Optics of Mamiya7 and Fuji GW690 II (or III) and GA645i

[arthuryeo]

How do the optics of the above camera compare to each other? I know

they are all super sharp but how's the defocused areas? In particular,

how's the bokeh like?

[arthuryeo]

mispelled 'camera', should be cameras.

[tad doxsee]

Hi Arthur,

 

I'm not sure if you can see what you're looking for

in this photo, but take a look at this Mamiya 7 example,

if you'd like:

http://www.photo.net/photo/2452755&size=lg

I'm sure there are plenty of other examples here

in photo.net (but no more in my portfolio).

 

Tad

[ben conover]

Bokeh<div></div>

[troyammons]

The Mamiya 7 is generally considered the sharpest MF RF.

 

The Fuji 690 and ZI both have good optics too. IMO the MAmiya 7 or at least a few of the lenses are sharper, but not by a mile or anything.

 

The ZI I had was decent, but too much of a P+S and the zoom was so short it was almost useless.

[tariq_gibran]

Format Size differences will overcome any differences will contribute more to image quality

than any differences in the lens qualities. So, the Mamiya 7 optics may be sharper but not so

much so that the Fuji's 6x9 full frame image would not beat the Mamiya 7's Full Frame 6x7

quality. 645 being about half the size of 6x9 is in an entirely different league. That's

printing full frame images. Between these cameras, your better trying to figure out which

format you prefer.

[tariq_gibran]

Sorry, at far as out of focus areas, it would depend on the particular Mamiya 7 lens. You

might find this interesting:

 

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-june-05.shtml

[elliot_n]

I think the Fuji lenses are vastly overrated.

 

I'm shooting a long term projerct with a Fuji GSW690II.

 

Vignetting, soft corners, flare (in the dullest of lighting conditions).... these images require

a lot of work in Photoshop to make

them look good.

 

As soon as this project is finished (I need the 6x9 ratio), I'm going to flog the Fuji and buy

a Mamiya 7.

[vince_n.2]

The Fuji GS690III is a joke. I bought one and sold it. The lens is not that sharp and poor constrast.

[tariq_gibran]

I just sold my Fuji GSW690 111 but it did not suffer from any noticeable vignetting nor

terribble corner sharpness. The lens was slightly softer than an 80mm Planar on my

Hasselblad in the middle but surprisingly sharper towards the edges at F11 but with a very

different charecter in that it was not nearly as contrasty as the zeiss planar but also

offered a certain smoothness of tonality which is near impossible to get from my 80mm

planar. I think there is probably a trade off which lens designers make between Contrast

and smoothness of tone with a contrasier lens appearing sharper but at the expense of

tonality. The Fuji 65mm SWC is biased towards smooth transitions of tonality where as

the Zeiss Planar was extremely biased towards Contrast. Which you prefer or what you are

capable of getting out of either is entirely subjective.

[elliot_n]

Interesting comments.

 

My main camera is a Mamiya 645AF. No vignetting and crisp, contrasty results.

 

As I'm stuck with the Fuji for this project, I've found ways of making it work for me.

 

Film choice - I tested films (colour neg) to find someting more contrasty than what I

normally use. I've ended up using Fuji NPC, rated at 100, and pushed half a stop.

 

Vignetting - it's actually quite subtle and easily fixed in the darkroom, as long as the film

is well exposed.

 

Soft corners - all fine now, but I only work at f22.

 

Flare - I should seek out a decent lens hood (Lee?)... but it's hard to use a large lens hood

on a rangefinder... I can fix the flare in photoshop, with masks and curves, but it's fiddly.

(The 'flare' I'm talking about is a large area which is slightly hazy and of reduced contrast,

caused by an overcast sky at top of frame.)

 

Contrast - film choice can help create some punch... curves in photoshop some more...

but I also use the photoshop 'local contrast enhancement' technique that I read about

somewhere on the internet... that's USM, but with a tiny Amount, and a really big Radius...

it's this technique, I believe, that makes the images from the Fuji look like they've come

from a modern contrasty lens.

 

Overall the limitations of the Fuji have pushed me towards an Imacon/Photoshop workflow

rather than my regular colour darkroom workflow. Scans to date have output well on an

Epson 2400 - they look much better than the straight darkroom prints I've made.

Eventually I'll

output much larger prints on a Lambda.

 

I'd very interested to hear from anyone who has tested one of the Fuji rangefinders against

a Mamiya 7.

[tariq_gibran]

Yes, the Fuji loves either a contrastier color film(I used Velvia which took on a fairly normal

contrast shot with the Fuji!) or, if shooting B&W, I might process with say Rodinal vs. a

sulfite based developer to give more edge effects. With B&W, I could easely acheive tack

sharp effects using Acros/Rodinal if I wished so it was never a question of ultimate

resolution. That said, I used to shoot with a Mamiya 6 with the 50 G lens which was very

sharp and had good contrast, but still slightly less than Zeiss lenses(which is not

neccesarily a bad thing). I would suspect the Mamiya 7 lenses to perform similarly. So,

Velvia shot with the Fuji looked like Astia almost but Velvia shot with a contrasty lens

looks garish and harsh in my opinion. Ultimately, it all comes down to testing what films

give the look one likes with your equipment and my experience with the Fuji proved to me

that an individual lens can often be more influencial than developers and Film types but its

funny how you don't read much about that. Its always I prefer Rodinal to D76 or Astia to

Velvia or whatever.

[paul_wilson2]

I own an M7II with 43, 80 and 150mm lenses. I also owned a Mamiya 6MF with 50 and 150mm lenses. All of these Mamiya RF lenses are great including the 150 (the lens is great, focusing it is a bit difficult). I used a Fuji 6x9 RF for a week or so. The one I had was quite good but not up to the Mamiyas.

[stewart_s]

Can't comment on the Mamiya, but have a GSW 690III and used to have a 645zi. The zi is pretty good and will produce impressive enlargements, but comparing scans pixel for pixel (ie not taking account of the larger image size) the 690 is noticeably sharper. Pixel for pixel, my Zeiss-Hasselblad lenses are sharper still.

[philippartridge]

<p>Forgive me, gentle detractors, for proposing that my Fuji 645s and GW690III are far from jokes! Nothing like personal experience and it is a shame some do not get what they wanted, from the 690 in particular.</p>

 

<p>I use all my MF cameras at f11 min, f22 max - I need DOF. Note the big Fuji goes from f3.5 to f32, a sign it is really a large format lens in an MF body. One see reports of optical vignetting at f3.5, which I feel is fair enough for this type of camera. I <i>never</i> see it, nor do I see any light drop off in trans materials. </p>

 

<p>Nor can I agree with the rousing exhortations regarding unacceptably low contrast [the basis for MTF] - I have used the same Gitzo tripod and films with Mamiya's 6 (all lenses), Fuji GA645, Fuji 645zi and Gw690III; and I much prefer the 690 for overall image quality, taking into account a personal weighting of sufficient resolution, tonal separation, usability and what might be called 'tonal appeal' [the real reason I swapped to Fuji]. To my eyes, the GA645 is indistinguishable in resolution from my 50mm Mamiya 6 lens, which itself is the equal of most if not all Mamiya 7 lenses (not surprisingly), at <a href="http://www.photodo.com/nav/prodindex.html">Photodo</a> at least. Now the figures may not back this assertion up, but images shot with this camera/lens (the Fuji 60mm/4) are so good I could never sell the camera.</p>

 

<p>I want to stay out of the bokeh issue - probably none of these Arthur mentions are wonderful at this aspect, compared with Leica or Rolleiflex.</p>

 

<p>The suggestion that the contrast/image difference one sees between RAP100F and RVP50/100 is less than the contrast difference between Mamiya's/Zeiss's lenses and Fuji's lenses is ludicrous, IMO. And, I see most merit in Tariq's assessment - one that Mr Perez perhaps found as well in his <a href="http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/MF_testing.html">MF lens tests</a>, though as stated one needs to exercise extreme caution in single observation sample testing. What I would expect to see is image softening in the Mamiya 6/7 lenses once off an extremely high centre, which is what is reported. Note, however, the edge data for middle to small aperture settings. And the evenness across the frame of the GW690 lens, not forgetting that the frame is 82mm x 56mm against the smaller Mamiyas' 68mm x 56mm and 56mm x 56mm frames. </p>

 

<p>Lastly, for landscape/wilderness photography, the need for robust equipment is very close to top of the priority list. The big Fuji is very strong, has no electronics or meter or fiddly dark slides, and will sustain heavy treatment - my Mamiya 6 had a circuit board check out (mucho dinero), had a dodgy film winding mechanism (many break, and Mamiya no longer supports them!), and in all likelihood would not survive a trip to the pavement...The 645s both have retractable lenses, and the zoom range of the 645zi is <i>very</i> useful, as it covers several prime lenses from a moderate wide to a long normal, all with very good resolution [the reason for Fuji's conservatism on the zoom ratio]. I have not come across many complaints of Fuji's EBC coatings regarding flare and have never seen it in my work, quite the contrary, in fact. </p>

[elliot_n]

Re. build quality. I bought my Fuji GSW690II with 150 on the clock, and have shot 150 rolls

with it in a 12 month period. It has failed twice in that period - first the winding

mechanism, and then the shutter (both successfully repaired by Fuji UK). Of course, it's

just one sample, and I don't know it's back-story, so no conclusions can be drawn -

but it doesn't inspire me with confidence.

 

Re. vignetting. I've no experience with the standard lens (90mm) version of this camera,

but the

wide version (GSW690, 65mm lens) exhibits vignetting at all apertures. This vignetting is

fairly subtle, and quite probably goes with the territory - I'm comparing it with a Mamiya

645AF and a 55mm lens, which is maybe not a fair comparison. Perhaps Mamiya 7 would

exhibit identical vignetting.

 

Here are some examples (not mine) of vignetting on the Fuji GSW690III - dark corners and

a hot spot in the middle.

 

The first link demonstrates the problem I routinely have to fix in Photoshop - look at the

white fence and the way it darkens (and colour shifts) to the left and right of frame:

 

http://www.fujirangefinder.com/document.php?id=152

 

http://www.fujirangefinder.com/document.php?id=459

 

http://www.fujirangefinder.com/document.php?id=3036

 

http://www.fujirangefinder.com/document.php?id=39