leica > mamiya

"why don't you keep the m4?"
because I'm not into 35mm negatives. There's not enough information for me. Color looks bad in my opinion too and I like doing color. Im not sentimental about cameras at all. I've only been doing this for like 2 years, Im still trying to find something I am comfortable with. I've gotten the highest end digital kit you can get and I hated it, so digital is off the list, back to film. 35mm is great but the negatives are too small, so 35mm is off. I love LF negatives but it isn't easy to carry around, so MF is a bingo! (inglorious basterds?)

Anyways, I saved up a bunch of money from 3 jobs for an entire year when I was 17 so I am just trying to find something to get happy with with that money. The Leica is rad, no doubt, but 35mm, to me, is snapshotty.
 
sanmich said:
Most poster seem to say that for what their type of work, MF is like 35mm, just better.
For quickly moving, fast pace PJ style, nothing beats 35mm, with its small size, fast glass and high autonomy (well, please don't compare to digital 🙂).
IMHO, they are kings in different areas.
I think it's usefull to have both, but if I have to chose only one, it would be 35mm...
just my 2 shekels
Click to expand...


Absolutely agree with this... for me they are each for different purposes, and the Mamiya RF - although better than a comparable SLR - is not a fast pace , PJ style camera. To me, the Mamiya and Leica are complements without much overlap ...the bigger format wont necessarily make the photo any better
 
And I don't disagree with you either. Im not looking for a camera that will make me the next nachtwey. I prefer to be super picky and take one frame instead of a burst of frames of the same thing. The size of the negative improves the quality a lot which is what I am looking for. The composition and color work is my own skill that will be honed with time and comfort

edit: and holy **** your photos are good ^^
 
Just two days ago I received a Bronica RF645 to play with for a couple of days. I usually only take photos at night, using a Leica, fast lenses and 400ISO film as standard. The maximum aperture of f/4.0 is quite limiting but the camera is very heavy and I have tried a couple of shots at 1/20s since I received the camera. I also have used my Rolleiflex occasionally at night with 1600ISO film and managed some OK shots but focusing was a big problem for me.

Since I like the square format a lot, a Mamiya 6 or better 7 is still tempting for me .... 🙂
 
A couple of questions about your "style of shooting"- Are you referring mainly to rangefinder focusing, or the aspects of the style of leica shooting more directly related to small size and/or sneakiness? Keep in mind that while it does rangefinder focus, it handles more like a pro SLR with motor drive, because of its size. It is not a small camera. If you are looking for a small size with medium format, consider either the Bessa III or a well-CLA'ed older folder, or a TLR like a Rolleiflex. If you sold your Leica and lens, you could easily afford a really nice Rolleiflex with a 2.8 Planar, with build quality comparable to your Leica, and an image quality to size ratio that MIGHT be unmatched in medium format.
 
rphenning said:
And I don't disagree with you either. Im not looking for a camera that will make me the next nachtwey. I prefer to be super picky and take one frame instead of a burst of frames of the same thing. The size of the negative improves the quality a lot which is what I am looking for. The composition and color work is my own skill that will be honed with time and comfort

edit: and holy **** your photos are good ^^
Click to expand...

You can be super picky, hyper picky, mega picky if you are after static subjects.
For dynamic subjects, shooting with a larger format and shorter autonomy will either bring you lots of fustration, or I'll have to salute the new genius of photography that is able, in one shot alone to grab exactly the right movement at the right moment.
Even HCB burned a lot of film, and I'm sure you could argue that his portraits could have been better in 4x5.
Or not...
Again, sometimes a large neg is completely irrelevant.
That being said, if YOUR type of photography requires it, well by all means....
But MF is not necessarily better than 35mm. To each task its tools. No magic bullet, sorry...
 
Not looking for a magic bullet, no worries. Just looking to get comfortable with something. I think each person (not to sound vain, I'm just a kid who likes photos, but anyways) has their preference based on what they are comfortable with physically and with what the return is. In the case of cameras, I am comfortable with a big obvious camera with me, and I prefer the look of big film negs over digital or 35mm. If I wanted to shoot 35mm I would just get a 5d II and be done with it. Or build an 8x10 point and shoot like frank said I should do.
 
rphenning said:
Not looking for a magic bullet, no worries. Just looking to get comfortable with something. I think each person (not to sound vain, I'm just a kid who likes photos, but anyways) has their preference based on what they are comfortable with physically and with what the return is. In the case of cameras, I am comfortable with a big obvious camera with me, and I prefer the look of big film negs over digital or 35mm. If I wanted to shoot 35mm I would just get a 5d II and be done with it. Or build an 8x10 point and shoot like frank said I should do.
Click to expand...

if you are after the mamiya 7 i doubt you will be disappointed. i happen to shoot a lot of dynamic subject matter and have little problem with the 7. it is an excellent documentary camera in my books.

it is not really that big. compared to a 1d or d3 it's downright miniscule!
 
Sory for the sarcastic tone.
I mean that you seem to dismiss the thought that 35mm is a viable option, and a good tool, which, IMHO, is a mistake.
 
I spent a year trying different medium format camera's. The Mamiya 6, was the one that I kept. I like the square negatives, and the lenses are something rather special. The 150 is my least used lens, the 75mm I use for the majority of street shots, and impromptu candid's. I think you should keep your M4, the 2 really compliment each other, I have the M4-P, and with the 40mm Nokton I would never dream of parting with it - then again the M4-P is a modestly priced camera, and the Nokton Classic is not that expensive either, so unless it's a financial burden to have both, I say keep them both.

I would totally recommend the Mamiya 6 over the 7. It's just a cooler camera. I am sure Mamiya 7's would argue the same, but my hero's shot 6x6 and for medium format, in my opinion, that's a signature negative.
 
sanmich said:
Sory for the sarcastic tone.
I mean that you seem to dismiss the thought that 35mm is a viable option, and a good tool, which, IMHO, is a mistake.
Click to expand...

nah no need to apologize. I get what you are saying, 35mm is definitely a solid tool for photography. I'm just exploring what I think what would work better for my style of shooting.

And that is good to know about the size. I had a 1d3 and that think was practical joke big.
 
"It is more important to click with people than to click the shutter!". Alfred Eisenstaedt

The camera is not that important after all. You know...

But if you are on a budget, lots of detail has to be taken under considerations like price, portability, system expendability. If you can only afford one camera at this time... I would buy every camera listed in this thread if money wasn't such a big deal.

I chose rolleiflex because I don't need a complexe system and for the size weight and silence. Your needs may differ!

Pentax 6x7 should be good for you I think, because there are marvelous lenses and the cam look big and vintage! I have saw youngters shooting with this big camera and they looked so cool!

Mamiya 6 can be an excellent system but I find it a little paradoxal. While you have the nice large negs, you cannot look at the drawing of the DOF like the big chambers and the SLR's.
But I dream to have one some time in the future!

If you buy used at a reasonnable price you will have no problem selling it to try other system!

The rolleicord advice was to access the goodness of the system for not too much.

Maybe even an hasseblad system would be good for you... You only knows!
 
Last edited:
Image quality, build quality

Image quality, build quality

You'll certainly appreciate medium format image quality..especially on prints over 8x10. I have some really nice 16x20's that make me smile from a Contax G, but the reality is bigger is better if you are making prints. I shot commercially for a while and we ever used 35mm. 120 was our portable, people format.

I shot a lot if film with an RZ 67. I traded my Hasselblads for a mamiya RZ67 at one point. We always cropped the 6x6 so the RZ gave me bigger film and the lenses were great. The shutter was electronic and I also got tired of spending a fortune to CLA the blads every couple years. The RZ felt awful after the blad. I love that "chiseled out of a piece of swiss titanium" feel. But never had anything break on the RZ and put thousands of rolls of film through it. Based on that I'm in the "feels plasticky but works great" camp when it comes to Mamiya
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LLR0P
Unusual Strap Lugs and Model Number on My Mamiya 7 — Need Help Identifying
Replies
5
Views
202
Johngwill
Johngwill
D
Put to Use a Mamiya 6 Engineering Sample Lens
Replies
4
Views
413
OlivierAOP
OlivierAOP
S
Odd/Interesting Mamiya 7 low-battery behavior
Replies
0
Views
231
Steve Goldstein
S
S
A problem on Mamiya-6
Replies
3
Views
621
Stargazer63
S
S
Mamiya 6 vs Konica Pearl 3
Replies
11
Views
1K
Stargazer63
S
Back
Top Bottom