Mamiya 645J

<p>While I like top of the line (or nearly top) gear as much as the next person, I have an admiration for the entry level (some call 'em bottom feeders) gear. During the early 1970's when Mamiya released the Mamiya 645 and later the 645 1000S (and so forth), many users (especially pros who used the 645 for weddings) needed a back-up body, but for less than buying a second 645. Enter the Mamiya 645 J. Has most of what the original 645 had but for less. Unlike the late 645 E that took none of the system accessories except the lenses, the 645 J could use most accessories including interchangeable focusing screens and finders. Since I already had several Mamiya lenses and a pair of 645 E bodies, I wanted a basic, meterless body with the least expensive finder. I chose the waist level finder to go with my 645 J so I got both pieces for under 100 USD. While WL finders are better with square formats, a lot of what I do is horizontal so the WL finder is not a problem. <br>

To try out my 645 J I used my 70mm f2.8 and 35mm f3.5 lenses with Tri-X and a roll of cold stored Verichrome Pan.<br>

First the camera.</p><div></div>

<p>I chose the 70mm f2.8 for some shots, not because of its built-in leaf shutter but because I wanted a slightly wider view than the standard 80mm lens.<br>

Both films, btw, were developed in Kodak's HC110 at dilution B and scanned at 2400 dpi on an Epson V600 scanner. Resized using Microsoft Picture Manager.</p><div></div>

<p>For some of the shots I used a tripod. Nice thing about the WL finder it makes me slow down and think more often than the eye level pentaprism.</p><div></div>

<p>Several of my scans had a stray thin vertical line. I checked negative and scanner and found nothing on them to cause this so I will eventually scan those again.</p><div></div>

<p>The previous photo, btw, was framed using the sports finder instead of the viewfinder as I was sitting in my car when a took the photo. This is where the pentaprism would have been better.</p><div></div>

<p>In the above photo the WL finder was ideal. Those of you who use these types of finders (especially in TLR) know how convenient they are for photographing children and pets at their level.<br>

The next few shots were done with the 35mm f3.5 which is about equivalent to a 22mm lens for 35mm. I used Verichrome pan for these.</p><div></div>

<p>A shot at nearby Mississippi State.</p><div></div>

<p>That pesky line showed up again in this scan and in the next. I used a yellow filter on the next image.</p><div></div>

<p>Two more shots. No lines on these two.</p><div></div>

<p>Last shot.</p><div></div>

<p>Great work Mike, the little 645's are really nice cameras. I used a 645 many years ago and found the lenses really excellent, although I have never used that 35mm, looks like it has very little distortion. Sometimes the waist level finder gives a brighter, easier to focus image...although you have that back to front thing.<br>

My previous scanner, a Canon 880F if I remember correctly, also put lines across my images just like yours, never worked out what caused it as the scanner died soon after the warranty ran out!</p>

<p>Thanks Tony. The image brightness is so good that I don't really miss the split image aid that my 645 E's have. I've looked through the non-metered pentaprism offered with the 645/645 J and it is a bit dimmer than the WL. Another thing I like about the WL finder is it gives the camera more portability, especially if the 80mm f2.8 is attached.</p>

<p>Very nice,<strong> Mike</strong>; I've handled a 645 on only a couple of occasions, having been more attached to Big Brother RB67, but the Sekor lenses are all excellent, as your pics demonstrate. Out of the Pentax, Bronica and Mamiya 6x4.5's, it would be interesting to know which enjoyed the greatest sales. I plumped for the Bronica system, but it would seem that there's really not a lot to pick and choose among the three. </p>

<p>The lenses handle flare well, as the interior shot w/ the window shows. Both the rocking chair on the porch and the dilapidated building spell Mississippi to me. We're OK in Florida, the beach is swell, but I miss Mississippi people quite a lot. We thought of moving to Oxford once, but the winters are too cold to suit us. Nice shots Mike, especially the calico feline, and I really like that 6x4.5 format.</p>

<p>Handsome photos.</p>

<p>OK, all you guys make me drool. The best cameras, DYNAMITE cars. I bet your wives/girlfriends are all super models, and your kids are gifted. I think I'll just go eat worms!</p>

<p>Okay, Ken, you nailed it. It's 3 out of 4 (the wife's not a supermodel). But she is supportive of my various photographic endeavors. When she married me almost 23 years ago she knew I was into photography. <br /> Steve- I've really become a big fan of the 6x4.5 format because of my Mamiyas as well as my Fuji GS 645S. The actual format isn't new, but Mamiya, Pentax, and Bronica gave it new popularity. I once had a 120 back for my Crown Graphic that allowed choice of 6x9, 6x6, and 6x4.5 negatives. This was one of the many cameras I inherited from my dad. I have countless family negatives that he shot with it using the 6x4.5 format that I'm currently scanning.<br /> Thanks, Gene, Rick, and Tony. BTW, I'm very familiar with the RB 67, Rick. When my family had a camera shop we used an RB 67 for shooting portraits. Had a Photogenic light set to use with it. The revolving back for it was very convenient.<br>

Currently shooting a roll of Ilford FP4+ in the 645J this week. Hoping to find some areas to exploit that 35mm lens.</p>

<p>I have a number of Bronica (ETR forward) cameras and lenses but I have started to build a small Mamiya 645 system. I have an old 70/2.8 leaf shutter lens with a balky leaf shutter as well as a nice 80/2.8 N. On their way here from eBay sellers are two PD-S finders (I bid on two hoping to get one and got both), a 150/4 C and a 55/2.8 N. My plan was to get an M645J but someone beat me to it with a Buy-It-Now. Now I will look for an ETRS instead. A strap should round things out for the time being. It's awkward to do macro work with the Bronica systems even with a macro lens and bellows. I should be able to do some improvising with the Mamiya because of the focal plane shutter. The 35/3.5 Mamiya lens looks interesting. My widest medium format lens now is the 50/4.5 Zenzanon for the GS-1. The 210/4 Mamiya lenses look very reasonable in price too. I will also see if I can make use of the 1/1000 top shutter speed. I remember when the ETR came out that various adapters were improvised to use 35mm amd medium format lenses on it. Now I just have to get that M645 1000S body and look in the freezer for some old Verichrome Pan. </p>

<p>I meant an M645 1000S instead. </p>

The 55mm is a useful lens. I often used it for group photos at weddings.

<p>Mike, I get those lines too. I found that if I wipe the scanner surface down with a microfibre cloth and some rubbing alcohol, it cleans up. I use an Epson Perfection 4490, same as Ralf. Really nice set of shots.</p>

Those pesky lines! My previous scanner did this a lot. I theorize it is a speck of dirt on the sensor. The line followed the travel of the scanner. I noticed also that if I did two strips of 35mm. One side was OK. Also, I noticed also that on 6x6 the line was just outside the photo but 6x9 it was was there. I think also the resolution played a role, low enough you don't see it. This is my experience, but YMMV. I bought another scanner for EUR 20,00 and this one doesn't do it.

 

I love the 6x45 format and would like to do more with it. I am hot and cold on another folder but one (Ikonta, Moscova etc) that does boith 6x45 and 6x9 would be welcome. You mentioned a Grafelx back that does 645? I didn't know this existed ..tell me more.

Chuck- I can't find the roll film back now, but I remember it was pretty simple: you would choose the format and insert

appropriate mask over viewfinder. Then use the corresponding red window to count frames.

An all in one back multiformat Graflex back sounds very cool. I have both 12EXP and 10 EXP backs. The advantage of 16 exp is very tempting. Was it a Graflex product or an aftermarket? I think if it was Graflex, I'd have come across it..I'll do some Google searches see what I can find!

<p>I don't think it was a Graflex product. I remember my dad used it to shoot 120 in his Crown Graphic back in the 1950's. I've found tons of 120 negatives that he shot in 645 format. Maybe I will find it eventually.<br>

He also had a Polaroid back for the Crown Graphic at one time, but I remember that he sold it in the early 70's.</p>