Tuomas Xi
Newbie
I'm interested in the 7 II, specifically for shooting modern architecture and cityscapes. I do quite a bit of architectural "tourism", and the relative lightness and compact size of the Mamiya would be convenient on trips. I do understand that large format cameras would be the best equipment for shooting architecture, but at the moment moving into all that feels like way too much. One step at a time...
Regards,
- Could anyone post or send links to photos of architecture or cityscapes shot with the 7 II and those two -or other- lenses?
- Any comments about using the 7 II for this purpose, other than the lack of camera movements (tilt,shift,rise etc.)?
- Opinions about the 7 II 's built-in viewfinder and the external viewfinders of the N43/N50 lenses? How would you compare them to , for example, Leica, Voigtländer Bessa or Zeiss Ikon viewfinders?
- Your experiences with the metering of 7 II?
Regards,
Niko
Established
I like the 7II´s viewfinder and rangefinder very much. The magnification is quite low, but otherwise (clarity, contrast, brightness) i would compare it to Leica quality (except Mamiya´s finder has warmer colours)! I never had problems focusing even with the 150mm lens.
There is a nice feature in the external viewfinder for 43mm (i guess the 50 has the same feature, but only own the 43). There´s a built in spirit level inside the viewfinder, which is visible inside the viewfinder at the same time you use it for composing. With this feature i´m comfortable shooting landscapes/architecture hand-holding the camera. Actually, it´s very rare that i carry a tripod with me when using the Mamiya. If i carry a tripod, then i am prepared to carry a larger format camera also. M7 is, IMO, at it´s best when it´s used for the same style of shooting that people normally use a smaller rangefinder camera for. Fast and light! Also, the camera can be hand-held for quite long exposures as well. The grip is well designed. I can manage 1/15 with the 80mm lens.
The meter is a sort of "wide-spot-meter". It´s accurate and quite useable, but you must keep in mind how it works. Just test your own camera to know the exact metering area.
Niko
There is a nice feature in the external viewfinder for 43mm (i guess the 50 has the same feature, but only own the 43). There´s a built in spirit level inside the viewfinder, which is visible inside the viewfinder at the same time you use it for composing. With this feature i´m comfortable shooting landscapes/architecture hand-holding the camera. Actually, it´s very rare that i carry a tripod with me when using the Mamiya. If i carry a tripod, then i am prepared to carry a larger format camera also. M7 is, IMO, at it´s best when it´s used for the same style of shooting that people normally use a smaller rangefinder camera for. Fast and light! Also, the camera can be hand-held for quite long exposures as well. The grip is well designed. I can manage 1/15 with the 80mm lens.
The meter is a sort of "wide-spot-meter". It´s accurate and quite useable, but you must keep in mind how it works. Just test your own camera to know the exact metering area.
Niko
Last edited:
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
I'm not sure whether a rangefinder with external viewfinder is the optimal combination for architecture, spirit level or otherwise. I would prefer to look through the lens, especially with wideangles, and to have grid lines in my viewfinder. For my personal taste rangefinders are suboptimal for architectural photography.
Are you sure you can't fit a compact 6x9 view camera in your budget?
Philipp
Are you sure you can't fit a compact 6x9 view camera in your budget?
Philipp
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
You might also look at some of the medium-format SLRs with built-in bellows and shift capabilities. The obvious choices would be the Rollei SL66 (those are really good and have become comparably cheap recently; 6x6 obviously), and the Fuji GX680, which is a 6x8 SLR, but has a built-in bellows with shift capabilities. There is a 50/f5.6 wideangle. The GX680 is a big camera, bigger than a Mamiya 7 obviously, but still portable (easier than a large format system probably).
(EDIT: As John pointed out, the SL66 has tilt, but not shift. The GX680 has both.)
Or you might take a look at the Hasselblad Arcbody. This is probably the most interesting and universal in compact medium-format cameras with tilt and shift capabilities.
(EDIT: As John pointed out, the SL66 has tilt, but not shift. The GX680 has both.)
Or you might take a look at the Hasselblad Arcbody. This is probably the most interesting and universal in compact medium-format cameras with tilt and shift capabilities.
Last edited:
john_s
Well-known
The SL66 is my favourite camera, but although it has tilt which is good for near/far landscape, it doesn't have shift which is what one would usually need most in architectural work.
For some architecture (not too high) one could use the Mamiya 7 with 43mm lens, but with the camera kept level and utilising the wide field to capture the top of a building. Avoiding converging verticals, and wasting a large part of the neg, of course, and strictly limited to buildings not too high. A shift lens would be better, but they are best on an SLR.
With all this complexity, a view camera starts looking like the easy solution.
Turtle
Veteran
If you have the budget for a full Mamiya 7 kit, consider an Ebony SW45 or similar. V small and light with some compact lenses and with a light tripod wont weigh much more. slower of course but much easier for architecture and mroe accurate framing etc. Keeping things vertical without movements and with external finders etc is not easy. My old RSW45 outfit went into a small orion trekker bag with 3 lenses and quickloads + meter!
Rgds
Rgds
oftheherd
Veteran
There are some things only movements will give you. That means 4x5 or a medium format system that has that. I got my 50mm lens from a pro who used a Mamiya Super Press 23 for architechture photos, but the moved to a Pentax. Don't remember why he made the move. If fact I met him when he was using the Pentax for a job where I also worked at the time. He had liked the Mamiya.
I think the Mamiya 7 will work with a wide angle lens. It should be surprisingly 35mm like in handling. I know my Super Press 23 is. The only advantage the Super Press would have would be the bellows back. However, you need to know that will help sometimes, but would probably require a tripod and ground glass focusing back as well. It won't cure all ills for architechture photography either. You really need to be able to move the front more than the back.
Bottom line is that I would say the 7 will do well, but look at other things before you make the leap, as they probably cost more than a 4x5 setup right now.
I think the Mamiya 7 will work with a wide angle lens. It should be surprisingly 35mm like in handling. I know my Super Press 23 is. The only advantage the Super Press would have would be the bellows back. However, you need to know that will help sometimes, but would probably require a tripod and ground glass focusing back as well. It won't cure all ills for architechture photography either. You really need to be able to move the front more than the back.
Bottom line is that I would say the 7 will do well, but look at other things before you make the leap, as they probably cost more than a 4x5 setup right now.
R
rpsawin
Guest
Another option to consider is either a Nikon or Canon body with a PC lens. I beleive both a 35mm & 85mm available. Nikon shows the 35mm pc lens in their current line up. You would have to find a used copy of the 85mm. I am not familar with the Canon line.
Best regards,
Bob
Update http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/Camera-Lenses/Manual/Perspective-Control.page
I guess it's the 35mm that would be used now.
Best regards,
Bob
Update http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/Camera-Lenses/Manual/Perspective-Control.page
I guess it's the 35mm that would be used now.
Last edited by a moderator:
john_s
Well-known
charjohncarter
Veteran
Learn to use the SKEW feature on PS.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Won't do the job, firstly it's tedious to do this precisely manually, secondly this works if the camera is skewed only on one axis while the other ones are perfectly aligned (which almost never is the case, or you have to do this once for every axis which is difficult at best), thirdly you'll lose some data horizontally which you may or may not want, fourthly you'll end up with distorted storey heights in the final image because skewing doesn't account for perspectivic distortion.
If you want to do this digitally, instead of using the relatively primitive skewing functions, better learn to use some software like Hugin that allows for precise perspectivic correction along all three camera axes. You'll still lose some picture quality to interpolation (well from I guess this will do the job for most of us hobbyists). And you'll still lose some of the image width because you have to crop the trapezoid output image. You can always take more than one shot and stitch them with Hugin, of course.
And then there are the people who don't want to work digitally.
Philipp
charjohncarter
Veteran
I'll look into it but I don't find SKEW that big of a mess.
chut
Luceat Lux Vestra
Tuomas, I think it depends on how you want your architecture photos to look.
The Australian architect, Harry Seidler published a book called The Grand Tour, where he used a Leica M exclusively for several decades. While the photography isn't of the highest caliber, it illustrates what you can do with such a tool.
Similarly, I find that I have my Leica M with me when I do architectural tourism and so I tend to use it most often. I have a Mamiya 7II as well, but I only have the 80 mm lens so far. I plan on getting a 50 sometime soon.
To produce 'proper' architectural photography, I imagine you would need to go LF and have all the movements. But I've sort of developed a street/architecture style and find that I like the images, even if the lines are not all vertically parallel. Here are some photos that I've taken with an M:
The Australian architect, Harry Seidler published a book called The Grand Tour, where he used a Leica M exclusively for several decades. While the photography isn't of the highest caliber, it illustrates what you can do with such a tool.
Similarly, I find that I have my Leica M with me when I do architectural tourism and so I tend to use it most often. I have a Mamiya 7II as well, but I only have the 80 mm lens so far. I plan on getting a 50 sometime soon.
To produce 'proper' architectural photography, I imagine you would need to go LF and have all the movements. But I've sort of developed a street/architecture style and find that I like the images, even if the lines are not all vertically parallel. Here are some photos that I've taken with an M:
katgut@earthlink.net
Established
Is #3 the Sundial Bridge in Redding?
chut
Luceat Lux Vestra
Yes it is, designed by the Spanish architect/engineer Santiago Calatrava.
Debusti Paolo
Well-known
Tuomas,I had the same problem:here the solution:
-a bronica rf645 with 3 lenses and flash (high quality,smaller than mamiya 7,better VF than Leica,Great meter,more shot per film vs mamiya with little difference on neg size,great ergonomics,full auto flash)
-a 903swc with 2 a12 backs (maybe i'll buy a 41050 ground glass)
I hope it helps
-a bronica rf645 with 3 lenses and flash (high quality,smaller than mamiya 7,better VF than Leica,Great meter,more shot per film vs mamiya with little difference on neg size,great ergonomics,full auto flash)
-a 903swc with 2 a12 backs (maybe i'll buy a 41050 ground glass)
I hope it helps