A bit of a gear dilemma with the Mamiya 7 + Hasselblad

[mike_leon]

So, a bit of a gear dilemma here...

 

I have been using a Mamiya 7 for some time now, after having picked up a partial kit from an estate sale and then filled it out gradually

from use. Over the last few months, I have started to sell off the lenses I use the least, namely the 50mm first (the 43mm was used way

more), then the 65mm (in favor of the 80mm), and finally the 150mm.  This leaves me with just the 43mm and 80mm, which I find

sufficient for what I use my Mamiya for (mostly outdoor atmospheric shots, more specifically landscapes in Nat'l Parks or just walks where

I feel like the big negative will be beneficial). 

 

I enjoy the camera a lot - I am very comfortable with RFs as I have shot 35mm for some time.  I recently went to Death Valley and while I

shot the majority of my images with my Mamiya 7, I rented a Pentax 67ii and found that I missed looking through the lens. I was able to

use my filters more effectively and focus closer.  

 

Another thing I am finding is that the lens I use of the time is the 43mm, making it a de facto fixed lens camera. 

 

So I am thinking of rebuilding my Hassleblad kit, selling my M7 80mm, and leaving me with a quandary over what to do with my

M7/43mm. I will miss it if I sell it, but maybe it makes more sense to sell it and pick up...

 

- an SWC, which is compatible with the new system and has comparable IQ, has changeable backs, but isn't usable digitally (more

expensive)

- a 40mm FLE, which solves the digital issue, but doesn't have the same SWC/Zeiss magic (similar price)

- or a Fuji GSW690, which isn't as wide, but has sparkling IQ. (much cheaper)

 

Any thoughts?

[leicaglow]

<p>The first thing that pops out is that the 7 is a bigger negative, and the 43mm wider than a 40mm on the Hasselblad. If your goal is to get to digital, then you may not have a choice, but you were a little sketchy on that art of your post. The look of the 40mm FLE and the 38mm is very slight, IMO. But then you jump to the 690. I get the impression you don't really know why you want to switch.</p>

[stuart_richardson]

<p>I would hang on to the 80mm and the Mamiya 7, personally. The 80mm does not command particularly high prices, and it is still nice to have along in the bag if you do decide at one point that you would rather just take the 43mm and the 80mm, instead of a larger kit consisting of the Hasselblad and lenses. The 38mm Biogon puts you in the same position, as it is also an additional camera to a Hasselblad kit. It is not very big or heavy, but it is bulkier and more fussy than just another lens (particularly when you account for the finder sticking on the top, and either rear caps or switching film magazines etc). <br>

Personally, I have both a Hasselblad 203FE kit with an SWC and the Mamiya 7II. If I had to keep one, it would probably be the Mamiya. I think the SWC is overrated. It IS a good lens, but it is a poor body. The 43mm in the Mamiya (at least in my mamiya) is sharper, much easier and more accurate to focus since it has an RF (what is the point of a sharp lens if you cannot accurately focus it without popping on a groundglass? It DOES make a difference...scale focusing is not accurate enough for these cameras in large prints), it has a 6x7 aspect ratio which is generally preferred for wide angle landscapes, it has a quieter, better damped, more accurate electronic shutter, a meter, AE, a flatter film path, AND interchangeable lenses.<br>

The SWC is more compact, can focus closer and can take a groundglass back for accurate focus in close up situations and has interchangeable film backs. <br>

After about 10 years of having both the Mamiya 7 and the 203 system, both with multiple lenses, I consistently get sharper prints out of the Mamiya -- I think it is a combination of lower vibrations (even with tripod and mirror pre-release), the big fat pressure plate and straight film path (the film does not get bent in different places like in the Hasselblad back...again, this does make a difference, especially if you do not shoot the film shortly after loading), and the advantages of rangefinder vs SLR optical design. All that said, sharpness is not everything, and the Hasselblad lenses have a great look. The 110/2 is amazing, and I agree that for anything longer than 80mm I am almost always looking to the Hasselblad over the Mamiya, but if you like using the 43mm and the M7, I would certainly recommend against selling it, as there really is nothing else like it out there. Since you already have it in hand, it's not like you need to shell out the money to buy it. In this case, the grass is NOT greener on the other side. </p>

[aplumpton]

<blockquote>

<p>"I rented a Pentax 67ii and found that I missed looking through the lens. I was able to use my filters more effectively and focus closer." </p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>If that is important, you might upgrade your Hasselblad equipment to a wider lens. The GSW 690 is a nice camera (I use one, and the 65mm lens is no slouch, but arguably less sharp than the lenses of the 7), but with a much smaller angle of view (like a 28 on 35mm body) than your 43mm on the 7, which you say you use a lot. Why not also keep your Mamiya 7 and its two optics? The 80 may not be that useful in scenics, but I find that the 75 on my Mamiya 6 (a more or less equivalent situation) is sometimes very useful for picking out important compositions within the wider view. </p>

[mike_leon]

Thanks everybody - I did downplay the digital element, but that is an ever looming reason in my head. Film and

processing are getting expensive (and I have a weakness for slide film, with more than 100 rolls in my freezer), and the

fact that the M7 does not have a digital upgrade path definitely scares me a little. The other thing is: one of the basic

reasons to own the M7 is to use multiple lenses. I already know out of the six, I would only ever use two, and in reality it's

one - the 43mm. That is the reason I brought up the Fuji' RFs - they are true fixed lens cameras, and they are less

expensive than the M7, and have a bigger negative for scenes with a lot of detail. The 503CW gets used for anything

longer than 100mm (love the CF 100), so I figured this would be the moment to either commit to that system either with

the 40mm or the SWC), or find a reason to keep the Mamiya.

 

I hope this clarifies things a bit.

[ondebanks]

<blockquote>

<p>- an SWC, which is compatible with the new system and has comparable IQ, has changeable backs, but isn't usable digitally (more expensive) - a 40mm FLE, which solves the digital issue</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'm pretty sure I've seen good images from a digital-backed SWC? It probably involved more work in LCC (lens cast correction) but it looked like it was worth the effort.</p>

[mike_leon]

Hasselblad does not recommend using a digital back with an SWC because of smearing at the edges, hence the consideration of the

40mm FLE.

[diegobuono]

<p>YEs, true, Hasselblad does not recommend using the SWC with digital back but.... then.....<br>

<a href="http://htv.hasselblad.com/video/hasselblad-swc-now-i-shoot-digital">http://htv.hasselblad.com/video/hasselblad-swc-now-i-shoot-digital</a></p>

 

[stuart_richardson]

<p>I would not think of your film gear in terms of its upgradability to digital. It is possible to shoot with the V system on digital, but it is not really ideally suited to it. The H system, the Phase One Mamiya setup, Pentax and Leica setups are more ground up solutions that tend to be more fluid to work with, even if you want to shoot V lenses (all these cameras have V mount adapters). Shooting digital in the V system is not really like just putting on a digital back instead of a film one, unless you are using a CFV. It is a bit more clunky than that in most cases. Personally I think it's better to stick with film on the systems built with film in mind, and digital with the systems that were designed for it from the beginning. I speak from experience here! At least make sure you try before you buy. </p>

[ondebanks]

<blockquote>

<p>The H system, the Phase One Mamiya setup, Pentax and Leica setups are more ground up solutions that tend to be more fluid to work with, even if you want to shoot V lenses (all these cameras have V mount adapters).</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Don't forget the Contax 645 also! Although its digital integration is slightly behind that of the Mamiya AFD/DF series and the Hasselblad H series, it does the job well. It is an "orphan" system, but it is still actively supported as a digital platform by the MFDB makers.</p>

<p>On other point - the H series can't shoot with the Hasselblad F/FE lenses - only the ones with a leaf shutter. The other cameras can take <em>all</em> the Hasselblad V lenses on an adapter, leaf shutter or not. But they won't be able to use the leaf shutter for faster flash sync. So it depends what you want to use the camera for. </p>

<p> </p>

[mike_leon]

Thanks everybody for your comments so far.

 

The alternatives are not lost on me - I am not a fan of 645, so the Contax and Mamiya solutions are not wonderful.

 

I have actually been curious with regard to the H series. I tried it out and was not really in love with the size and

ergonomics. Wasn't there something that Hasselblad did that rendered the later H bodies not compatible with previous

equipment...? I remember something happening where they undercut their previous users

[warren_williams]

<p>I sympathize with your dilemma. I started 25 years ago with a Pentax 6x7 with a 45mm lens -loved the results but hated the weight. Got a Bronica SQ and a 40 and had the same problems. I bought a Mamiya 7 with a 50mm and didn't warm up to the finicky lens swaps with the inner shutter and sold the system. I kept reading and decided to try the Mamiya 7 again with the "legendary" 43 but was no happier. I hated switching between the rangefinder and the viewing finder, hated the hard to see meter (at least with glasses) and hated the general feel of the camera. Went through Hasselblad 500, Plaubels W67and Fuji 6x9 gsw on the way. All the while full frame "35mm" digitals were getting better and better.<br>

I have ended up with the SWC, an old version with the first 'T" coating and it was love at first sight. Setting the focusing by estimate - pretty easy for most of my architecture, urban and nature shots and looking through the uncluttered viewfinder with the bubble level on the edge of my field of view allows me to concentrate on the image. I feel it really does have the best weight to image quality ratio of any camera I've owned. To cover my bases I also have a Nikon full frame system and am enjoying it too. Photography never has to be an either or game.</p>

[ondebanks]

<blockquote>

<p>The alternatives are not lost on me - I am not a fan of 645, so the Contax and Mamiya solutions are not wonderful.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I understand, Mike. But you're not really buying a 645 camera: you're buying a digital back and it turns out that a 645 camera is the best match to it (since no backs exceed the 645 film format dimensions). The 645's dimensions, weight, focusing screen, lens image circles, and "widest wideangle" are all optimal for DB use (or at least, more optimal for DB use than a 6x6 or 6x7 system). And perhaps the single most useful thing about these 645 cameras is that they give focus confirmation with older (pre-AF) or adapted manual focus lenses. That appears to be something which swings V users to H bodies when they "go digital".</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Wasn't there something that Hasselblad did that rendered the later H bodies not compatible with previous equipment...? I remember something happening where they undercut their previous users</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes. After then H2, they "closed" the system: the H3D and H4D have no film backs, no compatibility with digital backs other than Hasselblad's own ones (matched to the camera), and certain new lenses, like the 28mm HCD, won't work with the H1 and H2. So users who wanted to keep their 3rd party DB and upgrade the camera body, or keep the body and use some new lenses, were left high and dry.<br>

They have backtracked recently with the H4X, which gives the latest features of the H4D (like its excellent TrueFocus) to a camera which can take digital backs from other manufacturers. But bizarrely, you can't <em>buy</em> the H4X: you have to trade in a H1 or H2 against it. That policy has got many people's backs up.</p>