Mamiya cameras RIP ?

As a side note, www.mamiya.com is back up and running

Pavel, hehe^^

Peter seems like I have hit a nerve, no I have not owned an H1 but have used them and personally wouldnt waste my money on one for the reasons stated and I stand by every last word and still do after seeing your pictures which prove sweet FA. If you like your camera then thats fine but do not try and tell me that my reasons for not liking it are not valid. As for digital backs yes they are all made for the H1 but also for Contax and Mamiya, seeing that Contax is no longer it is obvious that the volume sales will now be Hassy and Mamiya but still does not make them 'better'. As a Hasselblad user for the last 20 years I would haved loved the H1 to be part of my kit but it never will be and I'm happy that I had as much experience with your camera as I have without wasting any money buying one.

I definately agree with Gary. The Ergonomics on the H1 are really poor. I hate all the LCD and menus that you have to flip through. The Contax 645 is much more direct and intuitive, and faster. The build quality of the Fuji lenses are no match for the Zeiss lenses, and the manual focus on them IS sloppy compared the Zeiss Contax lens. Further the Autofocus of the H1 may be a little faster -- due to it being introduced a good 5 years after the Contax and being able to take advantage of subsequent developments in technology -- but its not THAT much faster, and if you're not doing sports its not a big deal at all, or if you prefer MF, which is where the Contax is clearly superior. The H1 may have a faster flash sync speed, but the Contax has a faster top shutter speed (1/4000 vs. only 1/800 on the H1). Nice portraits, but you're not going to tell me you can ascertain the qualities of the Fuji lens relative to the superior Zeiss lens on the basis of a small, compressed 680x623 pixel jpeg image over the web, are you? It produces an acceptable image for the web -- what an accomplishment! The H1 viewfinder may be marginally bigger -- nice, but not a big deal, but the Zeiss lenses are faster (as well as having better color, contrast, tonal range, sharpness, out of focus rendition), and that IS a big deal. And every digital back manufacturer makes digital backs for the Contax 645 -- and plans to continue to do so. It's great that you're a fan of the H1 -- but it's far from a superior camera, just overpriced. People swear by Bronica, too. It's a shame, the H1, Hasselblad's only current product, abandoned the company's biggest selling feature -- Zeiss lenses -- and the camera suffers accordingly.

Peter,

Examples of my images, please go to www.gettyimages.com and search under 'yeowell' in creative section. Not necessarily examples of bokeh persee but all Zeiss glass.

Thankyou Peter!

 

No I don't want to talk about battery usage on the Contax cos it's bad, even worse with 220 inserts, but the battery grip helps with AA's and I also use the external battery pack for cold climates. Last year I was shooting in Bryce Canyon in winter without the external battery pack and had some battery 'issues' and cursed not having my Blad kit with me,in Europe I tend to take both systems.

 

Regards, Gary.

Gary- Nice images. Lot's of interesting images of Istanbul and I particularly like the ones of Scotland.

 

Battery life on the Contax isn't great (manual focus takes less juice), but just carry an extra batttery or two. They are light and don't take up much space. Or add the AA in the holder. I also understand that later Contax 645's have better battery life.

 

There is one other feature for the Contax 645 worth noting. it has an outstanding bellows for macro work. Not only is it built like a tank (with automatic aperture and metering intact), it also has tilt and shift capabilities.

 

The Contax 645 isn't perfect but it certainly has the best combination of features and capabilties for me, with the lenses being an important draw. I can tell you, however, that there is one thing the Contax 645 sorely lacked -- effective marketing and management.

Mamiya.com is back up again. The new 645afdII has been released. I guess that's the reason the site was down.

 

BTW, Jap glass rules. Many years ago here in S'pore, most photographers (amateur & pro) were obsessed with Zeiss & Leica glass because of their 'so called' sharpness and contrast, but at competitions and salons, the winners and medal winners were 90% Nikon and Canon shots.

 

Almost any brand of glass is better than most photographers.

If you guys are shooting your Contax 645's in manual focus mode and like the Zeiss glass, then you will find the H1 with the V System lenses and adapter even nicer.

 

Personally, I had a C645 for about 2 years, I sold it for a number of reasons including that I found the Kyocera/Zeiss lenses to be not as sharp as my V System Zeiss/Hassy lenses. The autfocus was kludgy and the mirror slap was horrific.

 

I regularly shoot a Hassy Flexbody with CFE glass as well as an H1. In reality I find little difference between the images. But then again I shoot b/w and donlt see the color issues.

 

Then again my 903SWC blows them all away. Go figure.

<i> quote: "Then again my 903SWC blows them all away."</i><p>

 

It would -- at that focal length. It's basically the Zeiss 38mm Biogon with a film back. The Biogon is a fantastic and legendary lens. While the Zeiss 35mm Distagon for the Contax 645 would be the next best thing -- it's hard to top the Biogon. But as I noted above, the attraction of this Hassy like the rest of V system is the Zeiss lens (the 903SWC body being little more than a simple box for the lens).

<p>

Interesting that you find the Zeiss lenses for Hasselblad V to be sharper" than the Zeiss lenses for the Contax 645. The lenses are quite comparable right down the line. The Zeiss Contax lenses are better in some cases (e.g., 140mm, 120mm Makro), the Zeiss Hassy V lenses in some cases (e.g., the 350mm SA -- although probably because it is a full stop slower than the Contax 350mm), and in some cases its a toss up (e.g., the 80mm Contax at F2.0 is sharper in the Center but slightly less sharp at the edges than the Hassy V 80mm at F2.8). Both sets of Zeiss lenses are, IMHO, superior to the Fuji lenses for the H1.

<p>

All the Hassy V lenses also fit on the Contax 645 with an adapter -- so you have access to all those lenses with the Contax as well.

<p>

I'll be the second person on this thread to post that I found the Contax 645 to have less mirror slap than the Hassy H1. In fact, it seems to me that mirror slap -- and vibration in general -- is very well controlled on the Contax 645. It is hardly, in any sense of the word, "horrific". The Hassy V system cameras are alot worse, as was a Rollei 6000 series I had for a while. We can't be talking about the same camera. There are alot of modern 35mm SLR's that have more mirror slap and vibration than the Contax 645.

"Mirror slap horrific" on Contax???? Its got to be the smoothest shutter/mirror system of any medium format slr, are you sure all your foam dampeners had not perished? The H1 is very much worse and the 505CW which I use is worse still. I would also not agree that all the 'V' lenses are better than the Contax, I have 7 'V' lenses and 6 Contax lenses and each has its jewels but overall about equal. Regarding the Hass superwide I would agree that it's superb, having owned at least 3 versions but the new 'V' 40CFE IF that I now own is at least as sharp overall and sharper in the centre but more importantly has no visible light loss out to the corners, unlike the Biogon, however distortion is worse.

Mamiya is not going out of business. They just introduced a new camera the 645AFD2 and the ZD is on the way.

 

I called the tech department last week with a question and they told me they are changing ISP's and that is way teh web sites were down (they are up again now)

 

--Fred Becker

On the subject of Mamiya versus Hasselblad digitals, each camera will find their niche customers. Like their film cameras, you will see a majority using Mamiya digitals simply because it's a lot cheaper than Hasselblad's H1. H1 is $20,000+ for a basic kit. I don't see your typical medium format user are going to justify a camera at that price. However, I can see some top fashion/commercial/portrait photographers in NYC being able to afford (and justify) such a camera.

 

On quality comparison, I don't think most people will notice the difference when you throw in such factors like style of photography, digital editing, printing, etc.