Yashica Mat 124G with Tele lens vs. Mamyia with what lens?

[ihaddad]

I am looking to buy a relatively inexpensive medium format camera

with lenses that allow me to capture good sport activities shots as

my children are playing in different sports (Football, Basketball,

Volleyball..). Is the Yashica Mat 124 G with Tele lens adequate for

this purpose? Or should I look for something like Mamiya C330 with

Tele lenses. And If the latter, what lenses should I get (105 vs.

135 vs. 150 vs. 180 vs. 250..). Thanks for your guidance. I am

aware of the general recommendations in the learn section. I am

looking for specifics if I wantes to buy one system on ebay or

similar sites.

[brian yarvin]

I would say to go for the Mamiya. Prime lenses beat out lens attachments every time!

 

Although it takes some getting used to, you'll find TLR's to be great for sports - after all, you can see the action while you're shooting.

 

I also suggest getting the longest lens possible.

[geoff_mcauliffe]

I have never heard of anyone being happy with the results from the "add-on" tele lens for the Yashica TLR, not much magnification and not sharp. Go with the Mamiya. The 135 lens is comparable to a 70 mm on 35 mm camera, the 180 is comparable to a 100 mm on a 35. You can get the "L" grip for waistlevel work or the pistol grip for eyelevel work. These make the camera easier to handle, IMHO.

[andrew_schank]

shooting action with TLR's is a real skill. 35mm shines for action shots and sports. Just look at the sidelines at professional sporting events--all 35mm. Just my suggestion, consider one of the new fast operating 35mm cameras instead.

[russ_arcuri]

I agree with Andrew. A TLR -- <b>any</b> TLR -- is the wrong tool for sports.

[durocshark]

If you really want medium format for sports/action, and can't afford something like a Mamiya 645e (about $1300 with 80mm lens and ttl viewfinder), try a Kiev system.

 

One can be picked up for under $500 (or much less used). A 250mm lens is about $250 more (again, less if used). Then send it in to have the meter and shutters adjusted. Or buy one from KievUSA already adjusted.

 

You can get a good, dependable system with long lens for under $1000. The Kiev 60 looks and feels like an overweight 35mm slr, so it's easy to get used to if you've shot 35mm before. The Kiev 88 is more expensive, but looks like a Hassy.

[todd frederick]

I tried a tele lens attachment on a Yashica and it totally stinks!

 

Use the Mamiya TLR with a 180mm Super...a truly fantastic lens, but can be pricy ($300-$400).

 

Also consider the above suggestion regarding a Mamiya 645 with a 150 lens as a possibility.

 

If you use the Mamiya for sports, a prism finder is a must, to follow action accurately. A waist level finder is reversed right to left. Also use a prism with the 645...always!

[james_bednar]

I've used the 126G for quite some time now. Recently sold, having serious regrets. 35mm just doesn't do any justice. You don't want the lens add-ons. Both the tele and wide are not very good, and they are very expensive (as compared to the camera). If interchangable lenses are a requirement, the C330 is your best bet. I never had a problem shooting sports with my 124g, however, it will require you to be very close to the action, so you'll need to pick a location wisely. I would suggest against buying your camera on Ebay. I won't offer specifics, but just find a dealer you can work with.

[andy mcleod]

I didn't find the right/left reversal of the C330 <i>that</i> hard to deal with. It does result in occasional confusion and disorienting sensations which go away with practice.

<br><br>

People do have a good point though, you could hook up a Canon <a href="http://www.keh.com/shop/showproduct.cfm?crid=1039382&skid=CA0201040025205&sid=used&bid=CA&cid=02&soid=N">AE1</a>, <a href="http://www.keh.com/shop/showproduct.cfm?crid=1039382&skid=CA0200001237505&sid=used&bid=CA&cid=02&soid=N"> AE1 Program </a> or <a href="http://www.keh.com/shop/showproduct.cfm?crid=1039382&skid=CA0200001175005&sid=used&bid=CA&cid=02&soid=N">A1</a>, Maybe an <a href="http://www.keh.com/shop/showproduct.cfm?crid=1039382&skid=CA0200001237505&sid=used&bid=CA&cid=02&soid=N"> A</a> or <a href="http://www.keh.com/shop/showproduct.cfm?crid=1039382&skid=CA0200001237505&sid=used&bid=CA&cid=02&soid=N">A2</a> winder a <a href="http://www.keh.com/shop/product.cfm?bid=CA&cid=06&sid=used&crid=1039382">300mm 5.6 300 4.0 or 200 mm , 50mm 1.8, and a 135mm 2.5 </a> or a <a href="http://www.keh.com/shop/product.cfm?bid=CA&cid=07&sid=used&crid=1039382">100-300 mm 5.6</a>

<br><br> or a <a href="http://www.keh.com/shop/showproduct.cfm?crid=1039382&skid=NK0200903743405&sid=used&bid=NK&cid=02&soid=N">Nikon 2000</a> a <a href="http://www.keh.com/shop/showproduct.cfm?crid=1039382&skid=NK0600499999904&sid=used&bid=NK&cid=06&soid=N"> 50 mm 1.8</a> ,<a href="http://www.keh.com/shop/showproduct.cfm?crid=1039382&skid=NK06010200035F5&sid=used&bid=NK&cid=06&soid=N"> a 135 2.8 </a>, a <a href="http://www.keh.com/shop/showproduct.cfm?crid=1039382&skid=NK06010200048Z6&sid=used&bid=NK&cid=06&soid=N">300 4.5</a> or a <a href="http://www.keh.com/shop/showproduct.cfm?crid=1039382&skid=NK0601020088206&sid=used&bid=NK&cid=06&soid=N">200 4.0</a> or <a href="http://www.keh.com/shop/showproduct.cfm?crid=1039382&skid=NK0701020077505&sid=used&bid=NK&cid=07&soid=N">80-200 4.0</a> for $400+ depending on your prices and whether you go to <a href="www.keh.com">KEH</a> or <a href="www.cameta.com">Bill Cameta's</a>.

<br><br>

If you use slower film, you'll probably find that your kid looks a lot closer w/ a 300 on 35 mm than with a 250 on 6x6, and that miniprints cost about half as much or less for 35 mm film. I shot soccer a few times, and found that most of the time the looked far away at 135 and 200 mm (w/35mm) and once in a while they would rush by within 20 ft or so. It might be nice to have a body w/ something long and a body w/ something shorter.

<br><br>

If you run well, you can get in their face w/ <a href="http://www.keh.com/shop/showproduct.cfm?crid=1039382&skid=CA0601040037505&sid=used&bid=CA&cid=06&soid=N">a 28<a/>

[christian deichert]

<center><img src="http://www.geocities.com/torgophile/mexico3.jpg"><p>

<i>Bible school, Alfa y Omega, Altamira, Mexico<br>

Mamiya C330f, 180mm Super, handheld with Ilford Delta 3200</i></center><p>

 

Can't go wrong with the 180mm Super. Lens tests show that it's a great lens, and certainly the best Mamiya made for their TLR's (105mm DS comes in second, by the way).

[christian deichert]

p.s. More photos of the same school, using 105mm DS, available here: <a href="http://members.aol.com/cldphoto/mexico.html">http://members.aol.com/cldphoto/mexico.html</a>

[kenneth_rowin]

I was surprised to see at a NY Knicks game last season that most of the pros under the baskets were using MF cameras to shoot the game. Back where I was sitting, they appeared to be Hasselblads and Bronicas. No twin lenses and only a few 35mm cameras in sight.

[steve_levine]

The only reason to ever use MF is when large prints are to be made.There is no advantage to using bulkier,heavier,slower cameras,with slower lenses for action shooting.a good used manual focus 35mm SLR with a couple of teles or (perish the thought)a zoom lens shouldnt set you back more than a $300-500.Online, used MF SLR's with lens ,prism & back run $500-1000.A tele lens for a 645 camera will run around $300-500,used.TLR's are nice for what they were designed for but shooting action indoors isnt one of them.

Dont underestimate the quality of 35mm today.The films have improved greatly in recent years.A carefully focused 35mm (without any camera shake) will blow up almost to 11x14.Larger than this the laws of physics catch up.

[ihaddad]

This is a follow-up:

Many thanks to all of you who contributed with valuable opinions. I am now shooting with a Fuji GA645 and an older Yashica 35mm camera. Both give me superb pictures, but do not do justice in sports due to the fact that neither one has interchangeable lenses to allow me to use a tele or zooming lens. I have several other inexpensive point and shoot 35mm cameras, but do not use them for serious work (in my opinion, they are good for pocket portability only).

I can afford an expensive camera, but I feel it is not justified for my purpose at this time. I want to stick to Mdium Format because I can appreciate and admire the difference. I just bought (on e-bay) a C330 prof f with 80 black lens and prism, and a 180 super lens. I know that I will enjoy taking all kind of pictures with them, and that I will be able to capture some sport action with my children also. It might not be the easier than a slick 35mm but I hope that It look much better when I project or print them.

Thanks again.