Leica M8 vs Mamiya 7

[infocusf8@earthlink.]

Why don't you rent or borrow an M8 and see for yourself, it is the only way you'll really be assured. I can tell you that I recently asked a local master printer to print a 16X 20 from a RAW M8 file and he politely informed mr that he was an artist and didn't deal with digital files. When I pressed him to at least look at the file he went on about his Mamiya 7 and the quality of prints from it. When he looked at my file there was a long pause then he muttered "I guess I can get rid of my Mamiya now." He printed the file and came away with a new appreciation of digital capture.

 

[rsl]

Trying to squezee every last bit of "technical performance" out of the medium is a noble endeavour but it should not get in the way of making good pictures. And I sometimes get myself doing it, either when taking the picture or when analysing (you see? bad word, that one, I should be using "seeing", not "analysing"...) it afterwards...

Fascinating! A thread that actually talks about photographs. jvr, you're absolutely right. The best photographs have always been gut reactions, not setups. If you're out to do still lifes you're better off with a paintbrush and canvas. One of the most compelling things about a photograph is that it captures time. Setups don't do that.

 

[Eric T]

I agree with jvr. Sometimes we can work to hard to make a particular format or system work as perfectly as possible. The time spent doing that is valuable and good shots can be missed in the process.
I guess for me it is partly laziness. I know my M8 can beat medium format for the shots I take so why bother carrying around the heavy body and lenses with a tripod when the handheld M8 works well for my purposes?
So I guess it depends on your motivations and objectives.
jvr - I am not surprised your 6x17 Fotoman can beat the M8 for landscape, panoramic shots. I have always wanted to try one of those. I am glad to hear that stitching M8 photos can come close to approaching the Fotoman results.
Eric

 

[Paul Kay]

Trying to squezee every last bit of "technical performance" out of the medium is a noble endeavour but it should not get in the way of making good pictures. And I sometimes get myself doing it, either when taking the picture or when analysing (you see? bad word, that one, I should be using "seeing", not "analysing"...) it afterwards...

Does anybody else feel this way? 🙂

YES! The reality of photography is that different cameras have different attributes which have to be understood so that you can use the right tool for the job. And of course there is a degree of crossover - inevitably. I use Canon EOS and Leica M (professionally AND for my own enjoyment - my wife refers to photography as an obsession rather than work or hobby!). Which is better? Neither, I simply choose the most appropriate for the photography that I am undertaking, based on which will deliver the image I'm trying to capture. This is not always based on the "technical performance" but often on which camera will capture the image (sometimes this might even mean weight is the criteria, as an example).

To get back to the thread question, I'm not sure that this post can be straightforwardly answered as the poster needs to determine whether another Mamiya 7 is carriable/usable alongside the existing one or whether an M8 digital workflow would sit alongside the existing workflow viably and far more beside. I very much doubt that in absolute terms a 10MPixel image would be SIMILAR enough to MF film although I doubt that the difference would be as dramatic as all that (I used to use a Contax 645 from which I have many scans which are superb but I'm now used to a digital workflow and quality and I couldn't step back). Sorry, but I'd say go and try an M8, and then consider the numerous other issues before deciding

 

[jvr]

Fascinating! A thread that actually talks about photographs. jvr, you're absolutely right. The best photographs have always been gut reactions, not setups. If you're out to do still lifes you're better off with a paintbrush and canvas. One of the most compelling things about a photograph is that it captures time. Setups don't do that.

I do respect still life photography in the studio, either professional or hobby. Morover, a good friend of my father was a professional studio photographer (when I was a kid I spent countless hours there) and I learned a lot by seeing him photographing everything, from people to shoe catalogs. I think I would not be able to make a living like this, not because of technique but because of degree of "on-demand" creativity that's needed. Everyday of the week. Every month of the year. Otherwise, no food. 🙁

BUT (and here comes personal preferences) a big part of the pleasure I take out from photographing is exactly that "instant" you capture on film. It does not have to be the "decisive moment" (so many times prepared!!!) of Cartier-Bresson.

IMHO, the best photographers have this "unique instant capture" ability and, at the same time, create images that have a bit of "eternity" in it (they will mean something to someone in the future).

Sebastiao Salgado strikes a perfect balance between these two things, at least for me.

I think most of the photojournalism work today needs a legend below. A good photography should not need that, at least for me.

BTW, take a look at this photobook (its paper, not electronic): Time (by Andy Goldsworthy) http://www.amazon.com/Time-Andy-Gol...bs_sr_6?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1198954355&sr=8-6

Very interesting.

 

[jvr]

I agree with jvr. Sometimes we can work to hard to make a particular format or system work as perfectly as possible. The time spent doing that is valuable and good shots can be missed in the process.
I guess for me it is partly laziness. I know my M8 can beat medium format for the shots I take so why bother carrying around the heavy body and lenses with a tripod when the handheld M8 works well for my purposes?
So I guess it depends on your motivations and objectives.
jvr - I am not surprised your 6x17 Fotoman can beat the M8 for landscape, panoramic shots. I have always wanted to try one of those. I am glad to hear that stitching M8 photos can come close to approaching the Fotoman results.
Eric

Well, I never had my Fotoman films scanned with a pro-grade drum scanner, or even a LS-9000 ED (and seeing the difference in 35mm between my V700 and my trusty old LS-4000ED I bet the difference is huge...). But with the V700, yes, a stitched panorama by the M8 holds itself rather well. 🙂 Problem is, no moving subjects. Even water can sometimes be a problem.

And you can handhold the Fotoman (ok, not for a long time!) and there is no camera shake at all (large mass, leaf shutter, wide-angle). I have very acceptable photos (enlargements to Epson Panoramic paper) handheld at 1/15.

BTW, when I bouht the Fotoman, I thought the 90 would be too long (the horizontal FOV is equivalent to a 19mm in 35mm and I have a 12mm... 🙂). But sometimes I wish I had a 210. I realizaed that I like the panoramic format and does not have to be wide-angle... 🙂

 

[Richard Marks]

Well I have owned a Mamiya 7 with the 65mm lens a few years back. It was a wonderful machnine in its own right but far too slow for portrait work. The other thing which annoyed me was that it is difficult to focus close enough. Also the viewfinder had a rather irritating in built polariser and the focusing patch is nothing like as bright as on a leica M. The 65mm lens was good but it needed stopping down to at least f8 to make it sing. It was also quite a heavy lump. In order to get the best out of it I tended to mount it on a tripod.

Absolute image quality the medium format option is going to have more detail when you get up to 34" enlargements. But only when evrything is spot on. The appeal of Leica lenses is their ability to isolate certain aspects of an image, wide open, blindingly sharp at the focal point and then a nice fall off. This is very adictive and one starts to look at the aesthetics of the image more than edge to edge sharpness. Also the impact of the images is often very noticeable without needing to enlarge massively. The M8 certainly has enough quality for big enlargements but dont kid yourself that it will have all the detail of a medium format tranny. But do you always need this detail? Sometimes it detracts more than it brings.Current trends for portraits are very much less formal now and if you are looking for spontaneity, then the lighter faster, better performance wide open leica in my opinion is going to give you a much higher hit rate. Personally there is no way i would swap my Leica M (filn or digital) for a mamiya 7. Interestingly the Mamiya I have kept is an old 220 TLR. Its fabuloous for black and white, costs very little and it is not going any where.

The only real way to resolve this is to borrow an M8 and see if it can do what you want it to. Let us know the results of your evaluation. Oh and post a few pics.

Attached an image that I doubt I could have pulled off with the mamiya 7. It might not have medium format detail but its got all it needs. I could probably have missed the moment with the mamiya but it would have been sharper and i could enlarge it to 4 feet. Take your choice!

Best wishes

Richard

 

[TJV]

The M8 is a great camera and I definatly got some great results with it printing at 18x27" but my Mamiya 7ii and 65mm lens just eats it. Appart from the "slow" f4 limit, I've never missed anything on the street that I wouldn't have missed with a Leica.

Having said all of that, I enjoy the feel of my Mamiya 7ii and it's a new system to me so I may be biased towards it at the moment. Ask me again in a years time when I've no doubt bought another M8 or whatever else is on the digital block. Who knows, we may all be shooting Hi Def digital movies in a few years that kill every still image we've ever seen before!

 

[ChrisN]

Interesting discussion, but this really shouldn't be too difficult to settle! Why can't a few M8 owners send the OP some RAW files for him to play with and print?

 

[Richard Marks]

Interesting discussion, but this really shouldn't be too difficult to settle! Why can't a few M8 owners send the OP some RAW files for him to play with and print?

Id be glad to but really he needs to go try an M8. That really is the only way.

Richard

 

[jplomley]

I would like to thank everyone for the valuable feedback. Out of all the responses, I think Joe hit the nail on the head with his statement,

"if convenience and minimum of hassle were the sole deciding factor, I doubt much in the way of real creativity would result. Those who have a passion - an obsession - with a field of art are not at all sidetracked by mere inconveniences; on the contrary, they often choose the most inconvenient, difficult methods just because the results are more toward their liking."

Eloquently stated.

I visited our local Leica rep yesterday here in Montreal and he was kind enough to furnish contact information for some of the local M8 users. Hopefully, I'll be able to get some comparative images between the M8 and Mamiya 7. I'll definately post the results.

Richard, I'm quite surprised to hear of your experience with the Mamiya 7/65mm lens combo. That is quite polarized from my observations which are more in line with TJV's. Was there a rangefinder alignment issue with your Mamiya? Could you have received a bad sample of the 65mm? I've shot the 65mm wide open with spectacular results. I might also add, that I have no problem hand-holding the Mamiya 7/65 combo down to shutter speeds of 1/8th - 1/15th with more than acceptable results. Of course I can do better if there is an opprtunity to brace myself, but in street work this is not always possible.

 

[Tuolumne]

I don't have a Mamiya 7, but I have shot medium format Fujis at 645 and 690. Even using an Epson 4990 the photos look incredibly impressive. I think the main issue is more the convenience of digital over film and hasseling with scanning. If you don't have the time or inclination to carefully scan your negatives, and total time including loading and unloading the film from the scanner is significant for each negative, then you won't be happy with any MF camera. Only you can decide this, and you may change your mind after spending alot of time at the scanner.

/T

 

[Richard Marks]

I would like to thank everyone for the valuable feedback. Out of all the responses, I think Joe hit the nail on the head with his statement,

"
Richard, I'm quite surprised to hear of your experience with the Mamiya 7/65mm lens combo. That is quite polarized from my observations which are more in line with TJV's. Was there a rangefinder alignment issue with your Mamiya? Could you have received a bad sample of the 65mm? I've shot the 65mm wide open with spectacular results. I might also add, that I have no problem hand-holding the Mamiya 7/65 combo down to shutter speeds of 1/8th - 1/15th with more than acceptable results. Of course I can do better if there is an opprtunity to brace myself, but in street work this is not always possible.

Hi this is all relative!
You can of course get good results hand holding a Mamiya 7 no doubt about it but in low light situations the M8 starts to shine. I am simply saying the hit rate should be higher with the M8
If you think the 65 is good wide open then you will be knocked out by Leica glass. Also f1.4 / f2 and selsctive focussing is a really different ball game. Its not a small difference. The mamiya 7 is a superb camera and has a special place in my affections (mainly for landscapes) but for people / street photography the M8 is in its element. I look forward to hearing how you get on. Id be delighted to send you some M8 files (send me an e-mail address), but Im not sure if this is as useful as giving the M8 a good trial. Incidentally my preferred medium format system for portraits was hasselblad and the M8 replaced this for me.

All the best for the year ahead.


Richard

 

[StuartR]

I would have to agree with jplomley here...the Mamiya glass is fantastic wide open. Better than most Leica glass (yes, I have a lot of it, and it is mostly asph). The reason it is better is precisely because it is so slow. But I do think you can handhold the M8 at slower shutter speeds in most cases. That said, camera shake is magnified based on degree of enlargement, and in all cases the 6x7 neg needs to be enlarged a lot less than the M8. I generally keep it at or about 1/15th with both cameras in order to get the best results.

 

[Richard Marks]

I would have to agree with jplomley here...the Mamiya glass is fantastic wide open. Better than most Leica glass (yes, I have a lot of it, and it is mostly asph). The reason it is better is precisely because it is so slow. .

Dear Stuart
Im a bit baffled by this. So slow is better? I mean a large format f8 lens is better too but for landscapes. I think this needs some qualification. I could never get the lovely shallow depth of field with a mamiya 65mm lens (on Mamiya 7) and it certainly did not focus close enough for my requirements and in available light even using ASA 400 in the UK I found it a struggle. Im not disputing that its wonderful glass but it just did not suit me.
Best wishes
Richard

 

[StuartR]

Slow is better in terms of the technical characteristics (resolution, edge to edge sharpness, distortion, vignetting etc), or at least in terms of making superb performance easier to achieve. All else being equal, a 65mm f/4 lens will be better at f/4 than a 65mm f/1.4 lens at f/4. That is what I meant. Obviously lens speed is useful to have for depth of field and available light. I certainly don't think the M7II is the best camera to use for available light, and if that is your way of working, then the M8 is certainly a better choice. In terms of focus, well it focuses to 1m, which is not that much further than the .7m of most Leica lenses. I never really had an issue with depth of field on the Mamiya, but I generally use it for landscape and wide angles, so it is not usually what I am after with it. You can get shallow depth of field with the Mamiya though:
cf:

Anyway, I found some similar shots from the M8 and Mamiya. The Mamiya is much wider though, so it is not entirely comparable.
M8

M7II

What you can't see is that in the color version of the M8 shot there is really bad moire on the water...the glare makes the water look pink. It is one reason I converted it to black and white...

 

[figfoto]

I am also at the same crossroads. My walkabout kit is a M6 w/24mm and a Xpan

w/45&90mm which is great for 35mm work.

For MF [indoor/outdoor] I use a hasselblad 503 w/50mm which is great but you got

to have it on a tripod most of the time to get keepers.


I am currently leaning towards the M7ll instead of the M8 for the following reasons:

As much as I love the 24mm [ one of Leicas best in my opinion ], when compared

to the hassey 50mm at 11x14 and larger we all know the answer. But, try taking a

picture on the Brooklyn Bridge sunday afternoon with a hassey w/50mm. This is

where the M7ll may bridge the gap [no pun intended] for my style since it is a

handholdable MF camera.

The M8 like my M6 [as we all know with leica in general] is designed for low light,

johnny on the spot handheld photography that MF can't do. Unfortunatly the M8 in

it's current design

will make my favorite lens the 24mm a 35mm because of the 1.5 crop factor, let

alone sending it in [along with the other leica glass I have] to get 'coded' then buy

filters for them [IR factor]. :bang:

The M7ll w/43mm and 80mm can be purchased for approx. $ 3400 from one of the

advertisers [Popflash I believe] as compared to the M8 which is close to 6 grand.

The above M7ll outfit would cover my needs for a

handholdable MF for my style, [ I'll keep the Leica for museums and

cathedrals].

 

[Bob Michaels]

The Mamiya 7 w/ the 80mm and 50mm lenses has become my standard camera. It's always hand held as I am a documentary photographer, 99% of the time photographing strangers. It is as convenient as any 35mm I own and the 6x7 neg is worth it to me.

In low light, Delta 3200 pushed to a true e.i. of 3200 works great with the big neg. That gives you the equivalent of a 1.4 lens. And it hand holds at slow shutter speeds just like a 35mm RF. I have a photo in a current exhibit that I hand held at 1/15th. Now it's not as sharp as everything else but damn close. I have another in the same exhibit that I hand held at 1/30th with Delta 3200 at 3200 and it looks the same as every other photo.

Recently I had a portfolio review by a well know documentary photographer. The work was all around 8x10, about 1/3 shot 35mm with Zeiss glass and about 2/3 with the Mamiya 7. He picked up one 8x10 and said "Really good....pause....., but it's a shame that you didn't shoot this one with that medium format camera you use". And that was from an 8x10.

 

[Richard Marks]

A particularly interesting debate. I certainly do not doubt the quality of the mamiya 7II, but its proponents also should try the M8! As always, horses for courses!
Richard

 

[gdi]

A particularly interesting debate. I certainly do not doubt the quality of the mamiya 7II, but its proponents also should try the M8! As always, horses for courses!
Richard

I have both and, unfortunately the M8 can't replace the Mamiya for me (for B&W or color, of course). For the best image quality and large prints the 6x7 neg runs away from the trimmed down 35mm sensor. (No the M8 doesn't match 4x5! 🙄)

The M8 has great lenses and can be stuffed in my coat pocket, great with a 50 or 90 for portraits, and has tons of fast lenses available. Its a great body, but the sensor is getting noisy at 1250 and, for me, mostly unusable at 2500 for color. But you can get a Noctilux and never need to go above 320!

If I were the OP, I'd probably take both on a big trip to China - if I could find somewhere to stash that bloated M8 charger! 🙂