Experiences with the Mamiya 7 and 43mm?

I have been using the Mamiya 6 for quite a while and I'm very pleased with it. Since I have a good opportunity to upgrade to the

Mamiya 7 I would like to hear some comments on the Mamiya 7

especially when using the 43mm lens. I would mostly use it for travel photography (mainly landscapes, sometimes cities).

 

<p>

 

I know the optics are very good, but I would like to know how useful it actually is in the field. For me the equivalent of a 24mm lens for 35mm would be the perfect lens, so I'm wondering if the 43mm is not just a bit too wide.

 

<p>

 

Is it a lens that you often use? Or is it a lens for the occasional shot when a dramatic effect is wanted? Is framing accurate with the seperate finder? Does this lens really work for near-far landscapes? At which aperture do you get depth of field from 1.5 meters to infinty (I guess that's about what you need in most cases)?

 

<p>

 

For me the only reason for changing to the Mamiya 7 would be the

superwide lens. Apart from this I actually prefer the Mamiya 6,

because the 50mm (M6) is wider than 65mm (M7) and the M6 is

VERY compact. Projection for 6x6 is also easier and cheaper.

 

<p>

 

Thanks!

 

<p>

 

Alexander Starcevic, Switzerland

If it's a bit wide, you can crop; if it's a bit long and you can't back up, all you can do is grind your teeth and wish it were wider.

 

<p>

 

This lens is changing my photography (mostly landscapes, some travel). First and foremost I just love working with it, but external reinforcement is also coming in for my work with this lens: I received a call in August from the editor of Northwest Travel asking to use a shot in the Nov/Dec 1998 issue. No one had ever before called me to make arrangements for using an image 15 months ahead. I have left my view camera at home for some recent trips. This is because of the M7/43, and would have been unthinkable only a few months ago.

 

<p>

 

As for getting DOF from 1.5 meters to infinity: by setting the lens to a focusing distance of 11 feet and using f22, you will get 10x prints of critical sharpness at any viewing distance for subjects located 5.5 feet to infinity. At f16 use a hyperfocal of 15 feet rather than 11 for corresponding results. If you don't require 10x sharpness then just play with the settings to get what you need.

 

<p>

 

Be aware that the light fall off issue has caused some photographers to abandon this lens. Others claim to have no visible fall off. I work around the fall off, and have posted some remarks about it elsewhere at this site.

 

<p>

 

Gordon Vickrey

krmhlz@earthlink.net

I wonder how the M7/43mm compares with Pentax 67/45mm? I know the M is much more expensive and lighter in weight. My question is about image quality.

Bill Lawlor

The M7 43mm lens has a 35mm-format equivalent of 21mm; but that equivalence is based on the diagonal angle only. Since 35mm-format is more panoramic (oblong) than 6x7, on the horizontal the 43mm M7 lens will not be nearly as wide as a 21mm lens in 35mm-format.

Wanting a lighter/smaller camera system with interchangeable lenses. I became interested in the Mamiya 7.

Before committing to the Mamiya 7 system. I did a informal comparison of the Pentax 67 90 mm and 45 mm compared to the Mamiya 7's 80 mm and 43 mm. I felt that the image quality of Mamiya 7 would have to be VERY significant to justify it's price. Being a great fan of the Pentax 67, I was amazed at my results. With the M-7 my images are FAR sharper and have much better contrast. Before comparing the two I was very skeptical of the Mamiya being that much better (if any better) than the P67. (Having owned an RB and 645 Mamiya that I felt where nothing special) Anyone that is thinking of making the switch, I would suggest they rent the M-7 with the lenses that they would like to have with it. Most places that rent equipment offer a day rate for the weekend. Compare the results. A word of warning this comparison my prove hazardous to your bank account.

Robin