Mamiya 7II Contax or Pentax

[sashar]

What is the best MF camera today on the market?

Thinking of getting Mamiya7 or Contax645(they are closing down..) or Pentax?

[db1]

What about hasselblad? what kind of work do you do?

 

check the archives.

[gaius1]

Well, do you want 67 or 645, that's the first question...

[mike_earussi1]

Depends on what your defination of "best" is. If it is optical quality alone then the Mamiya is best by far as their lens quality rivals that of Leica (literally), only in medium format size. Contax, having Zeiss lenses, is also good but you lose a lot of resolution (around 30%)in being 645 vs. 67 also the mamiya lenses are still better (all things being equal rangefinder lenses will usually be better than slr lenses, at least in wide angle as they are simpler in design since there is no mirror to compensate for.) The biggest bang for the buck is the pentax. Their lenses are not as good as either mamiya or contax (their contrast is as good but not their resolution) but it is a 67 slr which will have less grain than 645 and is usually much easier to compose with than a rangefinder plus they are so heavy that you can hand hold them at 1/30 second without noticeable camera shake.

Which brings up another area of consideration, weight. If you plan on shooting outside of a studio a lot (if you're just wanting a studio camera then you should really get a mamiya RB67 II) the pentax weighs a lot, especially with the lenses. Also if you plan on shooting on a tripod, all medium format focal plane shutters have a pronounced kick at 1/30 of a second and slower that must be compensated for by putting a weight on top of their pentaprism (when I had my pentax 67 and 645 I would drape my camera bag across the top, it weighed about 10 lbs. but it worked). Another camera to consider is the old Koni-Omega, the only 67 rangefinder with interchangable backs. They are only about 20% of the cost of the mamiya with lenses about 85-90% as good (rangefinder lenses again), definately better than the pentax lenses. They weigh more than the mamiya and do not have auto-exposure but if you shoot more than one type of film the interchangable backs are really nice. But their lens selection is limited, as are all rangefinders.

Hope this helps. Good luck.

[bob_the_builder1]

Mamiya are overrated - best bang for your buck is Rolleiflex TLRs, with image quality on a

par with others. Decide on what format you want first, then look at other aspects. Image

quality is good with all, there are no bad choices in MF. Even a HOlga is good in the right

hands. Dont be a brand victim and choose a system that fits your needs. There is no such

thing as the best MF camera, only lots of very good options. All have thei strenghs and

weakneses. Mamiya has the same weakneses as other rangefinders, an SLR has same pros

and disadvantatges as with 35mm, etc. etc. Think about the images you want to produce

first, then buy the tools that will let you best produce it. Mamiya lenses are very sharp, yes,

but if you are looking to produce more "artistic" shots perhaps that would be a hindrance ....

[ilkka_nissila]

I have a Mamiya 7 and if I were to do it again, I would get a Hasselblad 503CW. The Mamiya is great in that it is small and lightweight, including lenses, and you can get good results at long exposure times hand-held because of no mirror. But I miss SLR viewing and focusing. Also, you will never get a digital body for the rangefinder Mamiya, while there are several backs that fit the Hasselblad.

 

Avoid any discontinued system as digital support probably won't be there when you need it.

[eric_brody]

The question has no meaning, and no answer, certainly no single answer, as can be determined by the well meaning but useless attempts by others to answer it. The camera is but a tool. Until you define the end result eg what kind of photographs you intend to make, it's not helpful to ask such open ended questions. All the cameras you mention will make great images, when used by a skilled creative photographer, all will be frustrating bricks when used by someone without darkroom skills, in black and white, or photoshop skills in color.

 

Eric

[pavelp]

The best camera is a camera that allows you to do what you want to do. Mamiya 7 may have the sharpest lenses on this planet but if all you want to shoot is macro, it will turn into a worthless piece of equipment. RZ67 might be the most versatile camera ever made, but if you want a camera for travel, you want to look at other options first.

 

Define your needs and select a camera that will fit the needs. Difference in optical quality of major brands (Mamiya, Rollei, Pentax, Bronica, Hasselblad, apologies to those I omitted) are minimal, or at least not worth a single sleepless night (some test chart shooters will disagree for sure).

[andrewlamb]

Following up on the very sensible comments regarding the kind of

photography you intend to do: do you need a Polaroid back? Do you need to

re-load film quickly? Do you need leaf shutter lenses to synch, with flash, at

any speed? Do you need movements? And so on and so on...

[fewellp]

I use the mamiya 7 as a street camera, very light weight, superior optics and can be hand held as very slow shutter speeds. Check my gallery for some city shots with the seven at night. I also like the Mamiya C330s tlr as a tripod camera. I have all lens for both cameras and they are all awesome, just depends on what and why I am shooting. I can tell you though that a 6x7 chrome on the light table is a sight to behold. Just got the rollei 2.8e Tlr great for light weight TLR. Of all the old cameras the Mamiya 7 is the one camera I'll take if I can only take one camera and one lens. You can't go wrong with the 7 and no reason to spend the extra dollars for the 7II. Good luck! Regards Phillip

[mike_kearney]

The best medium format camera is the one currently in your camera bag and being used...

[troyammons]

Gees, those 3 are totally different cameras.

 

A good idea is to do a bit of "how do I want to shoot" research and go frm there. i have owned a few MF cameras, including the M7 and the P6x7 and P67 II.

 

I guess it boils down to if you wnat to shoot a chimney finder, to your face slr or a rangefinder. They all have their benifits, but i am sure you know that.

 

I have never used a contax so I cant comment on that.

 

If I were hiking a lot, and wanted to shoot 6x7 i would pack a M7, but the lenses are limited, close focus sucks, and using filters are more difficult, and the lenses cost mucho $, like a 43mm for over $1500 used. I really want to like that camera, but i like to compose through the lens. It is almost like a giant P+S.

 

The p67II is probably one of the most well rounded 6x7 cameras I have used. Great meter, nice screen, great selection of lenses, but some are so much better than others its not funny. Its a heavy beast too, terrible mirror slap. Very heavy.

 

The pentax 645 nII would be my next stop. Sharp lenses that are reasonable compared to contax, autowind, autoexposure and autofocus. Its like a giant 35mm AF camera but it has a smaller neg.

 

So I would decide how and what format you want to shoot first and go from there. Is a leaf shutter and RF manditory for shooting slow shutter speeds handheld. If so that narrows the field to several RF cameras.

 

Do you need 6x7 (P67 or M7) or will 645 do. That will narrow the field more.

 

Without shooting each you will just be guessing.

 

What is it that you are photographing.

[bob_the_builder1]

Just an additional thought on the Mamiyas. I recall reading somewhere that they were not

ideally suited to portrait photography due to their limited minimum focus distance, being

better suited to landscape photography in that regard. Just something to bear in mind.

[Brian]

<P>Sasha, you've been given some really detailed advice by people far more experienced than I am. My advice however is not to jump in too deep. Top class MF cameras are still expensive. A cheap starter kit would be one of the good old TLRs like a Minolta Autocord, Yashicamat or Rolleicord. Used with care, these will deliver stunning negs or slides, and you can decide for yourself whether the quality achieved is worth the more deliberate technique needed to shoot MF. If you decide to move on to high-price MF, you can sell the TLR for little or no loss, or keep it as a backup.</P><P>In another thread you were given a good deal of information about the relative difficulty of developing and printing MF compared to 35mm. You can also check out this first-hand before committing serious funds to MF.</P>

[jeff_drew4]

How about any 4x5" field camera with a rollfilm back?

[ilkka_nissila]

I absolutely agree that the Mamiya 7 is not the camera for portraits - at least I need SLR focusing to do it properly. However, they are very lightweight for 6x7 image size and interchangeable lenses. Yes, it's a great landscape, architecture, and travel camera. No, it's not a macro, tele, portrait, or action camera. But it takes a fraction of the space of a Hasselblad. Unfortunately, a Hasselblad can be bought for much less money than a Mamiya 7 system due to the wider availability of Hassie 2nd hand gear.

[Spearhead]

I use the Mamiya 7 regularly for portraits.<p>

 

<center><img src="http://www.spirer.com/images/mxg.jpg"><br><i>Oaxaquena, Copyright 2004 Jeff Spirer</i></center><p>

 

 

<center><img src="http://www.spirer.com/images/sean1.jpg"><br><i>Kinikick, Copyright 2003 Jeff Spirer</i></center><p>

 

<center><img src="http://www.spirer.com/images/birthday.jpg"><br><i>Cumpleanos, Copyright 2000 Jeff Spirer</i></center><p>

 

There's plenty more where they came from...It's about whether you are creative about portraits or not.

[ilkka_nissila]

Jeff, yes, if the subject is static there is no problem, but if the subject is allowed to live a normal life which is documented in pictures which may include portraits (of a live event, not posed), SLR focusing is easier and more confident than rangefinder focusing. It's about which style of photographs you want. If you disagree, show me pictures of children playing freely, take some close-ups of them in the with a 150 mm lens and if the whole roll is in focus then you're just a better cameraman than I am. I can only do that with an SLR.

[Spearhead]

There's a difference betweeen portraits and event shooting. And there's a difference between portraits and street shooting. However, I've done the latter quite a bit with the Mamiya.<p><center><img src="http://www.spirer.com/images/therush.jpg"><br><i>The Rush, Copyright 2001 Jeff Spirer</i></center>

[bob_the_builder1]

Jeff, I think the photos you posted are good but not really great head and shoulder portraits.

More environmental stuff, which is fine. For head and shoulder work the 7 isnt ideal. Sure you

can shoot away fine enough, but other systems are better, much better, for portraits. The top

portrait just looks flat to me, was it a crop from a larger image perhaps?

[donald_hutton]

Bob the Builder:

 

Just because it's obvious you don't know: portrait is does not imply head and shoulders only. I take it your statement "Mamiya are over rated" is based upon something you've read; not actual experience either? The optics are second to none - absolutely the finest on any medium format camera I've ever used. Yes, it's a rangefinder - which has some limitations. As an all around camera, I find it to have far fewer than my Rolleiflex TLR though. Incidentally, you may be also interested to know that the 80mm (normal) lens on the Mamiya 7 focusses down to three feet...

[Spearhead]

Headshots are a small subset of "portraits."

 

Richard Avedon used 8x10 view camreas for his portraits. I seriously doubt that anyone is going to argue that his shots aren't "portraits" because they are mostly not headshots. I seriously doubt that anyone here would have said to Avedon's face that the 8x10 was a lousy "portrait camera."

 

Get real, there's a lot of different ways to do portraits.

 

And my first posted one is head and shoulders.

[bob_the_builder1]

Hi Donal and Jeff - chill out fellas. All I am saying is that the 7 isnt the perfect camera it has

limitations. I tried one for a while and eventually sold it on as for the type of mainly

portraiture work I do the close focus issue was a problem. And yes, for me a classic portrait

is head and shoulders only. The stuff you guys are talking about is what I would call

environmental portraiture, where the 7 will be better suited. Yes, those lenses are sharp, but

again for portraiture I am not always wanting sharp, but rather soft with nice bokeh. I find

the 7 bokeh rather harsh. Just personal preference. As I have said above, the camera has its

virtues, just be wary of those selling it as a panacea for all creative applications. It is not.

[bob_the_builder1]

p.s. Jeff, when you say that "Richard Avedon used 8x10 view camreas for his portraits" you

are correct, however that system and the lenses available for it are way way superior in terms

of image quality to anything the 7 can produce. The proof is in the images! Just have a

browse around and you will see that most "portrait" photos are not taken with Mamiya 7

rangefinder cameras ....

[Spearhead]

What does that have to do with taking portraits? Nothing. It doesn't matter who has or has not used the Mamiya 7 for portraits (and I went to a local show with some very large portraits done with it.)

 

The point is that almost any camera can be used for taking portraits, there's no such thing as a "portrait camera," which is what is implied in your first response above. The Mamiya 7 is a fine camera for taking portraits, I've done it for years, plenty of other people have done it for years.