M6 vs Mamiya 7ii

[hrryxgg]

how would the 2 differ in terms of image quality?

is the idea of med/large format film for folks that do large enlargements only?

really curious here.

thank you!

 

[Timmyjoe]

I would suspect, all things being equal (quality of lenses, both cameras in perfect mechanical condition, experience photographer at the helm), the image quality from the Mamiya 7ii would surpass that of the M6 if you are shooting B&W film. Besides just a much larger negative (higher resolution per given film emulsion) I think you would get a greater tonal range with the Mamiya and the medium format negative.

Best,
-Tim

 

[xenohip]

This question interests me these days, though more along the lines of tele-rolleiflex verses M6 with 75mm summarit, or pentax MX with 77mm limited.

It gets interesting when you consider an f2 lens on the M6 with slower film versus an f4 lens on the Mamiya 7ii with faster film.

Anybody compared side by side prints, at say 10x10 or 8x12, medium format portra 400 versus 35mm portra 160? How about same question with MF delta 400 vs 135 delta 100, or MF delta 3200 vs 135 delta 400?

More interested in those who have actually looked at side-by-side prints than blanket statements about medium format superiority, or 35mm artistic flexibility.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

IMO. Why quality of the image is always measured in the size of the prints is nothing but rhetorical question on "photography" forums which are dominated by gear-heads, but not photographers.

I googled Mamiya 7ii and it is nice thing. But for me the quality of picture comes with how I feel about moment captured in this picture. And to me the ability of camera to capture the moment is related to its size. Incompatibility of camera to capture the moment is very dependent on camera size and how fast focusing could be performed is related to the negative size. MF, LF shots are often weak to me because they have nothing, but static in them.

This is why I would ditch both M6 and Mamiya 7ii in favor of M7 (AE) and 35 Cron (tab focusing). But because I'm trying to be patriotic, I'm taking my chances with meterless ELC Ms. 🙂 Maybe it is wrong. Trying to get the right moment and exposure by same time is difficult without regular practice.

 

[BLKRCAT]

Are you comparing leica m6 vs mamiya 7 or mamiya 6 vs mamiya 7.. I've called a mamiya 6 an m6 also.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

🙄 In the Leica M Lenses and Images?

After realizing where it was posted I reached for my gearhead hat. Writing with this one on.

I was turned off from modern MF RF cameras made in Japan due to the total lack of the character in their lenses. In opposite, Leica M lenses are giving something else in the images. The quality of print with lens character. Every time I print from negatives taken with Summarit-M 35 2.5 I'm telling myself - see, even if Summilux 35 1.4 ELC is nowhere near to be affordable, this lens is heck a lot of the character lens. Even at f11 it brings some special rendering. And those made in Japan RF MF modern lenses seems to have none of it even at f2.8. IMO.

 

[Peter_S]

I did not own a Mamiya 7, but a Rolleiflex, Bessa III and now Bessa 667W. I have used M6 and M7s extensively. For pure IQ, the Bessas beat the Ms in all aspects (except character, see below)- the lenses are at least on-par (the Mamiya WAs and Bessa 55mm f/4.5 are arguably better than anything Leica produced in that focal length), the negatives much larger. I sold all M gear, too heavy for too small negatives.

The character of the lenses is another matter, however. I still use a Contax T3, its character I could not replace by a MF camera (and its small). Also - having only 12 or 10 shots per roll changes your approach to photography, for better or worse. More thinking, less spontaneity.

 

[Hatchetman]

Just assume you are looking at sharpness, resolution, etc., the Mamiya would destroy any 35mm in that regard. In terms of ability to take good photos, it probably depends on what you are trying to do.

 

[NaChase]

I have both. I like both. I couldn't tell you which is *better*, but I have used each one in similar circumstances to the other and they have performed admirably. My prints from the Mamiya are beautiful, then again, I have a huge 20x30 print taken with my M6 and a 35 Bigon with Rollei 25 and it's awesome.

 

[benlees]

35mm will show more grain per size of enlargement. Certainly not a bad thing. Lots of factors to consider: "quality" of what ever you end up with is subjective and up to you.

I made 11x14 prints of the same scene; one from 35mm and one from 4x5. The 4x5 one is very crisp and clean, the 35mm is a bit grainy, but I prefer the 35mm version - in this case.

 

[DanskDynamit]

image quality of two film cameras??

 

[MCTuomey]

I would suspect, all things being equal (quality of lenses, both cameras in perfect mechanical condition, experience photographer at the helm), the image quality from the Mamiya 7ii would surpass that of the M6 if you are shooting B&W film. Besides just a much larger negative (higher resolution per given film emulsion) I think you would get a greater tonal range with the Mamiya and the medium format negative.

Best,
-Tim

+1 horses for courses

 

[mike rosenlof]

Are you comparing leica m6 vs mamiya 7 or mamiya 6 vs mamiya 7.. I've called a mamiya 6 an m6 also.

Yeah, I read this as Mamiya vs. Mamiya. If that's what you mean mamiya 6 vs. mamiya 7, differences are small, mostly related to your preference for square vs. rectangle.

If you compare 35mm to medium format, the differences are greater and a lot of factors come into play. The larger neg will show less grain at equal print sizes. The larger neg will have less depth of field for equal lens apertures. You might be willing to carry the smaller camera more often and get more pictures on film. You might slow down more with the bigger camera, with more thought your pictures *might* be more interesting. You might get more interesting candid photos with the small camera because it's more discrete. The list goes on.

 

[Rob-F]

No, it is posted under Leica M. I think the Op means Leica M6 vs. Mamiya 7II.

 

[mrisney]

I''ve had a M4-P with the Summilux 24 f1.4, then I wento to a full Contax G2 setup, even the Vario lens. But then I came into an XPan and Mamiya 6. I keep moving into systems but I rarely go back. I think once you use a Mamiya 6 or 7. It's hard to go back to 35mm film.

Leica was nice, but 5K tied up in one Leica lens, Oooofff. I sold that M4-P and that one lens and bought my entire Contax G2 and Mamiya 6 systems. Then I found out about the XPan at an estate sale, and I moved once again .... Oy Vey. I'd say go with the Mamiya 7, and if you like square - go Mamiya 6. My .02

 

[seakayaker1]

I do not believe you would regret using the Mamiya 7II. The medium format is exceptional and love the results when I use the camera. For day to day photography I find using the 35mm M more enjoyable, easy to carry and handle. So it is a toss up if you only can choose one to use.

I would recommend you get the Mamiya for the experience and make your decision after that. You can always turn it around for a 35mm without to much trouble.

Good luck with your decision.