x6.

Just as in telescopes where there is no substitute for aperture, in film there is no substitute for square inches. So a 6x4.5 negative is going to be a bump up in image quality from even the best 35mm negative-regardless of who is making the lenses. And it won't be close -- as in anyone can tell the difference at even a modest enlargement. But really, if you want square, you want square. If you have to have an internal light meter, that is going to limit your choices to more modern rigs with electronics. I think the Mamiya 6 is a great choice. Go for it!

Rolleiflexes = no meter
Mamiya C33/C330 = no meter
Hassleblad 500 = no meter
Kowa 66 - no meter
Super Ikonta B IIIC - no meter and hard to find in good working condition.
Yashica Mat 24 = no meter


That leaves you with the Bronica SQ-Ai, the electronic Hassies, the Rollei 6008, the Mamiya 6, the Plaubel Makina. There is a Russian metered prism that you can use with a Hassleblad, but the package is heavier than I'd like to carry. 6x7 and 6x9 can be cropped square of course, but other than the Fuji's there aren't a lot of light choices there. In fact, of those listed above, the Mamiya is really the only one light enough to be comfortable to carry around all day. There is the Mamiya 6 close-focus limitation, but just because it was a deal killer for me doesn't mean it will be for you. I found I could get a torso picture like the one posted by D38 right above this post, but couldn't fill the frame with a subject's face. If that works for you, then great!

The Plaubel Makinas are neat machines, but I never trusted the struts that held the lens.

When I was buying MF gear in the 1990's I was a poor photographer and then a poor graduate student. My gear was second hand pro gear, and I could barely afford that. So I made my peace with a handheld meter -- actually came to prefer metering that way -- more as a matter of necessity than anything else. I was doing street photography with a Pentax 67, which I still have. The lenses were faster than the Mamiya's and close ups were easy, both because of the lens's native close focusing distances, and because as an SLR you could use inexpensive extension tubes to get as close as you wanted. But it was a heavy rig, and the Pentax's shutter and mirror slap meant that slow shutter speeds (anything slower than 1/60) really required a tripod and mirror lock-up. But every system has its limitations and you learn to live with them or move on. I did finally get the Hassie/Bronica/RB67 of my dreams when studios were blowing them out in the early digital migration.
 
The auto-up close focus adapter for the Mamiya 6 is a fantastic addition to the kit and it's not just a crappy filter, it's a serious lens that is corrected to be used solely on the Mamiya 6 with the 75mm lens. It drops the close focus distance by about half. Other than that the 50mm is one of the best lenses ever made by anyone ever. It was seriously the nicest camera system I have ever owned or used and probably will remain so for the rest of my life.
That said, it's not really smaller than a Rolleiflex, it just handles differently.
Phil Forrest
 
Shocked at how inexpensive the Bronica SQ is. Why is that so?

I used the SQ for a couple of years for that reason. An SQ-A with the 40mm was 1/3 or 1/4 the cost of a SWC.

The SQ lenses are very good, but the shutters aren't very durable. I had one go on the 65mm.
All the film backs I had (3) had various light leaks.

The SQ is a -1 on the 'cool' charts. SWC would be a 10. Mamiya 6 would be an 8.
 
I used the SQ for a couple of years for that reason. An SQ-A with the 40mm was 1/3 or 1/4 the cost of a SWC.

The SQ lenses are very good, but the shutters aren't very durable. I had one go on the 65mm.
All the film backs I had (3) had various light leaks.

The SQ is a -1 on the 'cool' charts. SWC would be a 10. Mamiya 6 would be an 8.

Guess that’s why it’s so modestly priced.
 
Back
Top Bottom