Mamiya Press mini review

[squareformat]

<p>Hi All,<br>

I've posted my thoughts about the Press on my website at:<br>

<a href="http://photography-matters.blogspot.com/">http://photography-matters.blogspot.com/</a><br>

Hope you enjoy it!<br>

Bruce</p>

[dbltap4]

<p>Back in my younger days, I tried a Universal with the standard 100mm lens as a wedding camera. One long wedding convinced me that this was not the way to go for wedding photography! That was when I switched to 35mm, which by that time , was becoming the norm in my area. It was not so much the "work flow" involved in using it, but the weight and size that proved too much. I will say, though, that the 6x7 negs did produce a very decent picture.<br>

Jim</p>

[tom_aellis1]

<p>Very poorly written article / piece. You begin by stating that "you have no idea" what the Mamiya Press is good for. But then you continue to go on....<br>

The piece offers no information at all, just that basically you find the camera ugly, forgot to take out the dark slide and something about tilt and shift focusing. Then you go on in a new para leading the reader to believe that you will have something to say on the topic "Digital beats Med Format".<br>

Article is simply a bunch of words thrown on a screen and nothing sticks.</p>

[squareformat]

<p>Cheers, Tom!</p>

[Andrew in Austin]

<p>It's blog, folks - not a definitive review. Bruce tried it and gave it up for something modern. Now we have to wait to see if he eventually gives that up for a 4x5.</p>

[jack_welsh]

<p>Have the Universal and will never sell it. The first time I saw a Mamiya Press camera was years ago when a photographer was using one of the earlier models at a dog show. Like it very much. Don't use it as often now. Since I bought a RB67 and a 645 Pro since then. Use the Universal for whenever I want a 6x9 neg. Feel that in MF, the 6x9 is the best lanscape format. Since a person has more options in cropping than the 645,6x6 and 6x7 formats. Buying the other 2 cameras doesn't mean I like the Universal less.</p>

[h._p.]

<p>The statement that "You would have looked very odd indeed if you'd turned up at a press event wielding the Mamiya whilst your peers were carrying Rolleis and Leicas" reveals a complete misunderstanding of how press photography was carried out in the mid 'sixties, when this camera was current.</p>

<p>The Mamiya Press was a very successful model, aimed at the large number of photographers who combined press work for regional and local publications with a general commercial practice. These people would have been converting from something like the Graflex 4x5 camera and, as such, the Mamiya Press would have been a very attractive package, letting them move to roll-film while retaining a reasonable sized format and some of the movements they were used to.</p>

<p>In the UK at least, it was common to see the Mamiya in use at the jobs I went to and the photographers using them were not regarded as 'odd'. You certainly shouldn't consider the tiny body of Fleet Street hacks as representative of press photography in general and, in any case, I saw Mamiyas in use even among their number.</p>

<p>You might wish to do some further research and amend your article accordingly. There is already far too much misinformation on the web and I'm sure you don't wish to add to it.</p>

[squareformat]

<p>HP,<br>

I'm a newspaper reporter and have been for more than 30 years. I've known loads of regional/local and national newspaper photographers and in all that time I've only ever heard of one guy who used a Mamiya Press. He was, indeed, a local freelance who used his camera for other things than press photography. He used to get a lot of stick from his peers on the rare occasions when he turned up at a news event with it. A well-known photographer, now deceased, who used to work with the Express told me the move from 4x5 press cameras to Rolleis and then on to 35mm was quite rapid once it started. He couldn't remember seeing any Mamiya Press cameras in use in Fleet Street.</p>

<p>Rolleis started taking over from 4x5 press cameras, at least in the national press in the UK, in the 1950s. In the late 1950s Tony Armstrong Jones began using 35mm as a freelancer working for the Express and that started the switch to the smaller format. It took a little longer for regional papers to catch up but the guys on my paper ditched 4x5 in the early 1960s and moved onto Rolleis. Now, no doubt there would be some local freelance guys using Mamiya Press cameras somewhere in the UK but very few, if any, staff photographers. I can remember a local stringer using a Zeiss Super Ikonta in the 1980s but that didn't make her choice of equipment any less odd in the eyes of her staff colleagues.</p>

<p>You said, "You certainly shouldn't consider the tiny body of Fleet Street hacks as representative of press photography in general..." I'd argue that they were more representative of press photography than local guys who made their living shooting kids' portraits and only occasionally got some newspaper work.</p>

<p>The situation may have been different elsewhere in the world but that's the way it was in the UK and I'm quite content with what I've written.</p>

[h._p.]

<p>It's been my experience that people who take your stance are unlikely to be influenced by the views of others, so I'll leave you to your opinions.</p>

[Andrew in Austin]

<p>To say that 6x9 press cameras weren't in use during the 1960s is inaccurate. If you look closely at the photo below, you will see a Hasselblad in use.</p>

<p>http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2010/01/clarification.html</p>

[john_jennings2]

<p>I "came of age" in photography in 1968, when I took a high school photography class. This was an era of transition. The standard was 120 roll film. Graflex 4 x 5 were about five years out of date, and general use of 35mm was about five years in the future.<br>

Local newspaper photographers were using Mimaya twin lens refelx C33 or whatever. That's small town Texas, so pretty conservative.</p>