1000s/645e Dilema

[gord_hayes]

Hi boys and girls,

 

Ok, I decided that I wanted to try my hand at med format after poking

and proding and searching I narrowed it down to the 1000s. For a

number of reasons and the biggest was that of price, if I liked it I

could always at a later date upgrade the body and use the lenses etc.

 

I have now come across a 645E in excellent condition with 80mm lens

for around US450.

 

What do you "experts" think about the pros and cons of the 1000s vs

the 645E?

 

Would I miss the features of the E? do I need the features of the E?

and so on.

 

I know it's a philosophical question but I had to ask it.

[steve_levine]

The E cameras are much newer ,and less likely to break down inder hard use.At this point in time,the early M645's are all nearing 25 years old,and old grease,worn springs,and dried out rubber parts are really what you got.Cameras this old need a clean,lube & adjust if they are going to be used regularly.If they fail,factory rebuilds run around $300.So right there would be enough reason to look at the newer bodies.The big advanatge is the E's metering system.The 1000's's meter wouldnt be something I would depend on without an overhaul.Both cameras are "insert" only,and the E's viewfinder is fixed to the camera.If you want a camera to play around with and shoot a roll a month,save the money and get the older body.If you want a camera that will tolerate harder use,go with the E.

[jim_mcbride]

I have both bodies, which I use mostly for macro work. The E is lighter and easier to

handle. No question that its fixed metering prism is better than my removable metering

prism for the 1000s. But that fixed prism on the E is unhandy if you want to use

something else. Very often, I just want to look down and contemplate the image on the

ground glass. The fixed prism of the E won't let me do that. The E is perfectly OK for

shooting on the go, but I'll take the 1000s for precision photography anytime, even given

the fact that they both use exactly the same lenses.

[david_fennema]

I got a 1000s several months ago because it had all the features I was looking for in a

medium format starter camera. Sadly, mine gave me quite a bit of trouble, and I

eventually returned it. I loved the camera quite a bit, and the rolls I shot with the 80/

2.8 were gorgeous, but the age and unreliability was definitely a concern (my

problems centered around the PD Prism's electronic connections to the body -- don't

know if this is a common problem). I've been concentrating on digital for a while now,

but when I get the itch to get back into medium format, the E will be my choice, given

that it's a fairly new camera at a decent price with great lenses and a reliable meter.

But hey, if you're willing to look hard, you might find a 1000s in great shape. One

other thing to consider if you plan to drag your camera to various remote places: I

think the plasticy E is quite a bit lighter than the metal brick 1000s.

[per__ystein_pettersen]

I've got both types, and I find that I use the 1000s most of the time. I usually prefer the WL-finder and use a handheld meter. If you want camera metering and use the prism, the 'E' wins hands down, as the old metered prisms for the 1000s can be quite unreliable.

 

Why not buy both? I've overcome the drawback of no interchangeable backs using inexpensive 1000s bodies instead - a "excellent" 1000s body is cheaper than a "excellent" Hasselblad back at KEH!

[gord_hayes]

Well thanks Gents, I think you've answered the questions I had and Per comes up with the solution.

 

I was concened about the age of the 1000 but the price of a good one makes up for that. Having handled the 1000s, I really have an affinity to the style and metal body. Something nostalgic about it that lets me concentrate on the composition. Sorry to those who like digital but it doesn't work for me (yet) I'll come around eventually :) I just think it's cheating to think to yourself "oh I can fix that in PS". The 1000 goes the other direction.

 

On the other hand I like many aspects of the E, metering, lighter weight, changeable backs. I am not really fond of the plasticy look of it but I can get used to that.

 

So as Per suggested with the wonderfull advanatage of lenses that I can use on both, I'll go for the e and look for a good 1000 body with WLF.

 

Wish me luck

[gord_hayes]

You know, I'm so indecisive, I gonna stick with the 1000s. It just dawned on that the E doesn't have changeable backs, I think one of you mentioned it but it didn't register.

 

Later on maybe I'll upgrade to the Pro but I just like the feel, look and Prism or WLF.

 

Cheers and thanks

 

Gord

[todd holden]

Gord,

 

I have owned a 1000s for a few years now (got it used from another photographer who had it CLA'd) with a 90mm and 150mm and really like the camera. The 1000s doesn't really have interchangeable backs either, it uses "inserts" which are still available (I have a 120 and a 220 for mine). To me, that's a bit of a drawback for any of the non "R level" cameras for Mamiya as you cannot exapnd to take a digital back later if you want. Not a big deal really but something to think about. I have both the metered prism and the WLF. I chunked the metered prism in a case as it makes these cameras really heavy. Not bad if on a tripod but handholding these things for a portrait session can really make an arm sore (even with a trigger handle). Plus the I guess I like the WLF from my exposure to some of the TLR's I have owned.

 

The on camera metering is not that big of a deal to me as owning a good meter and getting familiar with it is just something that I think most photographer's that shoot regularly do.

 

My 1000s makes a great image and it does have mirror lockup which is very nice! I have often considered upgrading to the RB or RZ for the interchangeable backs but just have not done it yet as I have been playing with 4x5 format and digital 35mm. I think either camera would be fine to learn with and might make a good MF investment.

 

Good Luck!