Mamiya 645pro vs Contax 645 THE FINAL SHOWDOWN

[jack_malipan]

After reading hundreds of posts (and many sleepless nights) I

narrowed down a 645 choice to the specs of Mamiya 645PRO and the

Contax 645.

 

I'm begging for some practical experience from pro users of both

cameras to finally settle my mind on the following about the Mamiya,

which are critical for me:

 

1. M645pro film flatness and back-to-body build quality.

2. M645pro lenses wide open.

3. M645pro mirror slap.

 

To what degree are these a problem? Or does the problem exist at all?

(too many conflicting posts plus one desperate and confused

photographer!).

 

I know the Contax has great film flatness, lenses are very good wide

open and the mirror slap not bad.

 

I shoot wide open, usually 2.8-5.6 and am buying the 645 to use in

handheld situations where the RZ67 won't do, BUT I'm also a sharpness

nut(although it won't be enlarged over magazine cover size).

 

I love the Zeiss on my 35mm and can't really afford the Contax, but

if the M645pro is compromised by the points above in any practical

way, I'll find the money...

HELP!!!

[edsel_adams]

This is "apples & oranges".The Contax is a state of the art Auto Focus MF camera.The Mamiya is a 1970's technology manual focus camera.These cameras are both designed for a specific type of photography,mainly portraits & wedding shooting.Trying to make them outdoor wilderness cameras will bite you in the a--.

An associate of mine used a Contax on a recent desert trip,he & I made together.Before leaving he had numerous electrical glitches with the body.The camera had to be returned several times to Contax to make it right.If I were shooting in dark wedding halls,Id opt for the AF system.If the camera were for general use,Id stick with more proven Mamiya.

[_____133]

Edsel,I think Jack meant to write Mamiya 645 AutoFocus vs the Conta 645 AF.

 

I have no long-term experience with either except for trials in the shops. I am merely repeating what I have read in the different newsgroups.

 

It appears that the Mamiya 645 AF backs have a problem with film-flatness if you leave a partially shot roll in the back for a number of days. A user reported getting unsharp frames in the middle of the roll after it had been left in the back for one week. If you are a working photographer who finishes his roll in one sitting, it is apparently all right. Check the User's Forum at www.mamiya.com for more details. I used to shoot with the manual Mamiya 645 Pro TL. The optical formuale on both systems seem identical. My Mamiya lenses are uniformly as sharp as I would want them.

 

A friend of mine shot with the Contax 645 AF for about 1.5 years. He sold the entire kit because he was going digital with the Canon D30. His kit consumes batteries and has slow re-activation time in sleep mode. A common grouse is that it goes into sleep mode without warning and unexpectedly. That's only with his kit which was one of the first few off the production ramp.

 

I suggest that you test it yourself. Relying on forum advice as to what you should buy will set you up for big disappointment because we all react differently to different cameras.

[danny burk www.dannyburk.]

This doesn't directly answer your question, but I have to comment re: Contax not being an "outdoor camera". Nonsense! I've used mine as my primary camera for nearly 2 years, mostly for landscape and macro work. I absolutely love using it, and love the results it gives me. I haven't actually used a Mamiya 645AF, but I've looked at them and the lenses don't feel to be very well built. Not saying that this affects images, mind you, but fit/feel is an important part of a camera to me.

 

So far (crossing fingers) I've never had any problem at all with the Contax. The lenses are sensational, and the features are all first-rate. I use it strictly in manual focus mode, so can offer no comment on its AF abilities. My only complaint is battery consumption, which is admittedly rather absurd but I overlook it since I like the camera so much. For image samples, please visit my website at www.dannyburk.com - about 90% of my online photos were taken with it.

 

Regards,

[ShunCheung]

I went through the same decision process for two years. I am an amateur nature photographer and have an extensive Nikon system. Since I am very used to the Nikon F5 and F100, I really prefer the modern dials on the Mamiya over the more conventional controls on the Contax. However, that is about the only thing I prefer on the Mamiya. Recently, at work, some guy who moonlights as a wedding photographer bought a Mamiya 645 AF system in addition to his Hasselblads. Within a month or two, both his AF body and his new 55-110 zoom had to go back to Mamiya for repair. One data point probably shouldn't mean much, but that pretty much decided for me. Meanwhile I rented a Contax system and liked it a lot.

 

The Contax AF's quite well, even in a fairly dark room. AF speed is similar to that on my Nikon N8008 from 1989; that isn't great in today's standards but useable. Maybe it isn't primarily designed as a landscape camera, but well known photographers such as Marc Muench (son of David Muench) use it for that purpose. I'll soon find out for myself.

[jack_malipan]

Erik, I do mean the 645pro, I've eliminated the AF version from the list. I understand everyone reacts differently, but I was really hoping for long term users opinions about those 3 aspects, something I can't tell from handling in a shop. Believe me I spent dozens of hours here and elsewhere before bothering this excellent forum with another 'which camera' post!

My thanks to everyone who may help.

[jack_malipan]

Erik, I do mean the 645pro, I've eliminated the AF version from the list. I understand everyone reacts differently, but I was really hoping for long term users opinions about those specific 3 aspects, something I can't tell from handling in a shop. Believe me I spent dozens of hours here and elsewhere before bothering this excellent forum with another 'which camera' post! and these are the last 3 specific points I'd like to confirm.

My thanks to everyone who may help.

[ShunCheung]

Jack, the best suggestion I got from this forum concerning camera selection is <B>rent first</B>. Medium-format preference is very subjective. Can you rent a Mamiya M645pro for even just a day or two and shoot a few rolls? You probably won't find out the long-term durability issue this way, but that should answer you film flatness, lens quality and mirror slap questions immediately.

[jack_malipan]

Yes, I'D LOVE TO RENT IT! That would avoid me harassing people here :). Where I live I'd have to catch a plane to another country to find the nearest rental house (Madrid). Maybe someone knows a link to Mamiya 645(non-AF) lens tests, that might answer one. But I would really appreciate some input from experienced users. Film Flatness, back-to-body quality and Mirror Slap.Please, pretty please...

[_____133]

I stand corrected, Jack. I guess you meant to compare the handling qualities and manual focussing modes of the two cameras.

 

I never had any problems with my Pro TL and its magazines. That may be because I complete shooting my rolls and have not to date left any rolls half-shot in the back. It may also have to do with the way I load my film. I am anal about it. I put thumb pressure on one rim of the loading reel, fold the flap tightly on the take-up reel, and wind the roll as tightly as I can without destroying the insert! The magazine mates well with the body with no light leaks. The mirror is not as well-damped as in the Pentax 645N and Contax but that's not to say that it is excessive. One adapts to it; I learnt to hold my breath just before releasing the trigger, bracing my arms against my body and lowering knees to a firm crouch. The Pro TL with motor drive feels surprisingly light, lighter, I think, than the Nikon F5 with the same focal length and speed lens. The polycarbonate body is tough as nails. Mine is no longer pretty but it survived numerous falls. I like the Mamiya lenses. They are sharp as sharp can be. As sharp as Zeiss? I do not get myself involved in such debates at all. I do not get work rejectd by my clients. I guess that says something.

 

I must admit that the few samples I saw from the Contax 645 Zeiss lenses seem to have nicer bokeh and for want of a better term, POP. But not enough for me to consider switching (which I did eventually but for the Hasselblad 555ELD system).

 

After reading your posts, I will play the devil's advocate. I have a nagging suspicion that you won't be happy with the Mamiya no matter what. At the back of your mind, you will always lust after that Zeiss. So pony up and take the plunge.

[ShunCheung]

Where do you live Jack, in a cave somewhere in Afganistan? :-) You seem to have access to the cameras in stores. Is it possible to ask them to let you shoot a roll there, perhaps just outside of the store? It won't be a real-life shooting situation but it'll give you plenty of information.

 

Erik may be right though. Zeiss lenses are probably what you really want.

[william_carter1]

I'm not a pro, but have owned both the Mamiya 645 Pro and the Contax 645 AF and used them extensively. Just a couple of comments. I took the Contax on a recent trip to Ghana under some fairly rough conditions, and it performed fine. Not in sandstorms, etc., but pretty hot, dirty, rough conditions nonetheless -- no problems at all. Regarding the Mamiya 645 Pro: (1) back to body integrity -- I didn't notice any problems. (2) mirrow slap: it at least feels much more significant than the Contax 645, which has a fairly gentle mirror slap; on the other hand, I mostly handheld the Mamiya when I used it and got very sharp results. I have a photo that I took at the FDR memorial in DC that was shot at 1/60th w. the 80mm lens, and it's one of my sharpest pics (I don't have a scanner, so I can't post it -- sorry). (3) 645 Pro lenses wide-open -- I can't recall a specific photo that I took wide open with a 645 Pro lens, but I'm sure I must have at some point, and don't recall any sharpness problems (I will say that I have taken many photos with the Contax lenses wide open, particularly with the 120mm Makro, 140mm f2.8 and the 80mm f2, and they all performed very well (although I found the 80 did not perform as well wide open as the other two)). If you don't need the AF, TTL flash, flash metering, spot metering in the body, higher shutter speed, etc. of the Contax, I'd go with the Mamiya.

 

One final comment: I did notice some subtle differences between the "look" of the Mamiya and Zeiss lenses, but not as much as some people report, at least for black and white existing light photography, which is what I primarily shoot. If I studied 2 of my photos side by side, one from the mamiya and one from the contax, I could see the difference, but it didn't jump off the page -- mainly an advantage in smoothness of tonal gradation from the Zeiss lenses. (yes, I was using the same film -- Delta 100) In color, however, the Zeiss lenses rendered colors in a way that was more pleasing to me. (This isn't to say that the Zeiss lenses are "better" -- just that I preferred their look, especially with subjects with a long tonal range). The differences between the Zeiss and Mamiya for B&W aren't nearly as great as the differences between Zeiss and Schneider lenses for the Rollei 6008i -- I can see the difference between my prints from photos taken with those lenses immediately. (Not that the Schneiders are better, but they definitely look different, at least in B&W).

[_____133]

Jack, Moses Sparks has a reply to your question but somehow it ended up being posted under another thread called High Quality Ad Fashion Photography.

[eric friedemann]

Jack-

 

I think you have three basic issues: quality, reliability and price.

Two of these factors favor Mamiya; one Contax.

 

We recently tried the Contax 645 at our store. The fit, finish and design of the camera and lenses were wonderful. Image quality was also superb. You would expect this of a camera that costs that much. Given that the Contax 645 is a fairly new system, you just don't know about long-term reliability.

 

I have used several manual focus Mamiya 645 cameras over the years. Newer Mamiya lenses would compare favorably to the Contax 645 lenses. Also, Mamiya 645 manual focus cameras have been around a long time and I regard them as reliable.

 

Bottom line- I like both systems in their respective price ranges. If I were to buy one of these systems and money was no object, I would get the Contax, not worrying much about reliability, based on Contax' other products. If cost was a factor, I'd get the Mamiya.

[r_fossum]

if you are buying the camera to handhold why arent you looking at MF rangefinder? Why would you even think of an SLR? use your big 67 at longer focal lenghths and use the rangefinder for the shorter handheld stuff? Rangefinder lenses are sharp as hell ( witness recent tests on mamiya 7 and bronica 645 and they are as sharp as any zeiss hassy slr lens, I think the bronicas are leafs and can even can even sync with studio strobe )

 

Just a thought. If you need an slr then I understand but I dont think any slr is really designed to be handheld.

[jerryr]

I am unfamiliar with the Contax, but I've owned a Mamiya 645 Pro TL (manual) for about 4 years. I have two backs (one or fast film and the other, slow), the 80mm and the 105-210mm zoom lenses; the unit has the AE Prism Finder metering.

 

It is my first medium format unit. Coming from the 35mm world for 40 years, I still find using the Mimiya awkward, because it is so cubical I find it difficult to hold comfortably. I travel with it a fair amount and shoot a variety of subjects from on-stage bands to nature with color transparencies almost exclusively. I seldom shoot wide open because of the results in depth of field for my subjects.

 

Lens quality seems good. One or the other of the backs has leaked light from time to time so I now always double check my back insertion for security. I have found from the start I need increased steadiness with this unit, for some reason (advancing age [mine]---possibly eyesight?) so I use a mono pod more often, even without the telephoto. I have suspected focusing problems from time to time, thinking they were mine. Possibly is it film flatness as I sometimes leave a roll in one or the other backs because of what I'm currently shooting. I've experienced no mechanical problems and the electricals function fine. I need to polish the gold plated contacts with a cloth on one occasion to return the AE metering function.

 

I would echo the other comments, if you can find the money for the unit you truly want, buy it; you only go around once.

 

Jerry

[bruce_fichelson]

Well, this response is for new people given the age of the prior question and responses. Now, Contax has folded, though there are plenty on the used market. You all should be aware that Art Wolfe has used a Mamiya Pro TL for many of his great images---just look at his wonderful books. Also, keep in mind that Zeiss lenses for both the Contax and now for the Hasselblads are made by Fuji. Though of very fine quality, they are not the Zeiss lenses that made Hassys famous. For me, the differences are psychological. I owned a Contax briefly but found it beautiful yet heavy feeling and the lenses high prices were not justified in my opinion. Pro cameras are made to higher standards than consumer cameras and the same is true of their lenses.

Both are quality cameras and they both have fantastic lenses. The key is the photographer's eye and technique that makes he difference.

I decided to go with the Mamiya 645 AFD for its adaptability to digital backs now. That assures me of continued adaptability as backs come down in price.

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

Bruce - you are reviving a very old thread. But your facts are wrong - Fuji did not manufacture Contax 645 lenses. That was Kyocera. FUji now makes H-series lenses for Hasselblad.

[ShunCheung]

Kyocera made the Contax cameras and Zeiss lenses in recent years, but they stopped production last year (2005). Fuji now makes lenses for the Hasselblad H series, but those are not Zeiss lenses.