Mamiya 7 vs Pentax 67

Hey y’all, this is my first post here on Photo.net. Excited to join the community.

 

I was wondering if any of you all could give me your opinions on the Pentax 67 vs Mamiya 7 for a medium format system. A few specifics about my situation/preferences:

 

I currently own a Mamiya RZ67 Pro II with a 110mm and 65mm and AE prism finder. The camera is amazing, one of the best camera systems I’ve ever used and the images are amazing. I live the 6x7 format. I’ve been shooting a lot more lately, however, and have come to discover that my preferences as a photographer are much more inclined to documentary/handheld styles, and RZ systems, as great as they are, do not lend themselves well to hat sort of aesthetic.

 

I’ve been doing quite a bit of research on other MF systems that are more suited for documentary/travel/street style photography, and I think I’ve narrowed things down to the Mamiya 7 or the Pentax 67 (haven’t settled on a model version for either one yet). Here’s my current list of pros and cons for each:

 

Mamiya 7

 

PROS

• Glass (Mamiya glass is probably my favorite glass in the world)

• Quiet rangefinder shutter

• No mirror shake

• Extremely well-built

• Portable

• Brand (I’m pretty loyal to the Mamiya brand name, I know that’s very minor, but it still goes in the pros for me)

 

CONS

• $$$ (Body and glass are both MUCH more expensive than the Pentax system)

• Battery dependant

• No spot metering (Spot is by far my preferred metering)

 

Pentax 67

 

PROS

• $$$. This is kind of a big deal. I could probably sell my Mamiya kit and get a Pentax kit for very little net cost to me. I definitely can’t say that for the Mamiya.

• Also has great glass, for much cheaper

• Mechanical, non battery dependent (i know this applies to older, non-metered models, does anyone know if the newer models are battery dependent, other than the meter of course?)

• Spot metering prism

• Also very well-built and portable

 

CONS

• Louder Shutter

• Notorious Mirror Shake

 

With all of that in mind, does anyone have any advice or personal anecdotes about these two cameras? What are your preferences? Thanks everyone!

Edited June 13, 2017 by jay2654

The Pentax 67 is a honking big camera, and noisy to boot. The Mamiya 7 is much smaller, but both are smaller than an RB67. Since the 7 is a rangefinder, you can't frame precisely, nor focus closer than about 4'. You could throw a rock in a camera store and hit any camera that would do a better job for documentary photography than any of the above. However for landscapes, especially while hiking, the Mamiya 7 would be better than just about any non-digital camera in terms of image quality.

 

An hand-held digital spot meter is better than anything in a viewfinder for landscapes, closeups or group photos. If you shoot landscapes, especially with film where bracketing is too expensive, a Sekonik spot/incident/flash meter is a good investment.

Unless you are absolutely married to the 6x7 format, I think that probably one of the best modern MF cameras for documentary work is the Fuji GS645.

 

It's a LOT smaller than any 6x7 camera(although as noted either of your camera choices above are smaller than an RB/RZ since these are really 7x7 cameras), and for street/documentary work has the advantage of having 15 exposures per roll vs. 10.

 

In general, I'm not a fan of the 645 format(albeit I do shoot it with my RB67, making probably the worlds largest 645, and have also shot it in the past in a Rollecord), but IMO it's almost ideal for this sort of camera.

Why would you swap one large heavy 6x7 SLR for another?

 

There's very little advantage to the Pentax over the Mammy as far as I can see.

 

If you want a rangefinder, then buy a rangefinder.

My two cents.

 

I had my heart set on a Mamiya 7ii for years. Why? It's double exposure feature AND the glass. (I have nothing but good things to say about the Mamiya 645 series: wonderful cameras). BUT, I came to the conclusion that the Mamiya 7ii and its glass are simply inexplicably over-priced. If I were into professional photography for my living, I'd probably have purchased one long ago and wrote it off. But, this is a hobby. I shoot landscape and structures (bridges, buildings, etc). I can NOT justify $1800-2500 for a camera body and another $2500 for a couple decent lenses and accessories. So, I did what I could afford. And, being a little creative, I can still create double exposures with the camera I eventually bought in its place.

 

I recently purchased a Fuji GW690iii from a US seller. $450 shipped. (I will not buy film cameras off-shore anymore - descriptions are often questionable/lies; language barrier is often a problem). My next camera will likely be either a Pentax 6x7 OR a Fuji GW670 of some model. Except for its 645, Mamiya is entirely out of the picture. Can't afford them and Fuji & Pentax are much more affordable.

I only handled Pentax 67 and Mamiya 6 decades ago. I own a Mamiya C33(0) system with 4 lenses an additional compact rangefinder Super Isolette and a Pentacon 6 with 120mm f2.8 as my only MF SLR.

I really like rangefinders and happily shoot 35mm & digital with some. On the other hand I am a quite tall guy and getting along very well with a chimney finder on a TLR. So my first bit of advice would be stop lifting your current behemoth up to your eye level and keep it lower with a WLF or chimney finder (& also get the comfiest strap on earth for it). - That takes less muscles and helps you understand why you have a rotating back.

I didn't like the Pentax 67. Minimum focusing distance shouted for extension tubes (compared to the 35mm Pentaxes or TLRs I was used to) and it took some effort to lift it (with prism finder). The Mamiya RFs are way more portable and even a film Leica M is noisy compared to them. AFAIK the system is already partially no longer repairable so I would suggest thinking twice before you invest in it. - Maybe try a compromise by getting a fixed lens Plaubel RF for the wide end and an SLR for the long end?

I just checked; according to that article the Pentax has an electronic shutter.

I don't see much appeal in the metered finder options once available. I grew up with a handheld meter. - It gives me the chance to make up my mind if I should risk a frame in the available darkness before I dig the camera out at all. I also have just one meter to worry about and not a different one in each camera and can also meter strobes, if needed. to benefit from a built in meter it should really be the modern matrix variant and somewhat smart. - I don't know what Pentax and Mamiya are displaying in their VFs, but 2 needles to match (or some traffic light) and no idea of the set shutter speed aren't what I'd fancy and concentrating on focusing and nailing a moment are hard enough with the camera up, so scanning for a spot to meter on and adjusting the aperture is just a waste of muscles.

No matter how cheap film MF gear might be right now; I'll stick to what I have and maybe end getting digital MF some day.

Only the Pentax 67II has spot metering but if you use that or the TTL meter on the older versions, it is still a good idea to use a gray card to meter. Spot metering is a "nice to have" feature but if you go with the 67II to get it, you will have a camera that is not historically as reliable as the older models. I love the M7 and its famous optics but the P67 system has 30 optically different lenses to choose from, while the M7 is pretty limited. It is not so much the mirror shake that is the problem on the Pentax but the shutter. For hand held work, not much of a problem. For tripod work, it can sometimes be an issue but mostly with the lenses longer than the 200mm in the 1/2 to 1/30 second range. I have traveled with a Pentax since 1989 and like it for that purpose but find it a bit awkward for street work. In the end, the M7 didn't have enough flexibility for me. If I were forced to choose a different camera, it would be the Pentax 645Z. ($$$$)

I use a handheld spot meter when I need spot metering. Depends on what I'm shooting. Sometimes incident or built-in meters are just fine.

I use a handheld spot meter when I need spot metering. Depends on what I'm shooting. Sometimes incident or built-in meters are just fine.

I have a similar experience. Having a hand held meter is a great option to carry around to augment a TTL meter (or the other way around). I get surprisingly good meter read information from my Bronica SQ- Ai meter finder S.

 

Regarding holding off moving into a larger format, no doubt there is great glass out there in smaller formats but then again if the glass in some MF cameras is as good (or better) the extra large negative is something you simply can't produce from a smaller format. And the price and availability of Bronica gear these days is very hard to ignore.

Hello Jay, and welcome.

 

In your approach to handheld "documentary/travel/street style photography", do you like to shoot individual people/objects with shallow dof, or are you more of a "get all parts of the scene in focus" photographer?

If the former, then SLR viewing helps, and the Pentax 67 has nice fast lenses from semi-wide to short telephoto (75/2.8, 90/2.8, 105/2.4, 150/2.8, 165/2.8). Wider apertures also mean faster shutter speeds, so mirror/shutter vibration is less likely to register on film.

If the latter, then fast lenses don't matter while corner lens aberrations do matter, and stopping down forces longer shutter speeds, more prone to vibrations - the Mamiya 7 wins on these counts.