Mamiya 7 Travel/Urban System-- 65+43 vs 80+50 revisited?

I am planning a "travel/urban system" consisting of 2 Mamiya 7 bodies

(the older grays--NOT the new II) and JUST 3 primes. Obviously the

150 and either the 80/50 or 65/43 combination will be it. I was

careful to go back and read most of the related comments in the

archives, but would still like to solicit comments from people who

have used both combinations with TWO camera bodies and because the 50

is fairly new.

I know the 43 is HIGHLY regarded, but am concerned that it is TOO

WIDE for general use, even as a third lens. Also, for people who do

use a pair of 7s, which primes do you prefer to leave mounted and

what camera bag do you use? I'm assuming it is 150/80 or 150/65, but

it could be 80/50 or 65/43 as well, although the latter seems

unlikely for me personally. And just how fast and easy is it to

change lenses on the M7? FWIW, my current travel system is a pair of

OM bodies and the Zuiko 100F2.0+50F1.2+28F2.0 and 21F3.5--along with

a Bogen 440 carbon fiber tripod, Acratech Ultimate QR Ball Head and

Fuji 69 GSWIII/65mm.

 

Thanks.

 

Alex

I guess I would opt for a completely different scheme. FWIW: you may want to seriously prioritize a 1 camera-2lens bag and see if you need the 2nd body and 3rd lens. While travelling and urbanizing, what are the majority of subjects photographed? What are your favorite FOV lenses currently? I've done the same thing with a Bessa 35 bag. 1 body & 2 lenses seem to account for 80% of my slides. IF I bring the 2nd body + ultra wide, I may use it, but not frequently. Planning ahead may save you some headaches, but if you get the 2nd body, you will want all the lenses. Creating a working bag is a good idea, but if you load it up, it then becomes a fitness tool.

Alex, I have a Mamiya 6 I take with me just like a 35mm point and shoot. I only have one body many times I wish I had two because it takes just a little longer to change lenses with the dark slide configuration on the 6 witch is the same for the 7. If I could only take one lens it would be the 50mm. I've used it for scenics and medium close ups. I don't like the idea of the 43mm because it requires a second finder being attach to the 7. My second lens of choice is the 150mm it gets me closer and also alows me to have a shallow depth of field, portraits can be very nice with this. Rarely do I use my 75mm although it is always have in my bag it is a little faster stop wise. Hope this helps. Gordon

I travelled to India in 1999 with the Mamiya 7 and 80 and 43mm. I don't own the 50 and didn't own the 150 at the time. I also took along an OM4 with 50 and 85mm lenses. It is much slower to change lenses on the Mamiya, because of the dark slide, but also because you need to be much more careful, especially with the 43mm. The manual warns you to be careful when putting the 43mm on because it is possible to damage some of the connectors. Also, and obviously, even the though the M7 is a relatively light system, the Mamiya lenses are larger and heavier than the Zuikos, and its harder to change them on the run, so to speak.

Fyi: With regards to Gordon response on the Mamiya 6. I believe the 50 for the 6 is equiv to the 65 for the seven...

Alex,

<p>

If you plan to make images in 4:5 aspect ratio as your final goal,

then the following equivalences of focal length between 6x7 and 35mm

apply:

<p>

43mm .. 18mm<br>

50mm .. 21mm<br>

65mm .. 28mm<br>

80mm .. 35mm<br>

150mm . 65mm<p>

I've rounded off the focal lengths for 35mm (which obviously appear

in the right column) so that they would correspond to lengths for

which actual 35mm optics exist.

<p>

You might prefer a Mamiya 6 if you want some semblance of capability

for telephoto work, as 150mm for 6x6 is roughly like 85mm for 35mm format.

I would only get the 65mm lens in lieu of the 80mm lens if you

only have 2 lenses, whence the 65mm and 150mm would be a nice pair.

But if you are going to get a wider lens, either the 43 or 50, then

the 80mm lens would fit better between that and the 150mm lens.

<p>

Thus, it seems there are two decisions: get a 2-lens system or 3-lens system,

and if the latter, you need to decide between the 50mm and 43mm lenses.

<p>

For my own taste, neither Mamiya rangefinder system has enough telephoto

reach for urban/travel photography. Perhaps I'm a little shy with

some subjects, but if I travel with medium format, it's a C220F with

55mm, 80mm, and 180mm lenses. I could live with a mamiya 6 with

150mm lens if that lens focused close enough for a headshot, but

it doesn't (nor does the 150mm lens for a M7). I've also travelled with Rollei TLRs. Don't underestimate

the benefit of ground glass focusing with a waist-level finder when

you want to be unobtrusive. A waist-level finder also means you

can get away with a shorter (and thus lighter) tripod.

I travel with a Mamiya 7 with the 80 and the 43. I find the working distances with these to be reasonable for what I do, a mix of street and architectural photography. If you are goign to be working indoors, the 43 is especially useful.<p>

 

However, I often do street shots with the 43.<p>

 

<center>

<img src="http://www.spirer.com/images/2girls.jpg"><br>

<i>Two Girls, Oaxaca, M7 with 43mm lens, Copyright 1998 Jeff Spirer</i>

</center>

I currently use a Mamiya 6 MF with the 50 and 75 lenses. I have found this is all I need for a compact travel kit (I throw in a Leica minizoom point and shoot as well -- I use a medium sized PhotoRunner waist pack and it all fits great). I USED to have a second body and the 150 lens as well. I simply found the 150 lens too hard to focus to be practical, aside from the fact I found I rarely took it out of the bag in the first place. The two body system was just plain redundant -- I thought I'd have one loaded with color and one with B/W. Again, too much of a hassle in practice. The lenses are quite simple to change. I think you should figure out how wide you really want to go and how you really use the lenses you have (which one usually stays in bag, for instance). I've also found I tend to see and shoot wider in MF than I do in 35mm for some reason (maybe because rangefinder, maybe because square format -- who knows). I'd also suggest renting the kit and spending a weekend using the various lenses, whether you need or can use the auxilary viewfinders, etc.

Just a comment about the 35mm equivalent focal lengths posted recently. All that you need do with 6 x 7 cm lenses is half the focal length to give you a rough equivalent of 35mm format lenses. The focal lengths posted don't look right to my eyes at least. I don't own a Mamiya, but I do have for instance a Pentax 67 with a 45mm lense. No way on earth is that even close to an 18mm in 35mm camera terms.

 

I have a 17mm Tamron lense which I use on my Olympus OM4 ti camera. I took a few pictures last week in Glen Coe with that combination and the Pentax with 45 mm lense. The 17 mm lense has a much wider angle of view. In 6 x7 cm format I would need a 35 mm lense to get anything like the same angle of view. Just a pity that Pentax don't do a non- fisheye lense in this focal range.

 

I would tend to agree with the first reply in that less weight carried is far better all things considered. One body with two or three lenses would be much easier to carry around. I would certainly favour the 50 mm and 150 mm, both of which are particularly useful focal lengths. And for landscape images I am sure that the 43 mm would be a worthwhile additional lense. Not too sure about the 80 mm, it's a bit too in between. That's one thing that put me off this otherwise very fine camera, the complete lack of a normal standard lense in the 100 mm range.

 

I bought a Fuji GSW 690 instead and am very happy with the quality of the images that I can get from it. A cheaper option might be to add a 90 mm lense version of the Fuji in 6 x 7 cm format and just carry that along with the GSW version. Those two cameras would probably cover most things that you would want to photograph and at considerably less cost than the Mamiya 7 route that you are considering.

My comment on the Fuji rangefinders...<p>

 

The lenses are excellent. However, the ergonomics leave a lot to be desired for street and travel photography. I am a great believer that with modern optics, ergonomics is far more important than absolute lens quality. <p>

 

I took a Rollei and the Fuji to France (along with a 35mm rangefinder) and have never printed anything shot with the Fuji. I found it unwieldy, both for handholding and for longer exposures. I'd recommend trying before you buy, as I sold mine after the trip to France and bought a Mamiya 7. Take a look at <a href="http://www.spirer.com/">my web site</a> if you want to know that I know what I am talking about.

Allan,

<p>

if you half the 6x7 focal length, you'll get a rough approximation,

but not an accurate comparison. Many people make the mistake of

using the ratio of the diagonals of the formats as the ratio. If

you use this ratio, you'll find the focal lengths with equivalent

angle of view. But to do an apples-to-apples comparison, you need

to decide on an aspect ratio of the image.

<p>

Since the most common aspect ratio for making prints is 4:5,

I chose that for the calculations. If you make square prints, or

2:3 aspect ratio prints, you'll get different equivalences.

<p>

For 4:5, the largest usable rectangle in a 35mm frame is 24x30,

that is, 24x30 is the largest 4:5 aspect ratio rectangle that can

be fit inside (inscribed in is the technical geometric term) a 35mm frame.

6x7 is typically 56x68 and so I used 56mm as the length of the side,

but in fact, I should have used 54mm as 54x68 is the largest 4:5

aspect ratio rectangle. Thus the ratio is 54/24 = 9/4. A 43mm

lens for 6x7 thus can make the same 4:5 aspect ratio image as a

19mm lens for 35mm format (43 * 4/9 = 19.11111). Your 45mm lens

for a Pentax 67 is equivalent to a 20mm lens (45 * 4/9 = 20).

<p>

Perhaps you aren't used to looking at a 35mm viewfinder image with

the outer 3mm on each side ignored to get the same view? That's

the part that is cropped away when printing 4:5.

Personally, I prefer the 50/80 combination though I'd really suggest that you look carefully at which lenses you find give you the most satisfying results in your current travel kit.

 

While the 43mm is a stunning lens, it's just a little too wide for my tastes. It tends to get used in specialized situations, though I do use it more often when I'm shooting MF landscapes. One benefit to choosing the 50mm over the 43mm is that it's pretty easy to get used to using the 50mm without the auxiliary finder. Despite the M7's portability, I'd probably choose to own both of these lenses before I'd add a second body.

 

FWIW - I also tend to skip over the 150mm unless it's specifically called for by a situation. I find focus to be a bit too finicky to use for grab shots (though it provides absolutely tack sharp images when the focus is on).

 

Most of my shots (probably 80%) are made with either the 50mm or 80mm. I ALWAYS carry these two lenses, but often leave the 43mm, the 150mm or both at home. If I had to rank their usefulness (for my style and taste; YMMV) I'd say 50mm, 80mm, 150mm, 43mm. (I've never used the 65mm).

 

Good luck with your choice.

I shoot with the 7+lens around my neck, and a small Samsonite waistpack with my other two lenses, flash, close-up lens and 50mm viewfinder. I use the 50/80/150. When I was looking, the Samsonite had more space than bulkier packs with more padding - just right for the above gear (with added dividers). Changing lenses is quick enough for me. A quick turn and release of the darkslide turnkey (on the 7II) adds a couple seconds to the procedure. I use NHGII and shoot handheld.

 

Keith

I think it is very unlikely that you will find anyone who has used both the 80/50 and 65/43 combinations with one body never mind with two. Your questions are getting a bit too detailed and specific and a number of these things you'll probably have to find out after you've decided, not least because your photography will be different from others' and it doesn't much help you to know which lenses they leave attached, if any.

 

Changing a lens isn't quite as quick as an SLR, but it's not a life's work either. Remember that you have to close and then open the shutter curtain and if you're using the 50/43 there's a viewfinder to attach.

Thanks again for everyone who answered! Almost all replies were very informative. The surprising result is that my "plan" to dedicate a body to the 150, now seems unlikely. A careful scan of reviews and past posts suggest that in it's own way, the 150 is as "specialized" an optic as the 43--due to the difficulty of acieveing an accurate focus wide open. And I had planned/hoped to use the 150 wide open most of the time to avoid the 5 bladed diapram infuencing highlights. Also, a few have commented that the full viewfinder of the M7 was sufficient for the 50, allowing one to completely forego the viewfinder--something not possible with the 43. Hence, I now plan for an 80+50 system, whereby both these optics will stay on camera most of the time, with the 150 will be reserved for "special" occasions.By the way, I have NO intention of using any of Mamiya's lens shades. They are far too slow and fiddly in putting on and taking off, even though they are "perfect". I'll be using traditional rubber hoods for both speed and much greater protection against impacts.

 

Alex

You might want to reconsider your lens shade decision. Although I found them a bit awkward at first, once you get the hang of them, they are easy enough to get on and off and, reversed, can be stored on the lenses, with the caps on. They are also designed with a hole to minimize the amount of the bottom right of the frame which will be hidden by the shade when using the 80mm.

Mamiya 7 and a contax G2 completments each other very nicely.

So rather than carry 2 x M7 + 3 lenses, I'd vote for 1 x M7+80, then a Contax G2+21mm+90mm+flash setup.

 

Contax G2+90mm is small and very fast: F/2.8 vs. Mamiya's 150-F/4.5, TTL, AE, auto wind, auto focus (the AF problem of this is way overblown, I never had any problems with it). I can't say enough of G2. It's a phenomenal camera, and the lens!

 

Of course, unless you insist on MF.