Is the Mamiya 7 just an oversized Leica M7?

[parasko_p]

Hi all,

 

I recently purchased a Leica M7 system and it is to date the best camera/equipment I have ever owned...both in

terms of the camera's reliability as well as the lens optics.

 

I am using it strictly for street photography..for personal work and most times I use it as a p&s to capture the

moment quickly, with the exposure so reliable I really don't check the meter before I click (and I shoot slides!).

 

My questions:

 

1. Would I achieve the same as above via a Mamiya 7II kit?

That is, is the Mamiya a street shooting camera which can be used fast to capture a moment (I don't mean to

capture motion but instead a 'responsive' system)?

 

2. Is it too large to be discrete for street photos involving people? I know the shutter is more silent than the Leica.

 

3. Is the camera as easy (or difficult) to focus as a Leica (.72 version) and are the viewfinder framelines accurate with

the 65mm and 50mm lenses?

 

So, basically, I want everything the Leica offers me but a 6x7 neg.

 

Any advice/ comments appreciated. I would be interested in hearing from people who have used both systems who

can comment on the differences.

[wai_leong_lee]

Mamiya 6 prob better. However, at F3.5 for the 75 mm lens, it's just a bit too slow for low light.

[Craig_Cooper11664875449]

I shoot with both, and although I know others use the Mamiya for similar things, I dont find I much overlap in the use of both systems. That said, the viewfinder in the Mamiya is better than the Leica; the metering is quirky as it is not through the lens; and unless you are using AE metering, you only get full stop increments; as well, its not a camera that you can really zone focus with. Apart from that, I love the camera.

 

Something I added which makes it handle very well in a street environment is a generic leather hand grip - however, rather than use the bottom attachment for the tripod socket, I removed it and threaded a longer strap back through the bottom left side lug. If you think you every want to use it on a tripod, have a look at base plates from Kirk or RRS, generic ones just dont work.

[link]

Parasko,

 

I haven't used the Mamiya, but I do have a Fuji GW 690 which is similar in operation (though without a light meter).

 

When I got my "Texas Leica" I thought it might be useful for very high quality "street" photography. I was wrong. With the shallow depth of focus

zone focus is not really practical, and for most interesting lighting, I haven't been able to get a shutter speed above 1/125th often. The result has

been enough focus error and camera shake to make the results, though good, not really better than 35mm which costs a lot less per frame, and

is faster on the draw so to speak.

 

I still use my Fuji rangefinder cameras, but mostly for landscapes and usually on a tripod, and often at night.

 

So no, I don't think the Mamiya 7 is a big substitute for a Leica, but a different camera altogether.

[dougmiles]

If the Mamiya 7II has a sharply-defined center RF spot, that's better than the Fuji GW690 or 670 (which I do have), which has a rather pathetic yellowish fuzzy central focus area, typical of medium-format Fuji RFs. I've not had the pleasure of using a 7II but it could be a larger brother to the Bronica RF645 which I also use and like. The Bronica seems rather similar to the Mamiya except for the format difference, and it is like a bigger Leica M7. Crisp RF, quiet, compact, meters from near the VF window. Compared to the Bronica, a Fuji GW670III is a clunker, sorry to say. And it's not all a matter of size, as I also slink around with a Pentax 67II tucked discreetly under my elbow for opportunistic shots while out with my wife shopping, and it's definitely bigger than the Fuji. :-) I think the Mamiya is a little smaller than the GW690, might qualify as a general carry camera as the Bronica does.

[parasko_p]

Thanks to you all for your comments so far. I'm not sure I understand one comment though:

 

<<With the shallow depth of focus zone focus is not really practical>>

 

I'm not sure I understand the difference between depth of focus as opposed to depth of field (which I do understand).

 

I don't zone focus with the Leica and pre-focus/ plan my shots.

 

Anyway, judging from most images I have seen, not many people are using the Mamiya 7 the way a Leica can be used for discrete street shooting; I'm assuming due to the camera's physical size alone. A Leica tends to be less intimidating when photographing people, even when up close.

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

You should take a look at this DOF table:

 

http://dofmaster.com/doftable.html

 

The 80mm 'normal' lens for the Mamiya 7 has pretty shallow DOF. At f/11, focused at 10 feet, the DOF 7 feet. At f/5.6, it's only 3' 3". The DOF improves a great deal if you go with the 50mm or 43mm lenses.

 

I really like my Mamiya 7II, but I still use 35mm gear in low light situations.

[Mike Gammill]

Another possibility if you would find the 6 x 4.5 cm negative size large enough: The Fuji GS645 W, which has a 45mm f5.6 lens. This lens is about equivalent to a 28mm wide angle on 35mm. Camera does not have a rangefinder. Quiet leaf shutter and match diode meter. Perhaps some users of this camera might share some pros and cons of this model. I've been thinking about one of those for myself.

[derek_stanton2]

The only way to know if it would work for You is to try it. Find a used but clean sample at a good price. Use it for a couple of

months. If it's not right, sell it for (close to) the same price.

<p>

I had a Mamiya 6, at the same time as a Leica M7. I found the Mamiya was EASIER to focus than the Leica.

<p>

What i didn't like:

<p>- I wanted to shoot travel portraits, with shallow DOF. The 6 and 7 lenses are slow, and don't really permit as much subject-

background separation as i wanted. As well, they don't focus close, so shallow DOF is even more difficult to attain.

<p>- Bokeh was not good, at least, not from the Mamiya 6's 75mm lens.

 

Other than that, it's a very nice system. I don't believe you're going to get much 'stealth' from them, though. No matter how

quiet the shutter. It's a very large camera, and to non-photographers, it's 'odd-looking.'

<p>

If you shoot 'street' without scale focusing your Leica, i believe you can work the same way with a Mamiya. DOF with a

medium format camera is shallower than with 35mm. But, these lenses are slower, so you don't have to worry about

shooting at f1.4. F4.5 on an 80mm lens isn't that shallow at normal 'street' distances. As well, medium format is more

'forgiving' of slightly imprecise focus than 35mm is. If your focus with a 35mm camera isn't 'dead-on,' it just looks like it's out

of focus. With 6x6/6x7, you might still have a nice negative - not a throwaway.

 

Here's, perhaps, the main reason why i sold the Mamiya 6:

I was shooting Tri-X with both the Mamiya and the Leica M7. I shot them alongside each other, when traveling in Brazil. I

shot the same subject, and when i scanned the results, i found no significant differences between the two negatives when

enlarged to almost 11x14. I was using the fantastic Leica 35mm Summicron-ASPH. Now, Tri-X is not a high-resolution film.

I'm sure that if you shot a more fine-grained film with both cameras, the larger negative would prove superior. But, for my

purposes, Tri-X didn't give me any gain in the 6x6 versus the amazing ASPH lens.

<p>

Similarly, because the Mamiya lenses are so much slower than you're used to with 35mm, you may find you need to shoot

faster/higher-grained film, just to get the same working shutter speeds and appropriate apertures for your purposes. And, so

you have to weigh whether, for example, ISO 100 with a good 35mm lens is significantly inferior to ISO 400 with the MF lens.

<p>

I don't know what your idea of "street" is. There are some photographers i like who are shooting Mamiya 7s, but not many.

And, their work is generally more composed than 'responsive.' More like portraiture, less like Winogrand. Links below. In the

end, maybe you need to reconsider why you want the larger negative. When i tried to shoot 'street,' i had in mind a certain

look: I liked Ralph Gibson and Josef Koudelka, for example. I wanted my pictures to look like theirs. I also thought maybe

bigger could be better. But, there's a reason why it hasn't been done much/consistently. It just might not be the Most

Appropriate Tool for the job. In the end, i realized if i wanted something to look like something else, the best solution is to use

the same tools as what has already been established. But, i wasn't trying to create a new aesthetic. If that's your goal, you

will need to experiment.

<p>

Take a look at Kathleen Laraia McLaughlin:

<a href="http://www.photoeye.com/gallery/forms/index.cfm?

image=1&id=185304&imagePosition=1&Door=2&Portfolio=Portfolio2&Gallery=2">KLM at PhotoEye</a>

<p> and

<a href="http://www.klmphoto.com/Gallery.htm">KLM</a>

<p>

and "Stpiduko":

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/eamon/sets/72157604091210913/">Eamon on Flickr</a>

<p>

But, look at Stpiduko's work with the Nikon+28mm+Reala. In my opinion, that's the more vivid, interesting work. And, it

almost invariably appears sharper than anything he does with larger formats.... Reala (100) with a sharp lens looks 'better'

to me than the ISO 400/800 film with the Mamiya lens, even though the Mamiya lens is world-class.

<p>

You, lastly, have to weigh the output and reproduction stage. I have a dedicated Minolta 35mm filmscanner. But, i used

(only?) a flatbed for medium format negs. Perhaps the difference between the two negs would be greater if i scanned both

on an Imacon/drum? You will probably find you need a greater scanner investment to get the most out of medium format.

But, then again, for 'street' work, you're not working with a tripod, under ideal conditions, and so, again, the differences

become smaller.

<p>

I don't think there's a simple answer. So, that leads me back to my original statement ﾗ try it. : )

[kelly_flanigan1]

The old Kodak Medalist RF was the original Texas Leica

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

"I shot the same subject, and when i scanned the results, i found no significant differences between the two negatives when enlarged to almost 11x14."

 

You need a better scanner, then. I find MF optical prints to be vastly superior at 11x14.

[bobmichaels]

I shoot a Mamiya 7 and a Zeiss Ikon rf exactly the same way photographing strangers on the street. No real difference except the big neg makes prints that simply have better tonality.

 

The size of the body makes no difference and it is as easy to focus. The Mamiya 7 AE is heavily center weighted, so I frequently shoot on manual or pay attention to the exposure but that's no big deal.

 

FWIW, I seem to have the same probability of a "winner" from 10 frames on the Mamiya 7 as I do from 35 on the Zeiss Ikon.

[parasko_p]

Thanks to you all for your responses.

 

Derek, thanks for the link to Kathleen Laraia McLaughlin. What a great portfolio she has. A true advertisement for the Mamiya 7 and its capabilities using both B&W and Colour film.

 

However, her photographs are more portrait-like or shots where the subject is posing/ aware of her shooting. My photos tend to be more discrete where the person(s) is not always aware...so it requires very fast shooting, although planning is involved in the shot.

 

Based on all comments, I will purchase an M7 somewhere down the track, but for the moment the Leica gear suits my purpose...so I will have to live with smaller prints.

 

Cheers.

[parasko_p]

oops..my last comment should read: "purchase a Mamiya 7 somewhere down the track"

[derek_stanton2]

"I shot the same subject, and when i scanned the results, i found no significant differences between the two negatives when

enlarged to almost 11x14."

 

You need a better scanner, then. I find MF optical prints to be vastly superior at 11x14.

 

If you read the whole of my post, you should have noticed that i qualified that statement. Film choice has a say in any

potential differences. I already mentioned the scanner issue. As well, we are talking about 'street' photography, not 'best-

case-scenario' work where you're able/likely to use a tripod, cable release, etc. to take advantage of MF's inherent

advantages. Under the circumstances in which i shot those two frames, also the likely manner of working for the person

who posted the original question, my statement stands. And, no, in that specific instance, the MF scanner was not the

limiting factor. Examining detail with a loupe, down to the grain level, there was no significant advantage with 6x6.

 

And, again, whether or not MF optical prints are better at 11x14, if you are able to shoot a slower, finer grained film with

35mm because the lenses are faster, then the Practical differences are minimized.

[Uhooru]

I think the so called "stealth" factor in all these cameras is a red herring when it comes to street photography. I've used the Texas Leica, a Hassy, Leica's, a DSLR that's pretty big and the Mamiya 7. The only camera that ever got noticed was an old Nikon FE2 with a motor on it that actually turned heads...but I was still able to get shots. This stealth thing is a whole topic in itself. The Mamiya 7 is a great street shooter. I just have the 80 and I've really been enjoying it. It meters fine when I need, but I often just have a hand held incident meter and its fine. On a good sunny So Cal day there is loads of light and you can use, within the quirks of the lens, zone focusing. The camera is very quiet, more so than a Leica, but then you have to change film more often and its more expensive to operate. I tend to shoot more carefully and composed with it than the 35mm. Also, the rangefinder is very bright and the camera is quite quick to focus and shoot. I wouldn't think of it as one being better, the leica or the Mamiya, having both is better, they both have advantanges, I usually carry one of each or the Mamiya and a digital, one lens each. Light and mobile. The MF Mamiya lens, if used properly, blows all over the Leica, sorry. But you may not see it till you print big. The glass is just as sharp and it just holds so much more information. Sorry, but in photography negatives, size does count.

[john_photo]

Load up a mamiya 7 with any of the current 400 speed films and I will take the resulting output over a leica with slow film from here to eternity. And those looking for fine detail in my prints at my local gallery will also.

 

The large negative itself lends itself to all types of prints. For instance at 20 x 24, how is that 35mm leica or zeiss RF going to hold up using the SAME workflow when compared to 6x7? ah hem.. I would even take 645 SLR on a tripod shot with 400 over say 160 color neg shot with a leica and its wonder ASPH lens. No contest.

 

Your comparson methodology is flawed. Why not use a medium format film scanner or drum scans and then make the comparison. People shoot medium format because it gives them the choice to print big if they so choose. Leica RF's are super cameras but when it comes to IQ they are second fiddle to most modern MF systems from the 1990's.

 

35mm rangefinders are designed for a completely different type of photography. Often IQ means very little in these types of shots anyways. How many street photographers really utilize the potential of the ASPH lens while working handheld at low shutter speeds? such that it blows the latest prime lens from Nikon or Pentax out of the water?

[david_elden]

No, because of the DOF difference inherent in the longer FL used for a given angle of view with the Mamiya. Can you use it for street photography? Yes (you can find video of Martin Parr doing so for example), and you could use a 4x5 as well if you chose to but you will have to work differently and will get different results. Personally I use 35mm rangefinders and a Mamiya 6 and I use them for different things. Your plan of buying and trying is a good one, if a little pricey although you'll probably get most of your $ back if it doesn't work for you and you resell a used Mam 7.

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

"If you read the whole of my post, you should have noticed that i qualified that statement. Film choice has a say in any potential differences. I already mentioned the scanner issue. "

 

So you're defending your flawed methodology?? Your Leica is just as good as the Mamiya because you used a crap scanner for the Mamiya? Wow! Thanks for sharing your insights!