Anyone switched form Pentax 67 to Mamiya 7??

[mike_martin3]

Just wondering if anyone has switched from using the versatile pentax

67 system to the very portable mamiya 7 system. I know most of you

guys are probably rich and can afford both systems, but as someone

who just got out of college I cannot :)

 

Does anyone use the M7 as their main go-to camera? I prefer the

portability of the M7 over the hefty p67 in the field, but I am

scared of the limitations of a rangefinder. Plus I think the 80 is

kind of wide for a normal lens. I would assume that most people

would probably vote for the pentax 67 as the best camera to go with

for general shooting since it has the most versatile line of lenses

(at least in my opinion) then the mamiya. However, if you have

switched solely to the M7 or use the M7 as your main camera what kind

of shooting to you do?

[trooper]

I'm pondering similar issues.... I have a P67 system with a couple of bodies and decent selection of lenses. I also have a Bronica RF645 and some Fuji RF's. I find I'm not lugging around the P67 and using the Bronica for most things. I'm thinking that a compromise would be to keep 1 of the P67 bodies, a macro and a portrait optic and use the RF for the bulk of my projects (or upgrade to a Mamiya 7). I'm actually quite pleased with the performance of the Bronica and could carry on merrily with it, too. For the uses I put my equipment to, I don't feel that I'm giving up so much versatility with an RF and likely have too much worry about missing the slr features.

[viktor s.]

Mike, I have not used the Pentax 67 because I knew that it was not the camera for me because of the weight and rumored problems with mirror-slap. I use the Mamiya 7 for b&w landscapes and whether handheld or on a tripod it delivers what I need: properly exposed and impressively sharp negatives quickly and with a minimum of fuss. I actually prefer composing and focusing with a reflex camera system to using a rangefinder, but you can't have everything in one camera, so I'm willing to forfeit the former because the Mamiya 7 is such a great picture taking machine otherwise.

[cy soto]

I have used both systems and I believe that they are both GREAT cameras. The portability of the Mamiya 7 makes is an axcellent choice if you are planning on shooting landscapes or cityscapes only, or you are planning on traveling with this camera. This camera is light and its optics are superb (altough I still find the rangefinder kindda tricky to get the hang of it).

 

In my case I opted to keep my Pentax 67 system because it gives me more options. I shoot a lot of in-studio fashion and, I love to play around with my Macro setup.

 

If you are planning on doing any table-top photography (or just macro in general) or, any type of shooting that involves hand-holding your camera in-studio; stick with the Pentax. I have also taken this camera with me on some hikes and (although it weights a ton compared to the Mamiya) I can say that it gets the job done. In my opinion the Pentax is more versatile and its got my vote.

[douglas_green1]

I agree with Cy. I would add one more thing - The Pentax 67 has one serious weakness - an inability to do fill-in flash, due to it's very slow flash sync speed. But you can get a nice, inexpensive TLR that has a leaf shutter lens, that serves that specific function quite well, and makes a great compliment to a P67 system. I also used the Mamiya 7 for a while, and it is also certainly a fine system. But I needed better close-up capability, and I couldn't rationalize the extremely high cost of Mamiya 7 optics, vs. the Pentax (The Mamiya lenses cost approximately 2X those of the Pentax, and they are about 1 stop slower across the range).

[Scott Ridgeway www.Scott]

I've made the switch. On the other hand, though, so has most everything else about my photography.

 

I recently sold off the last of my Pentax gear 'cept for a lens hood or two. It was a very difficult decision. I've used a Pentax 6x7 for many many years. I've used rangefinders for only the last few. I went from a Pentax 6x7 and several lenses to a Mamiya 7II and a single 65mm lens.

 

My shooting style has changed dramatically though. Before it was color landscapes (www.scott-ridgeway.com) Now I'm shooting black & white almost exclusively and am shooting everything everywhere. I used to ALWAYS use a tripod. Now I rarely do. From Pentax 6x7 to Mamiya 7. Lots color landscapes to lots of black and white street stuff.

 

Anyway-- the Pentax 6x7 is a wonderful and heavy camera. It needs a heavy and sturdy tripod. Everything about the system is big, heavy and cumbersome.

 

The Mamiya 7/7II is a wonderful and light camera. The Pentax can do a whole lot more. The Mamiya can go a lot more places. You can always have the Mamiya with you. You'll rarely have the Pentax with you.

 

No easy answers. Everything is a trade off. Depends on your stlye.

 

Scott

[lex_jenkins]

If you want an idea of what at least one photographer is doing with a Mamiya rangefinder (the Mamiya 6, not the 7), take a look at a couple of books by Larry Fink, one on boxing, the other titled "Runway."

 

Tho' I'm a big boxing fan his book on the subject is tedious and a disappointment. I prefer his work in the latter book, a gritty look behind the scenes of the world of runway modeling.

 

Fink tends to hold his Mamiya 6 in one hand while his other outstretched hand holds a flash to get a particular look that characterizes his work. There are a couple of photos in which you can catch of glimpse of Fink reflected in a mirror holding his camera and flash this way. It'd be next to impossible to accomplish with the heavier Pentax 6x7, 67 or most other medium format cameras.

[db1]

I own a P67 and have not used it in a while because of its size and weight. Lately I have been wanting something more portable and refuse to go digital so I just got a M7 and love it. I've developed my first couple of rolls and I am very impressed. I too almost always shot with a tripod and now I don't need to. This could change everything for me. Using a rangefinder has not been a problem so far but time will tell.

As for the lens, I currently have the 80 and it is a little wide but I am actually going to sell if for the 65mm lens. I want a slighter wider angle in my photos.

Good luck in your decision. If you choose the M7 I don't think you will be disappointed. I would also suggest that you dig through the photo.net archives to read about it. There is some great info here.

 

...david

[ian_maclennan]

After using the Maniya 7 almost exclusively for a little over 1 year I switched very reluctantly to a Pentax 67 because the Mamiya just failed to live up to its potential. I had the 65mm and 150mm lenses and my sole use for the camera was as a portable landscape tool.

 

The good points of the Mamiya for me were :

 

Very low weight but 6x7 quality, so great for trekking.

Superb lens quality - high contrast and definition.

It feels just great in the hand, and is very suitable for hand holding

Easy film loading in the field (I only wish the Pentax was half as good.

Everything about the camera has a quality feel.

 

The two bad points, which ultimately led me to ditch the camera, were :

 

The rangefinder framing is nowhere near as precise as using a ground glass so I could never be sure of exactly what would be captured, leading quite often to scrapped shots or shots which had to be cropped down. This is not specifically a Mamiya issue of course, that's just a fact of life with rangefinders.

 

The rangefinder was completely unreliable when used with the 150mm lens. I never did fully establish whether I was just unfortunate with my particular camera or whether my experience was reasonably typical. I had the camera fixed on two occasions by Mamiya but the rangefinder just seemed unable to work reliably with the 150mm lens. Having paid nearly £1000 for a lens that I couldn't focus properly upset me just a litle. From other postings in this forum I suspect others have had similar experience with the 150mm.

 

If I thought that the rangefinder focusing problems had been cured then I would rush out to buy another 7 as a backup because it is such a likeable camera. By comparison the Pentax has a relatively industrial feel but ... it just does the job perfectly. I have used one for four years now and I no longer bother carrying a handheld meter since the performance of the matrix metering AE head is just so superb. Since I frequently take landscape photographs in rapidly changing lighting conditions this means that the success rate with the Pentax is unbelievably high.

 

As result of using the Pentax 67 I now have to work much harder in the field to lug the equipment about but for me the results more than compensate.

[chris lause]

You might want to take a look at the two reports on the Mamiya 7 from the Luminous Landscape (the author has also used the Pentax). The field report can be found at http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/m7_hands-on.htm.

[jeff_drew4]

I have switched from Fujinon GW670 II & III to mostly P67. I looked very hard, & tested the Mamiya 7 system before choosing the P67. Had Mamiya upgraded and updated the M6II, I would have been really flummoxed to decide - as I like the 6x6 format almost as much as the 6x7. Oh well. I don't regret acquiring the P67. The M7II has all the pluses mentioned & good glass. Things I miss on all rangefinder cameras: Macro, easy polarizers, interchangeable zooms, interchangeable viewfinders, telephoto lenses! I use rangefinder cameras a lot too! There are some things that SLRs do that RFDRs cannot, hence my P67 & I are best friends for some types of work! The P67 system is a great value and every bit good quality glass.

[david_henderson]

The question shouldn't really be specific to the pentax 67 since

the answer is going to be comparable for any weighty SLR

system vs the lighter Mamiya 7. I have a Bronica SQAi SLR

system and a Mamiya 7II. I like the lens quality and portability of

the Mamiya very much. But there's no way I'd stop using the SLR

to concentrate on the Mamiya. Why?

 

Well the biggest reason for me is lack of visible control of dof,

combined with very optimistic lens barrel markings on the

Mamiya. Second there's the difficulty in accurately positioning a

ND grad. Thirdly there's the question of longer lens availability

and usability, which is infinitely better on an SLR. Lastly, there's

the question of framing accuracy. There is no doubt that the

Mamiya gets me some shots that the Bronica wouldn't.

However there is equally no doubt in my mind that many of the

photographs for which I currently choose to use an SLR would

be worse if I made them on the rangefinder. I'm lucky- I don't

have to choose - but if I did the SLR would be the one that stays.

[robert_byrd1]

Can someone compare the Mamiya RZ67 with the Pentax 67? As a studio camera.

[lex_jenkins]

The one and only drawback to the Pentax 67 I can think of is lack of interchangeable film backs. That's it. Even that problem can be addressed fairly simply by buying another body. A good used body doesn't cost much more than some film backs for other models.

 

Pentax even offers a leaf shutter lens for an improved range of shutter speeds with studio flash. Not quite as handy as an entire line of leaf shutter lenses, but a reasonable compromise at a much lower cost.

 

If there's a need for a true studio MF camera, tho', there are more appropriate choices, especially considering the possible need for a digital back.

 

For an all-purpose MF system camera, tho', the Pentax 67 is hard to beat. Every year I consider swapping all my serious 35mm gear for the Pentax system.

[dougmiles]

Before I got my Pentax 6x7 in 1977 I had tried Rollei & Mamiya TLR's, Hasselblad, and the RB67 at various times, and concluded I really didn't like waist-level viewing at all. This was before the Pentax 645, and it seemed all the MF reflex cameras were made for waist-level viewing except the Pentacon 6 and the Pentax 6x7. Since I already used Pentax 35mm SLR's, and the 6x7 promised to be just a jumbo version, that was my choice.

 

Some 25 years later I'm still delighted with it, but that doesn't stop me from liking RF cameras too! Last year I got a Fuji GS645S used, and I like the light weight and compact size and sharp lens but dislike the fuzzy rangefinder and loud shutter. So I recently added a Bronica RF645. I think this will be a "keeper".

 

But if I could keep only one camera, it might just be the Pentax 6x7, as it's produced many of my favorite pictures. But then so has my Minolta CLE rangefinder camera, and the Bronica promises to be a larger version of that...

 

I think the important thing for an initial choice is to assess whether an SLR or RF best suits the kind of photography you mostly want to do. I will take the big Pentax out for landscapes and nature shots of flowers and streams, etc. I'll also take it for any type of pic that involves careful alignment of near & far objects. No parallax errors..

 

I'll tend to prefer the RF camera for photos of people in the street or malls, environmental portraits... Leica and Bronica are both very quiet and non-intrusive.

[akgraham]

I was going to get a P67 until I felt the weight of it. Instead, I have been using a Mamiya 7 as my main camera for 3 years. Most photographers who have seen mine love the handling, but hate the restrictions regarding lenses, filters, framing, close focussing, and so on. So do I, but I love the lack of distortion in the lenses, being able to hike and cycle with my 6x7 camera, and take photos handheld as I walk around a strange city at twilight.

 

If you feel it will be too limited for you, don't doubt it. I don't do much bird or wildlife photography, or I would have got a different tool.

[viktor s.]

Regarding a parallax problem with the Mamiya 7, I have found it to be a problem for me only rarely with landscapes and then when shooting at relatively close distances. Although not parallax as such, the viewfinder framing is surprisingly precise, I think, surely better than that of the GSW690III that I used for a year or so and never did come to like because for one I got fed up with finding objects intruding into the film area from the edges that were not visible in the viewfinder: tree branches etc. But what I would like to know from you Pentax 67 shooters is: how do you deal with the reputed mirror slap/shutter bounce that is said to cause unsharp images especially at the slower shutter speeds?

[ilkka]

Doug, The mirror slap is usually dealt with by locking the mirror up before taking a picture. The shutter bounce is not a problem with short lenses, up to about 200mm. A 2-series Gitzo with a good ball head is strong enough. With a 300 mm lens, you need a heavier tripod if using 1/30-1/4 shutter speeds. I use a 4-series Gitzo with that combination.

[gene crumpler]

I love the p67 system for serious work where I don't have to carry the cameras and lens any great distance. The newest 55mm F4.0 is an extra ordinary lens. However for travel where weight is a problem, I use a hasselblad.

[edgar]

Mike,

 

I switched from Pentax 67 to Mamiya 6MF about 1 year ago. I mainly do reportage photography exclusively hand held.

My P67 toolkit was: body + 55 f3.5 + 90 f2.8 + 165 f2.8 + 2x converter

My Mam 6 Toolkit is: body + 50 f4.0 + 75 f3.5 + 150 f4.0.

I'm extremely satisfied of Mamiya: it's light, handy, relatively small (it's a little bit smaller than my Contax AX!!!) the lenses are astonishing for general quality, micro contrast and sharpness, the shutter is EXTREMELY soft and silent, and you can use with good results shutter speeds slower than a Leica M!!!

To be honest, the only reason that it comes to my mind for preferring Pentax is the necessity of using long telephoto lenses, such as 300, 400 or 600mm, but it is not my case.

 

This is my opinion. Feel free to contact me for any doubt.

Cheers Elio