sf
Veteran
I think I do, at least. The questions I have are these:
If I want that format for image quality, would I be better off with an RZ67 or a Hasselblad?
Personally, I prefer Mamiya glass over all others, but I have read somethings
about the Mamiya 7 cameras that are less than pleasing. People say that build is
terrible and the viewfinders go out of alignment too often for such an expensive
camera. They praise the lenses highly, but call the body "third rate". Below
consumer Nikons, Canons, etc.
Would I be better off putting that money as a down payment on a D2X?
I prefer the quiet, low vibration performance of the rangefinders.
Is the Mamiya 7 worth the money?
Would I do better (in terms of print quality AND camera life to buy a contax 645?)
Or a Mamiya 645AF/AFD?
OR should I just fight off the GAS and make use of my sweet little 4x5 camera and my D70, and forget the middle range in quality?
I suppose, the ultimate question is, if you had 2 grand to spend, what would you spend it on if image quality and build quality are of equal importance (because you DONT have money after that for fixing cameras)?
Thanks for any input, ya'll.
George
If I want that format for image quality, would I be better off with an RZ67 or a Hasselblad?
Personally, I prefer Mamiya glass over all others, but I have read somethings
about the Mamiya 7 cameras that are less than pleasing. People say that build is
terrible and the viewfinders go out of alignment too often for such an expensive
camera. They praise the lenses highly, but call the body "third rate". Below
consumer Nikons, Canons, etc.
Would I be better off putting that money as a down payment on a D2X?
I prefer the quiet, low vibration performance of the rangefinders.
Is the Mamiya 7 worth the money?
Would I do better (in terms of print quality AND camera life to buy a contax 645?)
Or a Mamiya 645AF/AFD?
OR should I just fight off the GAS and make use of my sweet little 4x5 camera and my D70, and forget the middle range in quality?
I suppose, the ultimate question is, if you had 2 grand to spend, what would you spend it on if image quality and build quality are of equal importance (because you DONT have money after that for fixing cameras)?
Thanks for any input, ya'll.
George
Evgeny
Newbie
Go to shop and touch Mamiya 7.
If you want to have useful camera - D2X
If you know 'spirit of RF' - Mamiya 7
4"x5" + D70 - very good choice
In my family 2 cameras - Mamiya 7 (my) anf KonicaMiolta A200 (wife's) - I think very good combination for nonprofessional photografers.
Use both power - wide film + high quality digital
If you want to have useful camera - D2X
If you know 'spirit of RF' - Mamiya 7
4"x5" + D70 - very good choice
In my family 2 cameras - Mamiya 7 (my) anf KonicaMiolta A200 (wife's) - I think very good combination for nonprofessional photografers.
Use both power - wide film + high quality digital
jaemyung_shim
Newbie
I have 7 not 7II, and I don't think the built is of "third rate". It's not metal but it feels quite solid. Especially, the grip fits excellent in hands. But, anyone's assessment is subjective, and as Evgery said, check it out yourself if you can.
hth
Well-known
I bought my Mamiya 7ii 1.5 years ago, thinking that I would be able to use it for 10 years producing some 100 rolls of slide film per year.
I feared film would go away, but what eventually put me over the edge was that even if film vanished, I would like to take the opportunity to enjoy big slides while it still was possible, so I took the plunge.
It fits nicely into my hands but it did have a learning curve, much more than any camera I have used. This was mostly caused by metering, I tried a separate meter and dialed manually - not really perfect, tried the polarizer without really reading the manual - a disaster.
Now I have learned to trust the lightmeter and know when I should not. I have learned to use the polarizer and this camera is a blast to use with very good results.
I have recently started to use B&W in it too, and they come out really nice too.
On build quality, I do not entirely trust it. 1 month after I got it on a airplane trip, the rangefinder went out of vertical alignment. It was later fixed under warranty.
I sometimes get into trouble with some of the interlocks blocking and do not understand what the problem is. Sometimes it will not change lens, the lock is jammed, but it seems to be caused by that the camera has to be wind before the lens can be changed. This can hapen if I accidently have tripped the shutter, or it has not been wound on properly. I seem to automatically think the battery is the problem, and it never seems to be..
In any case, I really like the Mamiya 7ii and am happy with the purchase. Sometimes it frustrates my while using it (interlocks), but in the end, it shines.
If you like rangefinders, want a camera that is easy to use (though watch out for the interlocks), is easily handheld, that is capable of producing excellent quality, I think the Mamiya 7 is the way to go.
Bottom line is that I think it is worth the money, especially if you plan to use it a lot. I would buy it again and I would replace it if I lost it (save for having the money again). This is the most expensive camera I have by the way.
As Evgeny said, go to a shop and touch it, I think you will be pleasantly surprised if you just know in advance that it has a plastic shell (and do not expect a scaled up Leica). Do not worry, it is just a tool that gives awesome picture qulity while at the same time is easily handheld.
/Håkan
I feared film would go away, but what eventually put me over the edge was that even if film vanished, I would like to take the opportunity to enjoy big slides while it still was possible, so I took the plunge.
It fits nicely into my hands but it did have a learning curve, much more than any camera I have used. This was mostly caused by metering, I tried a separate meter and dialed manually - not really perfect, tried the polarizer without really reading the manual - a disaster.
Now I have learned to trust the lightmeter and know when I should not. I have learned to use the polarizer and this camera is a blast to use with very good results.
I have recently started to use B&W in it too, and they come out really nice too.
On build quality, I do not entirely trust it. 1 month after I got it on a airplane trip, the rangefinder went out of vertical alignment. It was later fixed under warranty.
I sometimes get into trouble with some of the interlocks blocking and do not understand what the problem is. Sometimes it will not change lens, the lock is jammed, but it seems to be caused by that the camera has to be wind before the lens can be changed. This can hapen if I accidently have tripped the shutter, or it has not been wound on properly. I seem to automatically think the battery is the problem, and it never seems to be..
In any case, I really like the Mamiya 7ii and am happy with the purchase. Sometimes it frustrates my while using it (interlocks), but in the end, it shines.
If you like rangefinders, want a camera that is easy to use (though watch out for the interlocks), is easily handheld, that is capable of producing excellent quality, I think the Mamiya 7 is the way to go.
Bottom line is that I think it is worth the money, especially if you plan to use it a lot. I would buy it again and I would replace it if I lost it (save for having the money again). This is the most expensive camera I have by the way.
As Evgeny said, go to a shop and touch it, I think you will be pleasantly surprised if you just know in advance that it has a plastic shell (and do not expect a scaled up Leica). Do not worry, it is just a tool that gives awesome picture qulity while at the same time is easily handheld.
/Håkan
RObert Budding
D'oh!
What Type of Shooting
What Type of Shooting
What type of shooting do you do? One camera won't meet all needs, which is why I, too, an looking to add a MF rangefinder.
I don't own a Mamiya 7, but a friend of mine owns one. Great lenses. As for build quality - it seems to get the job done. But it does not ooze quality the way a Leica or Contax does.
Have you considered a Bronica RF645? Robert White sells a new kit with both 45mm and 65mm lenses for about $1,200. The 100mm lenses are scarce, though they do show up on e*ay. Prices are low because Bronica is exiting the MF camera business. Several folks here use them - just click the link on the right of the home page for ,ore info.
SLR choices:
I, too like Mamiya glass, but the Mamiya RZ is too large for me to lug about. Great studio camera, though.
So I bought a Mamiya 645 Pro TL from KEH.com. The negative is 2.7x larger than 35mm and the lenses are excellent. And did I mention the price? Unbelievabley low! I bought a 150/3.5 lens for $180. And the body itself was $225 (add in a back and prism and you're good to go).
Some folks claim that 645 is not a big enough jump in size realtive to 35mm. I disagree. I've printed 16x20 using HP5 with excellent results. Also, the 645 cameras are very easy to handle.
The Mamiya 645 AF is pretty nice, but the camera and lenses are a lot more expensive. Too much money for the AF feature, in my opinion. And the optical quality is the same as the manual focus Mamiyas.
Contax 645 is also an excellent camera. And I wa tempted. But each additional lens will set you back $1,000 or more. And I feel that I don't give up anything with the MAmiya glass.
Happy shopping!
Robert
What Type of Shooting
What type of shooting do you do? One camera won't meet all needs, which is why I, too, an looking to add a MF rangefinder.
I don't own a Mamiya 7, but a friend of mine owns one. Great lenses. As for build quality - it seems to get the job done. But it does not ooze quality the way a Leica or Contax does.
Have you considered a Bronica RF645? Robert White sells a new kit with both 45mm and 65mm lenses for about $1,200. The 100mm lenses are scarce, though they do show up on e*ay. Prices are low because Bronica is exiting the MF camera business. Several folks here use them - just click the link on the right of the home page for ,ore info.
SLR choices:
I, too like Mamiya glass, but the Mamiya RZ is too large for me to lug about. Great studio camera, though.
So I bought a Mamiya 645 Pro TL from KEH.com. The negative is 2.7x larger than 35mm and the lenses are excellent. And did I mention the price? Unbelievabley low! I bought a 150/3.5 lens for $180. And the body itself was $225 (add in a back and prism and you're good to go).
Some folks claim that 645 is not a big enough jump in size realtive to 35mm. I disagree. I've printed 16x20 using HP5 with excellent results. Also, the 645 cameras are very easy to handle.
The Mamiya 645 AF is pretty nice, but the camera and lenses are a lot more expensive. Too much money for the AF feature, in my opinion. And the optical quality is the same as the manual focus Mamiyas.
Contax 645 is also an excellent camera. And I wa tempted. But each additional lens will set you back $1,000 or more. And I feel that I don't give up anything with the MAmiya glass.
Happy shopping!
Robert
oftheherd
Veteran
I don't think I have ever heard of an unhappy Mamiya 7 owner. There are probably some out there. It won't be because of the big negatives and slides. I don't think it will be the feel of use either. The one thing that is a disadvantage is you can't interchange the backs. Well, we are used to that with our 35mm cameras also, but extra bodies are often more expensive.
If you think you want the larege negative experience, you might want to consider one of the many good folders out there to see if you really like bigger negatives/slides. It will then become a backup camera.
My first foray into MF other than folders, was some 30 years ago with a Yashica 124 MAT G. I really loved that camera and especially those big negatives. It did not change backs or lenses. I decided to get a Mamiya C330 and put one on layaway. Then an acquaintance of mine convencied my to get a Mamiya Super Press 23. I had never even heard of it, but the price was right so I sprang for it.
I still have it these 30 years later. I now have three more lenses for it. I also have extra backs, including one for sheet film. The Super Press has an adjustable back. It has only 15 degrees of swing and tilt, no shift vertically or horizontally. But hey, this is a rangefinder after all.
This is a heavier camera than a 35mm for sure, But, with a wide strap, I find it not that bad. For some reason, I found it easy to use right from the start. It seemed almost 35mm like in use, unlike the Yashica TLR, which is usually used at waist level. I found being able to change lenses and backs an advantage. Not all the time, any more than with a 35mm. But there are times when it is nice to be able to change from color to b/w with the same camera. Granted, digital processing is taking up some of the slack there, but most still seem to think b/w still has an edge. Franly, I haven't done dark room work in many years, but comparing old prints with newer digital, I am inclined to agree.
As to negative size, I have always maintained that 6x7 is the place to go. As mentioned, you can indeed make large prints with 645. With care and good technique you can with 35mm also. But not as good quality, nor as consistantly. You need bigger negatives.
So why 6x7 over 645 or 6x6? Size has it. I realize 645 is bigger than 35mm, but I just don't think that much for the expense. For size over 35mm, so is 6x6. The trouble with 6x6 is that we usually make rectangular prints. That means you will often be really using 645 of the 6x6 negative. If you think square and print square, 6x6 will do well. If not, 35mm, 645, or 6x7 seems to be where to go.
Hassys and Mamiya RB/RZ whatever, from what I have seen are not as easy to use. They are waist level or tripod cameras, just like TLRs. The Pentax 6x7 is heavy and doesn't change backs. It has a reputation, deserved or not, of being less steady due to the focal plane shutter. I have heard users defend and complain, so I don't know the right of it.
So, from my opinion, that leaves the Mamiya Universal or Super Press cameras. They are in fact press cameras. That means they area easier to use than the waist level cameras. Their backs change easier also, and load easier, but I haven't used those so I can't say for sure. You can interchange lenses, and whether they are cocked or not makes no difference. You have the speed of rangefinder focusing, nad the ability to use it in darker light. Not black cat in a coal bin, any more than a 35mm, but better than SLRs.
One last thought. Do consider a relatively inexpensive folder, or a friends MF before you make the jump. If you already have a 35mm and a 4x5, as you mentioned, MF may hold no particular fascination fo you, at least not for the expense. Even used Mamiya Press cameras aren't given away free.
Sorry for the long post. I just think these are thngs you should consider before you look at another sysem and its costs. Those are just my thoughts. I hope they are of value, but remember, they are only my personal experience and thoughts. If possible, you should try to handle any camera before you buy it. Good luck in your choice.
If you think you want the larege negative experience, you might want to consider one of the many good folders out there to see if you really like bigger negatives/slides. It will then become a backup camera.
My first foray into MF other than folders, was some 30 years ago with a Yashica 124 MAT G. I really loved that camera and especially those big negatives. It did not change backs or lenses. I decided to get a Mamiya C330 and put one on layaway. Then an acquaintance of mine convencied my to get a Mamiya Super Press 23. I had never even heard of it, but the price was right so I sprang for it.
I still have it these 30 years later. I now have three more lenses for it. I also have extra backs, including one for sheet film. The Super Press has an adjustable back. It has only 15 degrees of swing and tilt, no shift vertically or horizontally. But hey, this is a rangefinder after all.
This is a heavier camera than a 35mm for sure, But, with a wide strap, I find it not that bad. For some reason, I found it easy to use right from the start. It seemed almost 35mm like in use, unlike the Yashica TLR, which is usually used at waist level. I found being able to change lenses and backs an advantage. Not all the time, any more than with a 35mm. But there are times when it is nice to be able to change from color to b/w with the same camera. Granted, digital processing is taking up some of the slack there, but most still seem to think b/w still has an edge. Franly, I haven't done dark room work in many years, but comparing old prints with newer digital, I am inclined to agree.
As to negative size, I have always maintained that 6x7 is the place to go. As mentioned, you can indeed make large prints with 645. With care and good technique you can with 35mm also. But not as good quality, nor as consistantly. You need bigger negatives.
So why 6x7 over 645 or 6x6? Size has it. I realize 645 is bigger than 35mm, but I just don't think that much for the expense. For size over 35mm, so is 6x6. The trouble with 6x6 is that we usually make rectangular prints. That means you will often be really using 645 of the 6x6 negative. If you think square and print square, 6x6 will do well. If not, 35mm, 645, or 6x7 seems to be where to go.
Hassys and Mamiya RB/RZ whatever, from what I have seen are not as easy to use. They are waist level or tripod cameras, just like TLRs. The Pentax 6x7 is heavy and doesn't change backs. It has a reputation, deserved or not, of being less steady due to the focal plane shutter. I have heard users defend and complain, so I don't know the right of it.
So, from my opinion, that leaves the Mamiya Universal or Super Press cameras. They are in fact press cameras. That means they area easier to use than the waist level cameras. Their backs change easier also, and load easier, but I haven't used those so I can't say for sure. You can interchange lenses, and whether they are cocked or not makes no difference. You have the speed of rangefinder focusing, nad the ability to use it in darker light. Not black cat in a coal bin, any more than a 35mm, but better than SLRs.
One last thought. Do consider a relatively inexpensive folder, or a friends MF before you make the jump. If you already have a 35mm and a 4x5, as you mentioned, MF may hold no particular fascination fo you, at least not for the expense. Even used Mamiya Press cameras aren't given away free.
Sorry for the long post. I just think these are thngs you should consider before you look at another sysem and its costs. Those are just my thoughts. I hope they are of value, but remember, they are only my personal experience and thoughts. If possible, you should try to handle any camera before you buy it. Good luck in your choice.
Alex Krasotkin
Well-known
Contax 645AF
Contax 645AF
When I had this question, I went for Contax 645AF + 2 lenses (Carl Zeiss Planar T* 80/2 and Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 45/2.8). This combination completely suits my photographical requirements (you can check up results on my web-site www.krasotkin.com). Camera and especially optics are absiolutely great! In addition I have Konica Hexar AF (for street and family photo). I scan my slides using Nikon Coolscan 8000ED. 6x4.5 file size scanned at 4000dpi is almost 320 mb, which allows me to print up to A1 size. Having said all that above, I am not sure that I want to have such a pain to work with bigger files (6x7) for doubtful increase in quality. Contax 645 AF has another advantage - I can attach digital backs to it, certainly when the prices will become reasonable. Mamiya 7 is a very good camera, but has some limitations including absence of interchangable back and problems to use gradient and polarizing filters. You need to think it over carefully investing your money in such equipement. If you like Mamiya, I would consider Mamya 645 AF, preferably AFd.
Best regards,
Alex
Contax 645AF
When I had this question, I went for Contax 645AF + 2 lenses (Carl Zeiss Planar T* 80/2 and Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 45/2.8). This combination completely suits my photographical requirements (you can check up results on my web-site www.krasotkin.com). Camera and especially optics are absiolutely great! In addition I have Konica Hexar AF (for street and family photo). I scan my slides using Nikon Coolscan 8000ED. 6x4.5 file size scanned at 4000dpi is almost 320 mb, which allows me to print up to A1 size. Having said all that above, I am not sure that I want to have such a pain to work with bigger files (6x7) for doubtful increase in quality. Contax 645 AF has another advantage - I can attach digital backs to it, certainly when the prices will become reasonable. Mamiya 7 is a very good camera, but has some limitations including absence of interchangable back and problems to use gradient and polarizing filters. You need to think it over carefully investing your money in such equipement. If you like Mamiya, I would consider Mamya 645 AF, preferably AFd.
Best regards,
Alex
Last edited:
sf
Veteran
thanks to all for the help
thanks to all for the help
I appreciate it, and thanks also for the in depth replies - lots to think about. I am considering the delicate nature of the viewfinders in RF cameras, and thinking I might go with the Contax 645 or the Mamiya 645 AFD to make up for that, and leave the super huge negative work to my trusty 4x5.
Thanks much
thanks to all for the help
I appreciate it, and thanks also for the in depth replies - lots to think about. I am considering the delicate nature of the viewfinders in RF cameras, and thinking I might go with the Contax 645 or the Mamiya 645 AFD to make up for that, and leave the super huge negative work to my trusty 4x5.
Thanks much
jan normandale
Film is the other way
Hi themirana
there is a lot of info and discussion as well as a user list for Mamiya 6/7 users at this link. Check it out a lot of your questions are covered here by various members notes, quotes and opinions regarding the Mamiya MF cameras
Jan
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3672
there is a lot of info and discussion as well as a user list for Mamiya 6/7 users at this link. Check it out a lot of your questions are covered here by various members notes, quotes and opinions regarding the Mamiya MF cameras
Jan
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3672
Wayne R. Scott
Half fast Leica User
MY two cents----------. If you want to try 6x7 to see if the negative size is to your liking and you want a rangefinder camera, look into the old Koni-Omega Rapid 200 beasts. You can pick one up for a song, it will allow interchangeable backs (like the Mamiya 23), lens are very very good. If you like 6x7 or if you don't you can sell it for very near what you paid for it. Then plunk down your hard earned cash on a Mamiya 7II and lenses.
Wayne
Wayne
tom7ii
Newbie
Having just bought a Mamiya 7ii, I believe I can offer share my experiences that may give you things to think about.
If a camera could be right for someone, this one is right for me. In contrast, I was never confortable with my Nikon F90x, though it is an excellant camera by pretty much any measure. As it turned out, in retrospect dislike autofocus, extreme automation and all the noise typical of a modern SLR.
That being said, I never realized the discomfort with my Nikon until I borrowed my friends Mamiya 6. At the beginning, I didn't really like it, though I thought I would. Imprecise framing, no DOF preview, viewfinder w/ 150 mm lens etc. It was only when I developed pictures that it really began to grow on me. The quality of the photos were stunning even though I hand held the camera. It's silence makes the camera very unobtrusive for photographing people. Hence, for me it really became an issue of the advantages outweighing the disadvantages.
So, I can only suggest one thing - you will never really know if you should own this camera unless you actually try it. If you cannot try one and buy it, be prepared that you may dislike it as I dislike my Nikon.
I would also like to comment on my observations of the 80mm lens. Everyone praises its sharpness. I would like to caution on it's 'bokeh'. Backlit sunlight peeking through out of focus trees is one place I notice it - looks very rough, and you can count the blades on the diaphram . Second, when focusing close at a wide aperture, the out-of-focus separation of a dark mountain (for instance) and a bright sky results in a nasty looking (darker than normal) band across the edge between moutain and sky. Is it bad? Depends on your personal taste....
So, based on my observations thus far, I would say that you have to be aware of situations that will cause the less than optimal 'bokeh' from rearing it's ugly head. Perhaps many people will have different opinions - I can only share with you my experiences.
All in all, like anything else, the camera has limitations and some 'uglies'. I am quite happy to live with and adapt to the limitations in order to enjoy the benifits.
On a side note, I do notice an improvement in my photos. I attribute it to my comfort in the camera. Will you experience the same? Only you can tell.
If a camera could be right for someone, this one is right for me. In contrast, I was never confortable with my Nikon F90x, though it is an excellant camera by pretty much any measure. As it turned out, in retrospect dislike autofocus, extreme automation and all the noise typical of a modern SLR.
That being said, I never realized the discomfort with my Nikon until I borrowed my friends Mamiya 6. At the beginning, I didn't really like it, though I thought I would. Imprecise framing, no DOF preview, viewfinder w/ 150 mm lens etc. It was only when I developed pictures that it really began to grow on me. The quality of the photos were stunning even though I hand held the camera. It's silence makes the camera very unobtrusive for photographing people. Hence, for me it really became an issue of the advantages outweighing the disadvantages.
So, I can only suggest one thing - you will never really know if you should own this camera unless you actually try it. If you cannot try one and buy it, be prepared that you may dislike it as I dislike my Nikon.
I would also like to comment on my observations of the 80mm lens. Everyone praises its sharpness. I would like to caution on it's 'bokeh'. Backlit sunlight peeking through out of focus trees is one place I notice it - looks very rough, and you can count the blades on the diaphram . Second, when focusing close at a wide aperture, the out-of-focus separation of a dark mountain (for instance) and a bright sky results in a nasty looking (darker than normal) band across the edge between moutain and sky. Is it bad? Depends on your personal taste....
So, based on my observations thus far, I would say that you have to be aware of situations that will cause the less than optimal 'bokeh' from rearing it's ugly head. Perhaps many people will have different opinions - I can only share with you my experiences.
All in all, like anything else, the camera has limitations and some 'uglies'. I am quite happy to live with and adapt to the limitations in order to enjoy the benifits.
On a side note, I do notice an improvement in my photos. I attribute it to my comfort in the camera. Will you experience the same? Only you can tell.
RFMan
Newbie
I use M7 for portrait and wedding with great successful, it's light and easy to handle like FM2n, I use it like 35mm, not like "MF". Very good optic, comparable to 35mm with crop from 35mm portion of the 67. really that good in sharpness. I think it is better than hasselblad 80mm, because I seen a lot blurr Hassel pics, Ordinary MF desighn just don't always get non blurr pics -handheld, but M7 is sharp even 1/60 second handheld with 80mm lens
jrong
Too many cameras
I have the Mamiya 7II and am thinking of selling it, along with its 65mm and 80mm lenses. I've had it since the summer of 2003, and ever since giving up on it and buying a Bronica SQAi earlier this year, I haven't touched the Mamiya 7II since...
I suppose it is all down to the individual. I use my MF gear mostly for landscapes or tripod shots, so I don't need anything as "convenient" and quick as a rangefinder. I have never used the M7II for street shooting, for e.g, as I find the DOF too small unless I use really fast film.
The build quality also leaves a lot to be desired. It's not BAD but then again, at that price, you'd really expect something better. Cosina/Voigtlander can do a decent job with producing quality "light" rangefinders such as the Bessa R, there is no reason Mamiya can't do the same. The lever to activate the "dark slide" is appallingly flimsy; the demo model I saw in the shop actually had a broken lever. I can see the lever probably won't take any rough handling. The exposure compensation dial feels tacky. There is a lot of plastic - which is lightweight, but doesn't inspire confidence. I certainly won't feel comfortable dropping it, and to date, it is probably my only camera body that I haven't actually dropped!
I don't like its inexact framing, although I've not had many problems with the meter. No DOF preview and the other inconveniences have already been mentioned above....
The glass is very good though. However, it does have a tendency to flare. Watch out for that. I've had too many hexagonal flare spots in my pictures even when I didn't really notice the sun in the frame. My 35mm SLR is a Contax system and I can see that pictures taken with Zeiss glass are much warmer - my M7ii produces Velvia slides with a distinctly colder look + feel, so an 81B is probably necessary.
It is perfectly hand-holdable though, I can get beautifully pin-sharp enlargements up to 16" x 14" of photos taken hand-held at 1/15s. And the shutter is amazingly quiet, just a tiny "click".
In the end, what got to me was the "strange" aspect ratio of 6x7. The negs/slides are huge, and lovely - but I found I just could not compose with 6x7. It's neither here nor there, not a square and not rectangular either. In the end, I found myself cropping just everything into a square.
So try before you buy.... maybe rent one out for a day or two.
Jin
I suppose it is all down to the individual. I use my MF gear mostly for landscapes or tripod shots, so I don't need anything as "convenient" and quick as a rangefinder. I have never used the M7II for street shooting, for e.g, as I find the DOF too small unless I use really fast film.
The build quality also leaves a lot to be desired. It's not BAD but then again, at that price, you'd really expect something better. Cosina/Voigtlander can do a decent job with producing quality "light" rangefinders such as the Bessa R, there is no reason Mamiya can't do the same. The lever to activate the "dark slide" is appallingly flimsy; the demo model I saw in the shop actually had a broken lever. I can see the lever probably won't take any rough handling. The exposure compensation dial feels tacky. There is a lot of plastic - which is lightweight, but doesn't inspire confidence. I certainly won't feel comfortable dropping it, and to date, it is probably my only camera body that I haven't actually dropped!
I don't like its inexact framing, although I've not had many problems with the meter. No DOF preview and the other inconveniences have already been mentioned above....
The glass is very good though. However, it does have a tendency to flare. Watch out for that. I've had too many hexagonal flare spots in my pictures even when I didn't really notice the sun in the frame. My 35mm SLR is a Contax system and I can see that pictures taken with Zeiss glass are much warmer - my M7ii produces Velvia slides with a distinctly colder look + feel, so an 81B is probably necessary.
It is perfectly hand-holdable though, I can get beautifully pin-sharp enlargements up to 16" x 14" of photos taken hand-held at 1/15s. And the shutter is amazingly quiet, just a tiny "click".
In the end, what got to me was the "strange" aspect ratio of 6x7. The negs/slides are huge, and lovely - but I found I just could not compose with 6x7. It's neither here nor there, not a square and not rectangular either. In the end, I found myself cropping just everything into a square.
So try before you buy.... maybe rent one out for a day or two.
Jin
oftheherd
Veteran
jrong said:
Interesting since it fits the 8x10 quite well. But as you said, you like the square format. There are those who do like that better. And 6x6 to the rescue. Cost of less expensive 6x6s isn't the only reason that format survives. I certainly liked my Yashica MAT G well enough until I got a 6x7. I am one who prefers the rectangular format. We all have our preferences.
S
shaaktiman
Guest
I have both the Mamiya 6 and the RB67. There's no doubt about it, the rb67 can take a major beating. (In fact, mine looks like it took several prior to my purchasing it.) But the only reason I have it is for close up indoor work, the 6 is the one I take with me everywhere.
I would say that it really depends on what you are going to use the camera for. If you are doing street or travel (traditional RF stuff) then you will hate yourself for getting the RB67, it's just too heavy and awkward. While the hassy is smaller and lighter it still can't come close to the 6 or 7 for ease of use and portability. The 6/7 absolutely rules street shooting and the lenses are just as good as any zeiss that the hassys'll give you. It's like having a medium format leica, I really can't say enough good things about it.
But if you are doing mostly studio, then I would say that you should save $700 and buy a used RB67 and a GOOD tripod. (KEH has some great beaters with C lenses for less than $400.) The RFs are not made for portrait work.
As far as the build quality of the 6 goes, I agree with the above posters, it 'aint no leica. But hey, what is? If you don't abuse it, it'll be fine. The alignment of ANY rangefiinder will go out with a good jolt, if you can't deal with that then get the SLR for sure. (A 10 minute tuk tuk ride once kicked out a perfectly aligned bessa on me on the 1st day of a 30 day trip; it sucked but I just shot stopped down and everything was fine until I got home and could fix it.)
I don't personally think that the 6 is poorly made, I haven't handled a 7(II) but I don't think there's a great difference between them. You might want to buy from KEH and just try out one of them. If the 7 feels too flimsy (or the RB too heavy) then just send it back.
good luck, they are all great cameras, you're in for a treat any way you cut it.
adam
I would say that it really depends on what you are going to use the camera for. If you are doing street or travel (traditional RF stuff) then you will hate yourself for getting the RB67, it's just too heavy and awkward. While the hassy is smaller and lighter it still can't come close to the 6 or 7 for ease of use and portability. The 6/7 absolutely rules street shooting and the lenses are just as good as any zeiss that the hassys'll give you. It's like having a medium format leica, I really can't say enough good things about it.
But if you are doing mostly studio, then I would say that you should save $700 and buy a used RB67 and a GOOD tripod. (KEH has some great beaters with C lenses for less than $400.) The RFs are not made for portrait work.
As far as the build quality of the 6 goes, I agree with the above posters, it 'aint no leica. But hey, what is? If you don't abuse it, it'll be fine. The alignment of ANY rangefiinder will go out with a good jolt, if you can't deal with that then get the SLR for sure. (A 10 minute tuk tuk ride once kicked out a perfectly aligned bessa on me on the 1st day of a 30 day trip; it sucked but I just shot stopped down and everything was fine until I got home and could fix it.)
I don't personally think that the 6 is poorly made, I haven't handled a 7(II) but I don't think there's a great difference between them. You might want to buy from KEH and just try out one of them. If the 7 feels too flimsy (or the RB too heavy) then just send it back.
good luck, they are all great cameras, you're in for a treat any way you cut it.
adam
kram
Well-known
I have had my Mam 7 for 9 years now. Its been through 4 house moves, been abroad a few times, and used on the beach. Only problem, as mentioned by hth, is that the rangefinder when out of sinc on an aeroplane. :bang: Build quality OK, but more like 70s Jap cameras rather than modern ones. I think it is the fit of components rather than the quality of them. How to adjust the rangefinder is posted somewhere on this site and on Mamiya's.
Weight wise, my Nikon F5 weighed more with a standard zoom lens (24-85mm), than the 7 with its standard lens. Optics: 80mm OK but I expected better at f4 and f5.6. 50mm lens is great . Len build quality is better (fit etc.) than the camera body. If I lost the 7, and replaced it with another (120 camera) it would be the 7II.
Contax 645, Blad H1 or pentax 645 if I really wanted a 645 camera. My Mam 645 super was O.K. but felt plasticy.
Weight wise, my Nikon F5 weighed more with a standard zoom lens (24-85mm), than the 7 with its standard lens. Optics: 80mm OK but I expected better at f4 and f5.6. 50mm lens is great
. Len build quality is better (fit etc.) than the camera body. If I lost the 7, and replaced it with another (120 camera) it would be the 7II.Contax 645, Blad H1 or pentax 645 if I really wanted a 645 camera. My Mam 645 super was O.K. but felt plasticy.