Why did you choose Mamiya 7ii over 35mm or digital?

[a._t._burke]

The Mamiya 7/7II fit lenses are said to be the highest resolution MF lenses currently offered. That gets you the clearest, best definition 30"x40" and larger big print.

[DavidRabinowitz]

Grady, I've been shooting digital since i got back into photography several years ago...2 years in I wanted to see what

MF could do vs. digital and I bought a Mamiya 7II with a compliment of lenses...i also bought a Nikon 9000 fim

scanner...at this point, they are gathering dust...i wanted a lightweight camera but if I had to do it all over again I might

have bought into the Hasselblad system...i find my interests have changed and I do more portraits and close ups with

the occasional landscape..my local photo store sends the MF out to be processed and it takes two weeks to return. I'm

too accustomed to the digital workflow whereby i can shoot and print within hours...now, when i'm more patient I can

really get into the incredible sharpness the Mamiya lenses create...i also like the increased tonal range over

digital...there is one other advantage i find with MF, it makes you think harder before you click the shutter...of course,

that's if you want to think much which is sometimes a problem with digital shooters...i'd love to find a reason to dust off

my Mamiya and get back to basics but at this point in time it makes no sense for me and i go digital when i scan with

the Nikon 9000 anyhow...

[david_f._stein]

Abhinava, wonderful image.

[bobmichaels]

I shoot with a Mamiya 7, a Zeiss Ikon rangefinder and a CLE. I shoot the same film (Neopan 400) in all of them.

All my shooting is handheld and usually involves some person I just met or have not met at all.

 

The Mamiya 7 simply gives better looking b&w prints, even at 8x10 sizes. I shoot it just like a do a 35mm rf.

 

But there still are times when 35mm range finder just works better so I usually have one with me. The Mamiya 7 is

an incredible camera but it won't do as your only camera. I can't think of any camera I own that would serve as

my only camera.

[ned_farmer]

I use a 35mm Nikon DSLR system (d700 now). The advantages of that system are apparent and many. But, I still

use my Mamiya 7 a lot. I can't tell you really which is better, but I would say they are two very different

systems. A high quality scan of Velvia film has tremendous resolution, but of course so do the the top Nikon and

Cannon DSLRs. However, most of the MF stuff I do is black & white and the 7 is great for that. The Mamiya 7

65mm, 150mm, and 43mm lenses are amazing. My digital images are mostly on my hard drive and viewed on a monitor,

but the Mamiya 7 B&W images are all worked in the dark room. I know darkrooms are going out fast, but I just

can’t do as much digital printing at home like I can with an enlarger. The costs of printing 16x20 black & white

seems fairly inexpensive when all costs are considered. Also even with cropping huge prints can still be had. I

love digital images, but for me not owning a large format printer (16x20 inch or larger) I’m way behind on my

digital printing capability. Yet I can produce them at will in the dark room. At least for the present I still

find great use of the Mamiya7.

[davem1]

Pure image quality.

 

I had a Mamiya 7ii with the 80 and 43, but got rid of it for a Nikon F5, 17-35, 80-200 and a Coolscan V. I wanted the convenience of

Autofocus, zoom lenses and its fast shooting capability. Now I want to ditch all the F5 stuff and buy another 7ii with 43 and 80. The

trannies are far superior than 35mm or affordable digital and Cibachrome prints are much better than Lightjet Supergloss (IMO!)

 

Just gotta get my 35mm stuff on ebay..... Roll on M7, can't wait!!!

[robert_champagne]

<p>Grady, your question and the responses are excellent. Here are my thoughts:<br>

1.) Digital or film-- a person capturing images either way today, is utilizing today's cutting edge technology whether they know/like it or not. Film technology today is superb-- Fuji and Kodak make excellent products. Even old optical designs like sonnars, planars, etc. are built to a precision never available before..<br>

2. It is harder to achieve good technical results with wet photograhy, than digital-- That is a fact.<br>

3.) Mood and atmosphere seem to be more subtle and more precious with film and silver prints, but too often digital capture and printing is destroyed by oversharpening and distortion of curves, etc.. <br>

Personally, I use a hybrid method-- capture with film (mostly Portra 400VC), scan with Fuji frontier (at a one hour photo), adjust in photoshop and print on an Epson 4800. Maybe this is a cop-out.. im not sure..<br>

I have a Mamiya 7II with 43,80 and 150 lenses. The lenses and film are indeed cutting edge-- no need to harbor any feelings of guilt/nostalgia about this equipment...</p>

<p> </p>

[robert_champagne]

<p>Grady, your question and the responses are excellent. Here are my thoughts:<br>

1.) Digital or film-- a person capturing images either way today, is utilizing today's cutting edge technology whether they know/like it or not. Film technology today is superb-- Fuji and Kodak make excellent products. Even old optical designs like sonnars, planars, etc. are built to a precision never available before..<br>

2. It is harder to achieve good technical results with wet photograhy, than digital-- That is a fact.<br>

3.) Mood and atmosphere seem to be more subtle and more precious with film and silver prints, but too often digital capture and printing is destroyed by oversharpening and distortion of curves, etc.. <br>

Personally, I use a hybrid method-- capture with film (mostly Portra 400VC), scan with Fuji frontier (at a one hour photo), adjust in photoshop and print on an Epson 4800. Maybe this is a cop-out.. im not sure..<br>

I have a Mamiya 7II with 43,80 and 150 lenses. The lenses and film are indeed cutting edge-- no need to harbor any feelings of guilt/nostalgia about this equipment...</p>

<p> </p>

[ronnie_pettit2]

<p>i have a the 7II with a 65mm and 43mm lens. i start the Oooos and Aahhhs as soon as i start pulling negatives off final rinse. i use the 43mm 90% of the time for backpacking and shooting small trout streams. it blows away the 40mm bronica on my SQai. it rivals the old raptar 135mm on my crown graphic, (some will day duh, here) if i ever get a wider lens for the crown graphic i will start lugging into the thickets again, but with whatever limitations the mamiya has, (for me it is close focus) the qulaity of a well exposed and nicely developed negative speaks for itself. I use mine more like a large format camera, on a tripod, with slow film, a cable release, long exposure, and i usually zone focus at about 8ft at f/16 which gives good DOP from about 3.5ft to infinity, or close. every camera has it's place, but you'll see when you start looking at your images, the mamiya 7 is a keeper. i can't wait to get a good scanner! anyone with experience will notice the crappy scans of prints on my website, but the prints of the mamiya make me smile.<br>

<a href="http://www.ronniepettit.com">www.ronniepettit.com</a></p>