Mamiya Standard 23 vs Hasselblad 500 C/M

Had the Super 23 then traded it in for the Universal which I use apt with instant film. Also have the 500cm and 503 cx. Use the 500 more but you can't beat 6x9 negs for some subjects.

Guess if you want to explore shooting sq with a mf slr, then the Hasselblad is it imo.
 
If you want a good travel camera I'd rather take a Mamiya 6 then a Hassy. The M6 is way easier to handle and more error proof then the Hassy. Hassy's break too you know, or have light leaks or jam.
 
charjohncarter said:
When you get everything sorted out you will love the 6x9 negative. I have only the 100mm and the 65mm, they were both very inexpensive. Here is the 65mm in a Mission, I think this was Tmax400:

6472198653_2ae7149347.jpg
Click to expand...

Outstanding picture! It conveys the feeling of vastness! I am now looking for a replacement 90/3.5 for mine since the lens is contaminated with fungi. The low vantage point gives me the idea that the camera was supported on a mini tripod. There is little or no distortion from the lens wide angle. The exposure is right on! Love this picture!
 
Thanks, that lens is really great. And for some reason not that expensive, maybe because of the f6.3. If you get one be sure to get a finder, the camera doesn't support that focal length. Like I said before the 6x9 is almost worth the extra weight and bulk. I use a 43mm (I think) to 49mm adapter and just leave it on for filters or a hood from a Pentax 28mm lens.
 
charjohncarter said:
Thanks, that lens is really great. And for some reason not that expensive, maybe because of the f6.3. If you get one be sure to get a finder, the camera doesn't support that focal length. Like I said before the 6x9 is almost worth the extra weight and bulk. I use a 43mm (I think) to 49mm adapter and just leave it on for filters or a hood from a Pentax 28mm lens.
Click to expand...

For the 150 my a Standard 23 comes with a view finder mask that slides in the window of the finder, today was the first time in 2'years since I bought it that I used it as the body light leak was solved masking the lens release button.

For the 50/6.3 including the auxiliary viewfinder, the prices hover at $600. It's still less expensive than a Hasselblad in eBay conditions. But that picture is so detailed it's amazing why on some forums they refer to the 65/6.3 as a poor lens.

The Hasselblad 501C with a C 50/4 and a 80/2.8, A12 back, weathered paint after years of professional use is $900...

So that's the situation...off to make a couple of pictures!
 
I don't really believe many of these lens gurus. They can always find something wrong with a lens (especially when they have never used it). I have a 55mm Pentax 6x7 SMC lens and it isn't any sharper than the 6x9 which has to cover a larger area than the 6x7.

I've heard the same about the 100mm f3.5, and I did a personal test with it versus the 105mm Pentax. I couldn't really see any difference with the way I process my negatives.

This is the 100mm f3.5 at the corner at f3.5:

5778028562_70765ab43e_o.jpg


This is the entire image at f3.5:

5777486409_39a08ca4c5.jpg
 
charjohncarter said:
I don't really believe many of these lens gurus. They can always find something wrong with a lens (especially when they have never used it). I have a 55mm Pentax 6x7 SMC lens and it isn't any sharper than the 6x9 which has to cover a larger area than the 6x7.

I've heard the same about the 100mm f3.5, and I did a personal test with it versus the 105mm Pentax. I couldn't really see any difference with the way I process my negatives.

This is the 100mm f3.5 at the corner at f3.5:

5778028562_70765ab43e_o.jpg


This is the entire image at f3.5:

5777486409_39a08ca4c5.jpg
Click to expand...

What film did you use? Have you seen pictures from Martin Chambi the Peruvian indigenist photographer that documented Cuzco? He used plate cameras that he carried with a burro.

The level of detail across and around the 8 X 10 inch plates is amazing despite the early lens construction and emulsions. Now imagine what a 1960's camera can do with the modern emulsions and the eye of a modern photographer like yourself!

I feel that the most used lens is going to be the 65/6.3 in my case too. I wish to receive good news this Tuesday when I will take the 90/3.5 for cleaning...

Well I found a 90/3.5 on eBay at $159 in Miami and a 100/3.5 on Japan at $99. I only have viewfinder masks for 90mm will it be quite different?

In the mean time I will read deeper into the Hasselblad Manual Third Edition...

High Regards for your Input and Photography,

Robert
 
I believe Don McCullin has used and may indeed still use the Mamiya Super23/Universal system. There was a photo of him with one floating around and I think he used it for his landscape work.
 
newsgrunt said:
I believe Don McCullin has used and may indeed still use the Mamiya Super23/Universal system. There was a photo of him with one floating around and I think he used it for his landscape work.
Click to expand...

Yes! I have it saved on you tube's watch later and you just made me remember!

It can only be seen on a PC though is not allowed for tablets!
 
RBruceCR said:
....
Thanks for the commentary about my test run in color, I discovered that the 90/3.5 is choked full of fungi! Indeed the pictures do not look like MF! I have to study more! I liked many of your pictures in your Flickr feed. I will have to study more on the medium! Tell me what you think about this series before finding the light leak through the lens release button:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/rbruce63/12258633363/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/rbruce63/12258618533/in/photostream/

Indeed comparing the Mamiya to the Hasselblad makes sense to me because I already have the Mamiya but have longed for a Hasselblad. But it's a moot discussion since or one has the money to spend or not.

To compound the issue, there are pristine looking Hasselblads at a steep price, overhauled 500CM's at a steep price, "rat" ones for the price of a Mamiya lens. To add to the issue I bought the Third Edition of The Mamiya Manual so it's like pouring salt on an open wound!

Regards,
Click to expand...

I don't know what else I could tell you. I'm not color, but b/w on film. Hard to tell you more about yours.
I went to check Mamiya 23 group on Flickr. I don't know...
I went to check 500 C/M and ... I don't know, either.
It looks like I'm going to keep my C33 and two blue doted lenses a bit longer.

Also with Ektar 100.

C33_Kodak_ektar100_June_2014530.JPG


They are at f8 1/250.

C33_Kodak_ektar100_June_2014534.JPG


Cheers!
 
RBruceCR said:
Hi, @oftheherd, will the screen only attachment fit my Standard 23 or do I need the screen-cut film holder as shown in the owners manual is the only one that will fit?

Thanks for the explanation of the usage of the screen, albeit the more stuff that I buy for my Standard 23 the less cash is left for the would be V series!

I didn't know that I could trick the old Mamiya into close up photography! That's quite a project!
Click to expand...

I have never seen a Standard in person. I have looked at ebay and it looks like it takes the same lenses and backs as the Universal and Super Press. In that case, you can use any of the ground glass backs. I think there were four; the gg only, the type that has the back fold up exposing the gg, and two types for single eye viewing, one I think with a magnifier.

I would suggest the type where the back comes up. They are more available and usually less expensive. The gg only is hard to find, even more so than the single eye types.

The 65mm lens is probably something like a 35mm lens on an 35mm camera. That was the first lens I got after I got the camera with a 100mm f/3.5. I really enjoyed it as it was wider than a normal lens, but I'm not a fan of 35mm lenses in 35mm cameras. Not wide enough. But when it is all you have, you like it.

The 50mm lens is more like a 24mm lens on a 35mm camera. If you want one, you just have to keep looking. I waited years for a 50mm lens to come along, and it was almost a give away. The 250mm was a long wait after that, and more expensive, but not what they seem to be going for now.

As to the 100mm f/2.8, I have never had one nor used one. Some people say they are very sharp. But the difference between f/3.5 and f/2.8 is negligible imho, and not worth the extra cost.

The extension tubes are easy enough to use. I think there are tables for them. There is also the possibility of using close up filters. Each solution for close ups has its advantages and disadvantages. Close up filters also have tables, but they are for use with 35mm cameras. I have never seen tables to use them on MF cameras. Regardless, for precise framing with either system, the gg will be necessary. I suppose you could use very careful measurements as well as calculations for exposure, and try to keep the camera pointed the way you want. I once did that hand-held with a Canonet just on a lark, and it worked surprisingly well with a close-up lens. I wouldn't want to try it with extension tubes.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
I don't know what else I could tell you. I'm not color, but b/w on film. Hard to tell you more about yours.
I went to check Mamiya 23 group on Flickr. I don't know...
I went to check 500 C/M and ... I don't know, either.
It looks like I'm going to keep my C33 and two blue doted lenses a bit longer.

Also with Ektar 100.

C33_Kodak_ektar100_June_2014530.JPG


They are at f8 1/250.

C33_Kodak_ektar100_June_2014534.JPG


Cheers!
Click to expand...
I enjoy very much the second picture but it amazes me the shallow depth of field despite the bright day!

It seems that blue dots are synonymous of modern multicoated lens in Mamiya. My 150/5.6 is a blue dot, I saw a blue dot 65/6.3 Sekor for press camera on Flickr the other day.

I even used my blue dot 150/5.6 yesterday! I hope to have soon the results and I hope they look proper of the medium format genera.
 
oftheherd said:
I have never seen a Standard in person. I have looked at ebay and it looks like it takes the same lenses and backs as the Universal and Super Press. In that case, you can use any of the ground glass backs. I think there were four; the gg only, the type that has the back fold up exposing the gg, and two types for single eye viewing, one I think with a magnifier.

I would suggest the type where the back comes up. They are more available and usually less expensive. The gg only is hard to find, even more so than the single eye types.

The 65mm lens is probably something like a 35mm lens on an 35mm camera. That was the first lens I got after I got the camera with a 100mm f/3.5. I really enjoyed it as it was wider than a normal lens, but I'm not a fan of 35mm lenses in 35mm cameras. Not wide enough. But when it is all you have, you like it.

The 50mm lens is more like a 24mm lens on a 35mm camera. If you want one, you just have to keep looking. I waited years for a 50mm lens to come along, and it was almost a give away. The 250mm was a long wait after that, and more expensive, but not what they seem to be going for now.

As to the 100mm f/2.8, I have never had one nor used one. Some people say they are very sharp. But the difference between f/3.5 and f/2.8 is negligible imho, and not worth the extra cost.

The extension tubes are easy enough to use. I think there are tables for them. There is also the possibility of using close up filters. Each solution for close ups has its advantages and disadvantages. Close up filters also have tables, but they are for use with 35mm cameras. I have never seen tables to use them on MF cameras. Regardless, for precise framing with either system, the gg will be necessary. I suppose you could use very careful measurements as well as calculations for exposure, and try to keep the camera pointed the way you want. I once did that hand-held with a Canonet just on a lark, and it worked surprisingly well with a close-up lens. I wouldn't want to try it with extension tubes.
Click to expand...

Thank you very much for the lengthy explanation on the useage of the screens and your appreciation of the lenses for Mamiya 23. I believe that there is a difference in the backs for my Standard 23 and those of the Universal 23, as the second one can use a Polaroid film adaptor and mine not.

Thanks to @Charjohncarter I understood what the 23 means and it is the ratio of height to base 2:3.

I am now pondering on the repair or replacement of my 90/3.5 for another at $159 or for a 100/3.5 that I have no viewfinder mask to use it and make the picture fit correctly, however, there is the possibility of the ground glass with film holder for my camera.

It makes sense to stay in the constraints imposed by one's equipment and to learn to use it thoroughly!

By the way it's impossible to watch your pictures on this site.
What kind of Mamiya do you have Universal or Super?
 
RBruceCR said:
Thank you very much for the lengthy explanation on the useage of the screens and your appreciation of the lenses for Mamiya 23. I believe that there is a difference in the backs for my Standard 23 and those of the Universal 23, as the second one can use a Polaroid film adaptor and mine not.

...
Click to expand...

The Universal does indeed take polaroid, and of course the 600SE as well. The Universal needed an adapter for the Polaroid back. It might have been the same as for the roll film backs, but I don't remember for sure (I never owned either, nor saw either in person).

Mamiya made no Polaroid backs for the Super Press 23. I have seen some where people have cobbled together something to use Polaroid though. I don't know how well they actually worked.
 
Does anyone know that exact model of that Mamiya Press that Don McCullin shoots with ??

I watched this on tv and loved his life story, amazing.....!


Respect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom