Which of these is the most Leica like in use and image quality.

A friend is interested in MF and wanted to know what I thought of the range finders (he knows I use leica, R only right now, but what does he know). Who has used these systems and what were your impressions. The broinca is very interesting, selling for just over a grand with the 65mm lens.

Anyway, thanks as always.

-- Mark (acerview76eus@yahoo.com), March 07, 2002

Answers

Mark: I've used the Mamiya 7 RF. It's a 6x7, takes 120 or 220 film, handles well, takes excellent images and costs WAY TOO MUCH! I've never taken to 645's (Bronica, Pentax et. al.) as they don't seem all that much better than 35mm. The resale on these cameras is terrible, but you can pick up a used body and lens on eBay for half the price of new. $1300-1500 US. I know I'm gonna bite the bullet and sell mine and funnel the lousy return into Leica stuff. Much better investment. Plus, there aren't any Mamiya 7 user groups to jaw with on the net.

-- Ben hughes (ben@hughesbros.com), March 07, 2002.

The reason resale is so low is because most knowledgeable buyers are going to Robert White's web site and buying for something close to half US price. MAC prices are too high.

MAC runs a user's forum at the mamiya.com website. It's an incredibly useful forum since it is monitored by Mamiya techs and you don't get ten conflicting answers to each question.

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), March 07, 2002.

ben, i am in the same boat as you with a rollei 6008i. love the camera but have no real use for it anymore. been shocked at the resale value of these things. don't know why it is. i have been to the robert white site that jeff mentioned but don't remember the prices he is quoting now being available back when i bought mine (30 months ago).

john

-- john molloy (ballyscanlon@hotmail.com), March 07, 2002.

I've borrowed the Mamiya 7II with 65 and 80mm lenses on a few occasions. I used to own a Mamiya 6 way back. They're both very Leica-like in terms of both advantages and disadvantages. Handling is good and image quality is excellent.

But I already have a rangefinder, and I find that those times when I want to shoot MF also happen to be situations when I need multiple backs, Polaroid packs, 100% framing accuracy, close- focus capabilities, etc-- i.e. what the Mamiya 7II lacks.

The Mamiya is perhaps better reserved for those "in between" situations-- when the quick and quiet use of a rangefinder is needed but when it's impractical to carry a full suite of MF gear.

-- JM Woo (wooismyid@deletethis.yahoo.com), March 07, 2002.

John,

The low resale value for Rollei is also, at least partly, due to way cheaper price if you buy from UK or Hong Kong dealers. I recently bought a 6008i body kit with 90/4 Schneider lens costing me a total of $3,580 and I would have paid over $6,000 if bought from US source.

You go figure can I sell the stuff as used for more than $3,580?

-- Fred Lee (leefred@cadvision.com), March 07, 2002.

Mark- As I've noted before on this site, you pretty much have to do your own film developing and processing with MF film. You will be disappointed with the cost, the time, and the finished product, if you use B&W machine prints. I had a Fuji 690 III and can say it is one fine piece of equipment for the money. "The Texas Leica," as it were. I really enjoyed being able to sync at all speeds up to 1/500. If I were getting the big Fuji today, I'd go with the 670. What I would like to see Fuji do with this big camera, is make it in 6x6 and shrink it by 2cm in overall width. It might be possible to make it do both 6x6 & 645 in the same camera. The Fujinon lenses were excellent. What I'd really like, is a new film, in cannisters, like 35mm, so you could have the 6x45 format in horizontal mode. With such a film, 645 cameras would not have to be turned vertically to get a horizontal picture and the bodies could be considerably smaller. I think manufacturers are watching to see if digital obsoletes traditional film-based equipment. I'm not holding my breath, waiting for a new MF film format.

-- Frank Horn (owlhoot45@hotmail.com), March 07, 2002.

Well, the Mamiya 7 is a fine camera, but it is no Leica.

If you want medium format results, shoot TechPan and use a tripod with your Leica.

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.net), March 07, 2002.

I am very seriously thinking in selling all my Hasselblad stuff, and buy one of those MF RF cameras, interesting to read coments, Thanks

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), March 07, 2002.

Ben:

I've never taken to 645's (Bronica, Pentax et. al.) as they don't seem all that much better than 35mm.

You are just doing something different than me. 645 on a Blad is much better than 35 mm with a Leica [under conditions where I could use it]. Before the 645 there wasn't really a choice. Now there is.

The whole thing is a choice on what body will allow you to take the photo. I will try the Bronica and see how it works. It is much like the M7 solution that Leica has chosen.

Art

-- Art (AKarr90975@aol.com), March 07, 2002.

John, You may have bought your 6008i just before the price drop. Was 4000 for the kit then went to 2995. This really hurt resale. Robert White is about a third cheaper across the board on Rollei, but no US service. You would have to send to the UK which is not a problem.

-- Bob Haight (rhaigh5748@aol.com), March 07, 2002.

Thanks for the input so far. Art, I too have thought the Bronica RF may be the best choice for a rangefinder. Has anyone tried one?

I don't understand the 645 is to much like 35mm comment (I've heard that many times before). Using the short side of both formats, you are looking at about an 8.5x enlargment for 35 vs. a 4.7x enlargment for 645. Maybe size dosen't count in everything, but here it just may. To put it another way, it's the difference between climbing Mt Whitney in CA, USA (14,494ft) vs. Mt. Everest, Nepal-Tibet (29,028ft) i.e. Whitney is easier to climb and it's easier to get a great 8x10 from 645.

thanks,

-- Mark (acerview76eus@yahoo.com), March 07, 2002.

i have a m3 and both the fuji ga645 and the gw690. the ga645 is better for portrait work with it's vertical format and for when the kids are hanging off me and i have to work quickly. the gw 690 is great for landscapes due to the large size of the negative. neither feels like a leica, but they both can be found for under $1000 used. to me the primary advantage of a rangefinder in medium format as that they are smaller, lighter and easier to pack. most people dont casually throw their hasselblad in the trunk like they do with their 35's but with a range finder it is no big deal.

-- greg mason (gmason1661@aol.com), March 07, 2002.

I have a Mamiya 6. It's great. The only thing that keeps it from being as convenient as a 35mm RF is the 12 shots per roll of 120 and the slow lenses.

I love being able to shoot tri-x in 120 and get prints that look as good at 11x14 as ISO 50 film in 35mm.

-- Pete Su (psu_13@yahoo.com), March 07, 2002.

If you want medium format results, shoot TechPan and use a tripod with your Leica.

So would that make TechPan & a tripod with a medium format yield large format results?

-- jarrod connerty (jarrodconnerty@hotmail.com), March 07, 2002.

Yes! I have done that, put my old Mamiya 7 in a tripod and shot TechPan of the Fort Worth skyine. Then blew the thing up to 16x20. Stunning!!! Put a loupe on the print and see nothing but detail, detail detail!! Looked like a contact print from a view camera! Dang, I'm starting to miss the Mamiya.

One last thought, if you take the plunge to MF, get a 6x7 or 6x8 or 6x9. Might as well go for real estage. I don't think 645 is worth the jump if you already experience the quality of Leica.

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.net), March 07, 2002.

Dan:

it has been a while since I have done this intensively. I am doing it again. I have stuff from 35 mm to 8 x 10 and still have the equipment to do ti.

I have used Leica since my IIIF in 1960. Lenses are unique. Still, they don't match 645. Maybe the Bronica will; maybe not. I will see. It will be a fun trip. Just another scientific experiment for me. ;o )))

Art

-- Art (AKarr90975@aol.com), March 07, 2002.

My local photo dealer, who sells both Mamiya and Leica, took some Portra 160 film and shot the same church and steeple with an M6 with a 28/2.8 and the similar wide angle on a Mamiya 7. He enlarged both to 11X14, and asks you to identify which is which. Most people can't! If you take a loupe out, the 35mm print is obviously grainy, but there's resolution of detail in the grain (so to speak.) I, too, had a Fuji rangefinder, and agree the 6X7 is more useful. But the wide angle lens became a limitation. The problem with medium format (from my perspective) is how much you loose in lens speed, depth of field, and general handling. (For example, you can't get close enough for a tight head shot with the Mamiya and a 150mm lens.) My answer to what MF is most Leica-like isn't on your list. It's the Rolleiflex TLR. Solid German quality, simple, reliable, quiet, and my vote for the highest ratio of image quality to camera size and cost. Don't know why, but a cropped 11X14 from my 3.5F Planar Rollei looks better than a full frame from my Fuji GA645zi.

-- Phil Stiles (Stiles@metrocast.net), March 07, 2002.

I crop a 6x6 Rollie 3.5 Planar neg to blow it up to 20x24 even wide open and the results are amazing even with Arista 400asa. If the Bronica is close to that, than the Leica cant compete except in low light.As to tech pan the results are great if the lighting is right and you like the look of that film.I really only like tech pan with a higher resolution lens like a DR 50mm in bright light or perfect non contrasty light with high contrast lenses.Or portraits with a softer lens.It still would be a pain to enlarge a 35mm neg to 20x24...or 16x20 for that matter ...much easier with medium format or sheet film.

-- Emile de Leon (knightpeople@msn.com), March 07, 2002.

I have a Fuji GA645. I paid 46000 yen for it in Japan, second hand, having gone only about 20 rolls through it (there is a counter for total rolls). That's about USD 400 but I haven't seen that good a deal since. They mostly seem to go for around 65000 yen there (USD 550).

Wonderful little camera. I like the portrait orientation because normally most of my pictures tend to be horizontals.

But I agree, it is not a Leica. First of all, its all batteries, autofocus, auto wind etc. It makes quite a noise, especially when focusing. You could prefocus and then use as fixed focus with quite low noise as the winding is reasonably quiet.

The lens is great and it is very compact in size. I carry it in a half of a small Hadley with the other half reserved for a Leica or XPan, with two lenses.

I haven't used them, but I suppose the Mamiya 7 or Bronica 645 are closer to Leica than Fuji's 645's. 6x7 is bigger, but not that much bigger. In quality, there is a much bigger jump from 35 to 645 than there is from 645 to 67. And 66 just crops to 645.

Ilkka

-- Ilkka Kuusisto (ikuu65@hotmail.com), March 07, 2002.

Add another vote for the Mamiya 6 / 6MF. We use 2 (one 6 and one 6MF) on all our photo gigs. Lightweight (especially appreciated when mounted on a stroboframe with a Metz 60 CT-1, while carrying a battery pack with 2 spare batteries), easy to focus in dark reception halls (RF), and 6x6 (no need to flip the camera in the vertical position). Both Color and B/W prints look stunning, as long as you use a handheld meter (the built-in non-TTL meter is worthless). 16x20's are the norm for wedding portraits and I haven't had any complaints yet. On the other hand, my Nikon F4s auto-everything setup (for backup and inexpensive wedding packages) sometimes gives very questionable results, and is a much heavier setup. Eh...What can you do? My Leica M2/f2-summicron is my recreational camera. Sorry, but I can't use it's 1/50sec sync with 400 speed NPH for fill flash portraits at the beach, but it is my ideal out and about camera.

Oh yeah, the Mamiya 6/6MF is collapsible, so about 1 inch of the total lens length can go into the body for storage (like in a hip pouch).

Not a Leica, but definitely worth trying.

tk

-- TonyK (tk_1971@yahoo.com), March 07, 2002.

I've handled the Bronica when the rep dropped by......

The impression of quality (leica owners know this feeling well) is on par with the Mamiya IMO, and I like the vertical orientation better- 75% of my shots are vertical.

lenses available are the 45 and 65, giving 28mm and 40mm (35 equiv.) Hard to do portraits considering the 3-foot minumum. the 135 had problems early on, and a 105 is the 3rd, according to rumour.

viewfinder is ok; not bad, not an M3.

available light? get TMZ- the fastest lens is f/4.

all in all, the MFRF's usefullness can't be beat in the field, but they get smacked around attempting anything else. Not that it can't be done.......

-- Mike DeVoue (karma77@att.net), March 07, 2002.

I've handled the Bronica when the rep dropped by......

The impression of quality (leica owners know this feeling well) is on par with the Mamiya IMO, and I like the vertical orientation better- 75% of my shots are vertical.

lenses available are the 45 and 65, giving 28mm and 40mm (35 equiv.) Hard to do portraits considering the 3-foot minumum. the 135 had problems early on, and a 105 is the 3rd, according to rumour.

viewfinder is ok; not bad, not an M3.

available light? get TMZ- the fastest lens is f/4.

all in all, the MFRF's usefulness can't be beat in the field, but they get smacked around attempting anything else. Not that it can't be done.......

-- Mike DeVoue (karma77@att.net), March 07, 2002.

sorry about the double post.........

I forgot to mention that the Bronica is smaller and lighter than my F3hp+md4.

-- Mike DeVoue (karma77@att.net), March 07, 2002.

Mike, how does it compare in size to an M? Thanks for the post.

-- Mark (acerview76eus@yahoo.com), March 09, 2002.

The answer to the question is that a Mamiya 7II is very much like a Leica in terms of the viewfinder, as compared to a Contax G or an SLR, because the bright lines of the frame are inside the window, so that it is possible to see what is going on around the frame. With a Contax G, as with an SLR, what is seen is 90% or slightly more of the picture area. Some people think seeing more than the picture area is wonderful. But a talented photographer could use either approach and take excellent pictures.

In terms of use, metering on the Mamiya is automatic, not manual, unless you really want to work at it. One issue with the Mamiya is exactly where the meter is reading, because it is not a TTL system. However, whenever I have trusted the meter the pictures have been excellent.

And in terms of Leica-ness, the lenses are excellent.

If you want to take a lot of pictures on a roll, use 220 film. You don't need interchangeable backs, because with ten pictures on a roll of 120 film you're almost always near the end of a roll.

I also have a GA645 and I enjoyed using it, but the results cannot be compared with the Mamiya. Or I suppose they can be compared, and come up short.

Finally, in terms of sharpness and detail, there is no way a 35mm can compare to medium format, but: The issue is not the difference in sharpness exactly, because a properly stabilized 35mm is impressively sharp, and as I understand it, the 35mm lenses can certainly resolve many lines per mm or whatever is used as a choice to test sharpness. The point is that while the resolution for medium format is slightly and noticeably sharper, even with 8x10 prints, the big difference, and the reason for using medium format, is the richness and smoothness of tone and the absence of grain. The point made above about the detail verging into the grain of the film is exactly the point. With medium format, especially the Mamiya, the detail is there with incredible rich grainless color. With black and white the effect is also dramatic. A properly stabilized Mamiya provides awesome results.

The drawback of the Mamiya is the limited lens selection, but all of them are excellent, and the side effect is that your kit will be minimal. In theory then one would be less of a pack animal and more of a photographer. Also, the lenses do not focus very close. But if you want to do macro work, buy some other camera.

Like the Leica the camera may need occasional service on the rangefinder mechanism. If you don't like the idea of having to have the camera serviced, buy a Canon.

And finally, like the Leica, the Mamiya is overpriced. However, one can either buy the Mamiya on ebay or take a trip to Hong Kong (my choice). Hong Kong is also an excellent place to test out the camera.

I've never used a 6x7 or 6x9 Fuji, but they do not have internal meters, so the result is that picture taking is more laborious. I like the Mamiya, but it's not real good for baby pictures.

-- Richard Stone (richardslaw@yahoo.com), March 11, 2002.