I'm happy with the Mamiya 6 save for Macro/Close Up work - what are some medium format options for this type of photography.

[jason michael]

Quite Simply, I am looking for a decent close up / macro Medium Format Body / Lens

for close ups and macro work. (or close to Macro, I do not need to go to 1:1). I would

prefer mid price/level solutions rather than entry level or high end solutions. So,

what do you use when you shoot close ups with medium format or what would you

recommend?

 

Sincerely,

 

Jason Michael

[harry_akiyoshi]

I use a 4x5 view camera with a 6x9 rollfilm back and a 150mm Schneider G-Claron. Sharpness isn't particularly impressive as compared to the better medium format systems, but it does give me movements, which are invaluable for macro work. Some other nice features, too -- flash sync at 1/500, ability to shoot 4x5 if I'm going to enlarge much. If you don't need to work quickly, it's probably the best quality:cost ratio you'll find for medium-format macro photography.

[dale_dickerson2]

Check out the Rollei sl66 with a 120mm Zeiss or one of the Mamiya 6x7 cameras.

[hugh_sakols]

I have created some amazing close-ups using my mamiya c220. With an

old TLR paralax is an issue as well as exposure comp. due to the

bellows extension. I've been pretty good at estimating the paralax

adjustment. Of course you can use a paramender which I own but rarely

use. Also Bronica I believe makes a macro lense for the Bronica S

[david_goldfarb]

Do you do your own darkroom work? Enlarging lenses, usually reversed, often make excellent macro lenses, if you happen to have them on hand anyway. On a camera that has an independent focusing mechanism and focal plane shutter you only need a reversing ring and appropriate step-up rings to reverse-mount an enlarging lens, and then you might want a bellows or extension tubes for greater magnification. I do this sometimes on my Bronica S2A. Other candidates would be any other S- or EC-series Bronica, Rollei SL66, or Mamiya RB67, and I'm sure there are others.

 

The view camera/rollfilm back suggestion above is also not a bad one, since it can be fairly inexpensive and flexible, and you get lens movements in the package. There are also dedicated macro lenses for large format that aren't too pricy, and enlarging lenses are also a possibility, if you don't mind working without a shutter (you don't really need one if you are working with strobes--just dim the ambient lights for the exposure and use open flash technique) or acquiring a separate shutter (some enlarging lenses will go straight into a Copal 1 shutter).

[rick_sikora]

Consider a Pentax 67, waist level finder and a 135mm macro lens or the 150mm and a Canon 72mm close-up lens 500D or the 105mm and the helicoid or even the +1,+2,+3 extension tube options.Mix and match to your liking. Plenty of possibilities here that will deliver good pictures and not break the bank. Good shooting, Rick

[._._z]

Don't be coy - name your budget.

[jason michael]

My budget would be / shall be for one body, one lens, and any necessary accessories

such as extensions tubes etc. It would be nice if it was part of a system which I could

grow over the years...then again a stand alone medium format close up / macro setup

has its appeal too.

[thomas_diekwisch1]

I have a Mamiya 7II which is very similar to yours and I am very happy with it as well. Lenses, weight, etc.. As you are noting, it's not really a camera for Macro or close-up. Also, Macro becomes increasingly difficult with increased format, e.g. 6x7 is quite cumbersome. Thus I have decided on a Pentax 645 with a 120 Macro. This turned out to be a far better combination that it might seem. The Pentax is great for Macro and fast portrait while the Mamiya does everything else. The only disadvantage I can see are the two bodies, but both are quite light.

[hakon_soreide]

I just purchased a good old Kowa 6 SLR medium format camera. For this system, close-up extension tubes are readily available on the second-hand market, and it was my first add-on gadget. The longest extension tube with the normal (85mm) lens, makes for macro work up to 1:1, and would yield even higher magnification with the 55mm wide-angle lens, reportedly one of the sharpest medium format lenses around.

 

The extension tubes might also be combined to make longer tubes. There does exist a bellows system for the Kowa, but this is hard to find on the market today, and the same goes for the dedicated macro lens, although acquiring various tubes makes for a more flexible and cheaper system.

 

For a mint Kowa 6 with standard lens and finder, you'd expect to pay around $450-500 on eBay, less if it is in less than perfect condition. The extension tubes save for the longest one, which is slightly scarce, go for around $50, and the longest tube varies somewhere around $100-$150. A 55mm lens in usable condition shouldn't cost more than $250-$300 when sold separately, but look out for Kowa items sold together, when you might get an extra body and finder and not pay more than the lens would have cost separately.

 

Actually, I am selling my Mamiya 7II soon since I now have the more flexible Kowa system that can do the same and a lot more (and I've been itching to get into macro photography ever since I got the Mamiya 7II when that option wasn't even available to me), and it won't cost me an arm and a leg every time I want to expand on the system unlike the Mamiya 7, where the cheapest lenses start at the same you'd expect to pay for a decent Kowa system consisting of three good lenses, one or two bodies, a waist-level finder, prism finder and a few extension tubes...

[john_stockdale2]

Another vote for the Rollei SL66. The standard lens (80mm) is fine for closeups, and the combination of bellows and reversible lens mounting without buying any extra fittings at all makes up for its price being somewhat more than most other older 6x6 units. It is, of course, a completely discontinued model, with all that that implies.

 

It is a *lot* heavier and unwieldy than your Mamiya 6! (also a discontinued camera). Two of the very best.

[._._z]

That's not a budget. If you don't name one you'll get a wide swath of responses, not

tailorded to your needs ... unless you really aren't serious and are just trolling for

generic recommendations.

[keith_laban]

Let me start by saying that I love and use medium format cameras. Having said that, if I were now looking for a camera/system solely for macro/close up work then I wouldn�t even consider medium format.<p>Let me explain. Filling the medium format frame with almost any subject other than an essentially two dimensional subject and achieving enough depth of field is a constant struggle and often impossible. For example, if I wanted to fill the frame using my 6x6 Hasselblad with a smallish spherical object or an object that has a lot of depth (fungi, flowers birds, eggs etc.) and also wanted to achieve enough depth of field so that the whole subject was in sharp focus, it would be impossible. The only way I could achieve front to back focus would be to take the shot from further away and therefore have the size of the subject greatly reduced within the frame. In other words the resulting transparencies would be all background/foreground and little subject, not good when presenting transparencies to publishers or stock agencies!<p>So, what�s the answer? Change format, use 35mm, it�s no accident or coincidence that most of this type of work is done on the smaller format. In the past I�ve had to produce thousands of macro/close up studies for publication and have always used Nikon cameras with the superb 55mm and 105mm AIS Macro lenses. These lenses are about as sharp as it gets for macro work, regardless of format.<p>Getting enough depth of field using medium format is often a problem and for macro work is often impossible.

[robert_potts1]

The depth of field thing depends on what you are trying to do. Many of the folks selling macro images from 35mm use extension tubes on telephoto lenses to reduce depth of field enough for their purposes. I use a pentax 645 with a 120mm and it is perfect. I do virtually all of my shooting at f4 or f5.6. If I am not close enough to my subject, I'll get too much background clutter even at f4. Maybe a better argument for 35mm would be that you get f2.8. I think most of the 645 systms have something comparable to the pentax. Get yourself a collapsible reflector to fill in the shadows and have fun. Good luck.

[keith_laban]

Robert<p>Generally speaking the overriding constraint for macro/close up photography is not too much depth of field but far too little. Using f4 or f5.6 with a 120mm would limit DOF to a few millimetres of sharp focus, albeit with no distracting background detail!<p><a href="http://www.keithlaban.co.uk">www.keithlaban.co.uk</a>

[jim_mcbride]

Jason: I often use the kit described by Andrew Pitman but I admit that the setup for

such a kit is "fussy" at best. Like you, I enjoy using Mamiya equipment and just as

often will use a Mamiya M645 1000s with an 80mm f4 + macro spacer for tabletop

macro work. Before I acquired the macro lens. I used a regular 80mm f2.8 with

extension rings and got very good results. If you are willing to compromise on used

(but still useful) equipment, this is a very good time to buy. As more and more pros

"go digital" the used market has a good supply of Mamiya equipment at quite

reasonable prices.

[wayne_crider4]

I had picked up a RB outfit not only for the 6x7 format that I wanted to shoot

but for macro work as well thru the use of an extension tube and 500D Canon

c/u lens. In the end my Canon 35mm is a much preferable system. As an

example, look at what John Shaw (Closeups in Nature) is shooting. Whether

your needs are personable or for publication a 35mm system is still the

system to beat for macro work.

 

Since I see that most macro lenses in mf are around 120mm's, just for info,

what are the minimum focusing distance's?

[filibert_kraxner]

I shoot close-up and macro with both Canon 35mm and Pentax 67 MF. I use a standard 105/2.4 lens with one or more extension rings. At max. extension I get approximately 1:1 reproduction. A word of warning here: mirror/shutter shake and depth of field are real challenges with this setup. The whole assembly is quite heavy and long, absolutely necessitating a second support under the lens. I use a Manfrotto (Bogen in the USA?) 293 support for this. Still, it's difficult to get absolutely sharp pictures if the camera is tilted in an awkward angle. I probably need a bigger ball head than the Manfrotto 352RC I am currently using....

Obviously, you could go for a 100 or 135 macro, which would lessen the problems mentioned above, but these are more expensive. Optimum picture sharpness and contrast is around f8 or f11. Go wider and the picture is rather soft, a smaller aperture (minimum is f22) results in lower contrast. This is more of a problem than with the 35mm system. The Pentax 165/2.8 I also own is rarely used for close-ups, precisely for this reason.

This response is something of an 'I wouldn't do it again' thing, I guess. If you must do macro in MF (like me, lol), go for something with a leaf shutter and bring the heavy tripod. Good luck!

[robert_potts1]

Hello Keith:

 

Then how do you explain the recent popularity of the 180mm macros in 35mm format? It seems to me that the 50-55mm macros are rather in the minority. Most of the folks I know use the 100-105 macros which aren't much different from medium format's popular 120mm macros. Factor in the larger circles of confusion for medium format and it's a wash. At 1:1, medium format covers more territory than 35mm. You may or may not want this. One format is not superior to the other in graphic terms, just different. In practical terms you may print larger with medium format. There are times when I think a removable prism would be nice, but I suppose this would get me into trouble with verticals. Maybe for macro only, square would be the way to go.

[mike_elek]

The Rollei SL66 with its bellows and reversing lens will give you plenty of options for macro use. Plus, its ability to tilt the lens will help you control depth of field.

 

The coated Carl Zeiss lenses are extremely sharp. Because of its size and weight, the SL66 is best used on a tripod or at the very least attached to the accessory hand grip.

 

Camera prices for the original SL66 with the 80mm Planar plus 120/220 back will run from $600-$900 through online auction. I don't know if that fits into your budget.

 

I've found the camera to be very reliable, relatively easy to use and undeniably heavy.

 

I've yet to miss a shot with the SL66.

[Jochen_S]

I got a Pentacon Six with bellows and 120mm for little money. I suppose the Biogon isn't the world best macro lens but I want to portrait my next hamster with it. For sophisticated tabletops I'd use my 4x5 - Movements are nice. Forcing Mamiya TLRs into macro work is possible, but the shaky paramender needs a good tripod, so 6x9 field cameras with 3x draw are much easyer to carry. (and cheap)

[jason michael]

I do do my own darkroom work...I'm currently building a personalized darkroom but

that is another topic.

 

I am very thankful for the responses so far and I intend on handling a number of the

recommendations to see how I feel about them.

 

The biggest omission I made was that I am looking more for a close up system than a

macro system. I have two 35mm macro systems and am looking for a medium format

close up system.

 

Sincerely,

 

Jason Michael

[robert_potts1]

645 is easiest to use. I would say SLR and a short extension tube that wouldn't rob much light with whatever lens you like. I have not had good luck with the closeup lenses that screw in like a filter.