Which camera: Pentax 645n or Mamiya 645 afd?

<p>(My first post!)<br>

I would like to have a medium format camera with auto-exposture and auto-focus. It is very confusing for me, the Pentax 645n is very tempting but I do not like the lenses being really expensive at the moment. But I also hear that the Mamiya auto-focus is less capable in comparison?<br>

How about the glass in both systems? Any difference in performance?<br>

Cheers!!<br>

Mohamed</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I'm curious why the need for an AF/ AE MF camera? MF is usually not used for subjects that move too fast. Focusing and setting the exposure can usually be done easy enough manually. That said. MF is more difficult to focus than say 35mm due to the shallower depth of field. Also the focus speed of the MF camera's is noticeably slower than an DSLR or a 35mm SLR.</p>

<p>The AF can be helpful in some cases. What are you planning to shoot?<br /> I've shot wedding with both of these systems and I never saw any differences in lens quality. If you focus carefully I doubt you will either. Both are very capable professional cameras. I've routinely made 30 and 40 inch prints from these 645 negs too.</p>

<p>An outlier here would be the much pricier Contax 645 AF cameras and lenses. Their lenses seem to be a bit "snappier", (that combination of contrast and sharpness).</p>

<p>The last thing would be to suggest any of the manual focus 645 cameras (Bronica, Pentax, Mamiya). But only because of their lower prices. These are all great camera systems too</p>

<p>The Pentax 645N (actually I had the NII, but there is little difference; both are much better than the Pentax 645) was one of my all-time favorite cameras. If I were still using film, I would still have the camera. With the introduction of the Pentax 645D, prices on Pentax 645 A and FA lenses did go up, sometimes considerably. I've never used the Mamiya, but I can heartedly support the Pentax 645N or 645NII if you think you can afford the lenses (most are excellent, but the 35-55 FA is terribly expensive and not as sharp, the 45mm does not have the best reputation, but the others are great).</p>

<p>New lenses for the 645D have been very slow to appear, Pentax has been bought by a new company, and I'd be somewhat concerned about their commitment to the 645D. Any decline there would lead to greater availability of the lenses (but that's purely speculation on my part).</p>

The Pentax 645N has better metering than the original P645, and a more intuitive and traditional control layout, even if you don't consider that it was the first MF having AF. With it's big bright viewfinder and interchangeable screens, my P645N happens to be really, really terrific for manually focusing. It uses any of the older less expensive lenses too, some of which are truly spectacular and exquisitely overbuilt like the SMC-A 35mm f/3.5 (reputedly equal to or better than anything else in it's range-- and my experience confirms.) The standard SMC-A 75mm f/2.8 (manual focus) is a standout, as are a half dozen other lenses that are still relatively cheap because they don't perform particularly well with the 645D. With the Pentax 67>645 adapter the Pentax 645s also use all the 67 series lenses at full metering aperture. Considering this, the Pentax 645 system had the largest range of lenses of any brand. (Admittedly many Pentax lenses were designed and produced long before digital sensors were contemplated. But used with film none are likely to be slouches.)

<p>I have the Pentax 645N and with 5 different lenses, the sharpness is not f a very good quality at all, why not going for a second hand hasselblad, a camera like the 500 C/M is found at very good price and the result of this camera is superb with its lenses and it is lighter in weight and can be used by hand held.</p>

<p>Thanks guys for all your valuable feedback!<br>

I'd like to photograph my kid but found that manual exposure metering is a bit slow. Manual focus does not bother me much but it is metering that does, especially I am into using slide film which has to get the right amount of light. BW is forgiving to exposure errors due to it latitude as you know so no problems there. It is the color slide film.<br>

I wish if I could just get extra lenses for my Hasselblad 500 c/m and get over that AE thing but...</p>

<p>one of the nice things about the AFD is the ability to use interchangeable backs which the 645n does not. Because of this, the AFd will take digital backs if you wish to go that way in the future. There are good lenses in both arsenals. Personally, I think Mamiya's metering is better. Neither of them have AF like a good 35mm camera. It is similar in speed to early 35mm AF usage. </p>

<p>I had manual M645 1000s bodies for years, and then when I was ready to buy a particular digital back, I bought the digiback, a Mamiya 645AFD, an AF 55-100 zoom, and a 645AF film back. Some of what I do with this setup is what you want to do ("photograph my kid"), so I can confirm that it does focus fast enough (AF, or MF with focus confirmation), and it does meter accurately: although I haven't put slide film through it yet, most of my digital shots need no eV correction in post processing.</p>

<p>In addition to auto-exposure and auto-focus, one other feature makes a big difference to the "photograph my kid" genre: the built-in motor drive. With the AFD, there's one motor in the body to cock the shutter, and separate film advance motors in the film backs themselves.</p>

 

<p >The Pentax 645N would also be great I'm sure, having all these features too, but my existing investment in fast Mamiya glass ruled it out for me, and its fixed back rules out digital upgrades for everyone. However it probably makes a great film-shooting companion/backup for those fortunate enough to have a Pentax 645D.</p>

<p > </p>

<p>But a medium format single lens reflex camera is not going to be the ideal instrument for photographing fast-moving little kids no matter how fast the auto-focus or how easy it is to manually focus. The handicap is a huge shutter lag inherent in that big swinging mirror, on the order of a 1/4 second (250ms).<br>

In 35mm film SLRs and dSLRs, it's much much faster, with the fastest (swinging mirror ones) being below 40ms. That's a factor of 6x more shutter lag (which I'll venture makes catching peak-of-the-action moments exponentially easier, not just 6x easier.)<br>

A 2-1/4 Twin Lens Reflex has an instantaneous shutter, however. Have you considered one of these? Consider as well that for candids and for action, AF is often over-rated or over-emphasized. Using fast film you can zone focus and stop down to get most everything in the frame from several feet to 15 feet away in reasonably sharp focus.</p>

<p>For us older folks, AF isn't for "JUST" fast moving subjects, It is for better and faster focusing with older eyes!!!<br>

Glasses or not.<br>

That is why I will get an AF MF camera.... Pentax 645NII most likely... as my 62 Years young birthday gift.</p>

<p>I'm 'only' 50, but my eyesight is such now that I am seriously considering ditching all my MF gear for AF. All except for one 4x5 and one TLR. My eyesight seems to change and require new prescriptions each year now. Pentax 645N is looking pretty good as a suitable compromise for the type of photography I like to do.</p>