derek_stanton2

Hi, Marc.

I've recently gone through the same process, and received much of the same advice

from B&H sales reps. Unlike many in this thread, i defend their position.

Relative to Rollei, their is a tremendous difference in how their MF SLRs are received

in the US versus Europe. I've come to believe that they are more popular in Europe

than Hasselblad, while here in the US, the opposite is true. Reasons why? No idea.

But, the BH rep(s) [both in the new and 'used' departments] are wary to recommend

them. The Used camera salesman tells me they get, perhaps, 10 calls per week from

photographers wishing to sell them, versus 1-2 from those looking to buy. They

aren't buying any more used cameras. That, to me, was a sticking point. No one,

however, will dispute that the lenses for the Rollei (Zeiss and Schneider) are excellent

- perhaps the best. A common opinion, though, is that the electronics are not as

reliable as in other cameras. I don't know that to be true. And, if you read the

opinions in this forum, Rollei 600x users seem to be a happy bunch. But, the BH rep

did tell you about the current, local 'climate' relative to Rollei, and that information

may or may not be of interest to you. I took it seriously, and also dismissed the 6008

series. It also seemed quite significant to me that a store like B&H BARELY even has a

Rollei SLR display. Not very encouraging, despite what's on the Rollei specsheet. More

importantly, though, i favoured the size, ergonomics and viewfinder of the

Hasselblads.

Regarding Pentax versus the others, it really does come down to removeable backs

and digital capability. Pentax actually has 'classic bokeh.' It's different from Zeiss, but

quite nice. I don't know how the lenses test for 'sharpness.' I've never heard any

complaints about any of these cameras' lenses. The Contax, though, does have a

slight advantage with the 80mm, as it's a faster lens at f2, instead of 2.8. I wouldn't

read too much into the pricing issue as an indicator of quality. As you are aware with

the Leica system versus the Contax G2, dollars don't equate to quality. The same case

can be made in medium format, as the lenses for the Pentax 67 are amazing, and yet

'cheap.' [Did i read recently that a new Pentax 645 is being discussed?]

The H1 is still very new, and there isn't a lot of reliable feedback about it. The early

discussion revolved around the choice of Fuji as the lens manufacturer. Personally, i

haven't seen enough images from the H1 to know if the lenses are sufficiently 'Zeiss-

like.' Perhaps they'll just have their own character and will prove to be fantastic in

their own right. But, at this point, it seems like a lot of money to put into such a new

system, especially if you are not yet sure if 645 is the right move. What's your

timeline?

Regarding your Leica M gear versus medium format.... "better blow-ups" may depend

on the size of your enlargements and film you prefer. I was surprised to see that i

could perceive no additional 'detail' in an image shot with a Mamiya 6+50mm versus

the 'same' image shot with a Leica M+35mm Summicron-ASPH. Of course, both were

on Tri-X, so maximum lens resolution could not be exploited, but i thought the film

enlargement factor would be a benefit to the medium format rangefinder. But, at

11x14 inches, the Leica picture actually looked a bit better....

Back to the B&H guys.... It's unfortunate that you had a bad experience with one of

their salesmen. I don't know the true reasons for his biases. I suspect, though, that

this guy was busy, and was abrupt in efforts to 'cut to the chase.' If someone comes

into the store without a more focused interest in a specific product or comparison

between two products, they can be a bit harsh. I've seen it, and although i know they

should be respectful to the needs of every consumer, i know it must be difficult to

maintain that consistency. It's a personality issue. Some of the guys there are better

at dealing with customers, and some just want to move the lines. But, it's a huge

store, and i've always been able to get the information and product i need. Yah, i do

have a bias in favor of B&H. Love the place.

Have you read the user reviews at www.photographyreview.com?

Good luck,

Ex-girlfriend's daughter.

[sorry, it's a Contax image]<div></div>

I haven't had any battery issues. I've only had the camera since November, but have

left it on accidentally for long periods a few times, and i'm still on the original set.

As for the ISO dial, i won't contradict anyone, but i haven't experienced problems with

it at all. I expected to, based on some comments read before i bought the camera.

But, i've had my M7 in a Luigi Crecenzi half-case almost exclusively, and the dial has

never been incidentally moved out of position. I did, however, notice it one click out

of position this week, when i was using the camera without the case. How much of an

issue is this? I can see the potential for problems, but i still wouldn't hesitate to buy

one....

Laurent,

You really can't tell anything about image quality from what's posted on the web in

small resolution file sizes. Anything from a Canon 1Ds to a 2megapixel POS will look

pretty similar.

But, as i suggested, visit www.steves-digicams.com and look at the review image

samples. Steve tests all the cameras in a pretty consistent manner, so you can

compare apples to apples.

See the link for the LC5:

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2002_reviews/Lumix_LC5/samples/P1000105.JPG

and then for the Canon G2

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2001_reviews/g2/samples/IMG_0181.JPG

What's immediately apparent to me is that the LC5 doesn't really render tonality as

smooth gradations. Instead, you get small dots, which sort of imitate shade. Look,

especially, at how shadows and modeling are rendered. Then, when you look at the

G2 sample, everything is smooth. And, that's just with the G2, which might be

considered 'ancient' at this point.....

The thing is, many people are thrilled with the LC5 and Digilux. But, many have also

expressed the same disappointments i have. You may not notice these image effects

in your prints. It'll depend on the output size, your output device, and your own eyes

and discrimination. For me, i saw the differences. And, even if i were to print smaller,

i would still know that the camera was eliminating image data at some point in the

process, and i just couldn't keep the cameras based on that principle.

Eventually, though, i sold the G2 as well. Not that i was disappointed with the image

quality, but because it's virtually impossible to control depth of field with a compact

digital. Almost everything in the frame is going to be in focus, because of the small

sensor size relative to the focal length of the lenses. I guess, though, that if you are

used to other compact digitals this isn't an issue for you, right?

Laurent,

They ARE the same camera. This is a year-old story, about which you can read plenty

at www.dpreview.com.

I was very excited about both of these cameras upon their release last year, and

bought the LC5. I returned it because the image quality suffers from what is

described as a "posterization" effect. Basically, the images are more noisy than other

cameras of the same specs, and tonal information is lost. See the samples at

www.steves-digicams.com for evidence. I then bought the Leica, hoping it would be

better. It actually was a bit better, perhaps the firmware uses less aggressive

sharpening or somesuch? But, in the end, the pix were still posterized. I was

comparing the pictures to those from a Canon G2. The G2 was clearly superiour.

There is also the issue of the lens, which is rumoured to be only a re-badged Canon

lens. In any case, you can't really expect to get a real Summicron + zoom AND digital

camera for less than you'd pay for an M-Summicron, right? In the end, i returned the

Digilux, too, and i'm now shooting only film.

If you're looking for a quick, responsive camera with a very nice LCD screen, these

cameras might be great for you. If you need to print larger than 5"x7" though, i'd go

with something else. At 'small' print sizes, those image effects may not be apparent.

There's also a thread on dpreview about a possible upgrade/update to the firmware

of the LC5 by Panasonic. Some people report an improvement, others have not been

able to acquire the update, possibly based on where they live.... Do some more

research, and make your own decisions.... My recommendation would be for

something by Canon, Sony, Olympus.... Or, wait for the next generation of the

PanaLeica venture.

I love mine. And i will continue to take exception to the claims that the M7 is more

"point-and-shoot" than an M6. Firstly, in manual mode, it functions identically. In

Aperture Priority mode, it's no more a P&S camera than a Canon 1Ds or Nikon F5. It's

"Aperture Priority," not "Program." I'm still controlling both the aperture AND shutter

speeds by varying the aperture ring. I'm not sure how/why this is so distorted by the

"purists."

Secondly, the M7 gives you more Feedback In The Viewfinder. I can't see how that can

be construed as a bad thing. In my opinion, the "two arrows and a dot" system is

rather infantile - I'll always prefer to have more rather than less information in the

viewfinder. I can then choose to ignore it or use it. And, i don't discriminate between

which metering method is used to determine exposure. If you use "auto-everything"

or spotmeter... it doesn't matter.

The M7 gives you options. In addition to the two exposure modes, you also get two

manual shutter speeds. So, the issue of 'battery-dependency' is largely moot* for me.

And, i've never considered it a burden to carry an extra set of tiny button cells during

what's expected to be the last half of the batteries' life cycle. Batteries are so much

smaller than the next roll of film, no?

I shoot mainly Tri-X and Plus-X, so the stepless shutter isn't tremendously important

to me, but chrome-shooters might find it significant.

I do, however, find that the rangefinder patch flare is occasionally annoying. I hope to

have the MP's version installed, if that's possible. And, i'd rather have the MP's finish

and lack of red dot, but the 7 is still quite beautiful. Lastly, a faster top shutter speed

would really be appreciated, but as i knew the specs going in, i can't consider that to

be a "mistake."

*No, i haven't had to shoot in the Arctic or anywhere near Lambeau Field in January,

so i can't speak on that issue.

First, decide on the lenses. Whether you'll want a 50mm 1.4 or f2. Then, the 28mm.

But, you may be surprised to find that with a rangefinder, the focal length you'll be

most comfortable with will not equate to what you use on your Nikon. I'm a

50+85mm guy on an SLR, but prefer 35+50 on a rangefinder.

I'd recommend used Leica lenses first. Not that CV/Konica lenses don't have quality

and value, but if you're looking toward Leica, i have a feeling that a part of that

interest is in the mystique associated with the glass. If you don't try them, you may be

forever wondering....

After the lens situation is sorted, you'll know what you can afford for the body. If an

M7 is out of the question, i'd suggest the Konica Hexar over the Bessa2 because of

the automation. If you want to shoot 'street,' in my practice, any speed advantages

you can get with aperture priority mode are worth the theoretical risk of 'battery

dependency.' Plus, the Hexar's got a very nice minimum shutter speed (is it 1/2000 or

1/4000?). VERY valuable if you're shooting in bright conditions and want to preserve

shallow depth of field. Then, there's the winder and loading. I have an M7, but if i

were to buy a second Leica-compatible body, it would be a Hexar.

The counter argument might be in favour of a Contax G2. Fantastic camera, with

great+cheap lenses. The only problem i had with it was with the lack of focus

confirmation. I like to shoot wide-open, or close to it, and you really don't have a

positive feeling about what the camera is focused on. Generally, my results were very

nice, and i love Zeiss glass, but i stupidly sold the camera when i thought i was going

gung-ho into digital. I'm now out of digital and back to Tri-X, and went with Leica

this time, because i knew i'd be Forever Wondering if i didn't....

I agree with everything Alex just said. Great camera, even with its limitations.

However, i'm a bit divided on its usefulness for shooting people. As noted, the

150mm lens is a hit/miss proposition for achieving focus. Not nearly reliable enough

for me. And, the limited close-focus range is another detraction, even though you

could purchase the optional lens adapter. But, the reason why i sold my 6MF is that i

really didn't like the bokeh of the 75mm lens, which i had planned to use for 'travel

portraiture.' The out of focus rendering is harsh, and generally not pleasing. I found it

detracted from the imagery, rather than remaining neutral or enhancing the pictures.

But, there are lots of people who use the system beautifully, including Benjamin Broad

who has a wonderful gallery here (http://www.photo.net/shared/community-

member?user_id=84205) and a photographer named Adam Jahiel (http://

www.adamjahiel.com/).... Both of whom were the original inspiration for my interest

in this camera. Although i loved how it operated and felt, i sold it because i could not

get the bokeh i wanted - due to the characteristics of the bokeh and the fact that the

lenses are slow. Instead, i've recently purchased a Hasselblad 203FE (used/mint, but

still much more expensive than a used 6 kit), and i'm thrilled with the eary results. I

just put up three of my first portrait attempts with it on photo.net (Folder>"2003"). I

have to reorient myself with the waist-level finder, but the quality of the lens (80mm

2.8) is exactly what i have been looking for. If only i could get a contemporary

rangefinder with Zeiss glass...

I do believe, though, that the Hasselblad would be a better bet for you too. Although,

of course, the Mamiya would certainly be less obtrusive in documentary/street

photography. The Mamiya 'blends' much better than a 'blad, which is always going to

be noticed. As well, the Mamiya can be used much more effectively at low shutter

speeds without a tripod.... So, there are really compromises with either/any system.

Here's my final take: i'd go for the Hasselblad. I'd keep your Nikon 35 for the street/

documentary work. Especially if you're using B+W/Tri-X.... When i shot the same

scene with both the Mamiya 6's 50mm lens AND with a Leica M7 + 35mm lens, the

Leica's 35mm Summicron-ASPH actually produced the 'better' 11x14 print. The detail

was close, but i'd say the Leica was at least as detailed, and probably a tad more. I'm

attributing the closeness to the low-resolution nature of the emulsion, and expect

that you'd see the medium format's advantages with a fine-grained film, but that was

an eye-opener. So, i've kept the Leica for 'spontaneous/street/casual' stuff, and got

the Hassy for instances where i can take a bit more time for composing. I haven't yet

had the need for interchangeable backs, as i'm just shooting Tri-X, but i may add one

so that i can switch between PlusX, depending on the lighting. But, from my

experience with other MF systems, changeable backs is a decided advantage. But,

your idea of a second body works also, as we've all had to do with the Pentax 67....

Yah, there really are Pros and Cons, aren't there? Good luck.

I've been screaming for some manner of B+W mode on a DSLR for a while. Yes, i know

it's always going to be better to do the conversion in PS, but what i want is just a

simple monochrome LCD image review. I don't see why it would be so difficult to be

able to simply switch the LCD to B+W, or desaturate the LCD image. The result would

be the same as the way Medium Format photographers shoot B+W Polaroids to judge

exposure and composition, even though they may be shooting color film. With the

digital, i'd still want the capture to be in color, of course.... Doesn't the Fuji S2 do

b+w?

I bought a Zeiss Jena 50mm 1.5 in M39/Leica Thread Mount on ebay a few months

ago, for a bit over $300. It was in fine shape, and i used it with a Leitz adapter on an

M7. Worked very nicely. I did sell it, though, as i already had a current 50 Summilux

and couldn't discern enough difference between the two. I did a 'rough' test between

it, the Lux, a Canon EF 50mm 1.4 and Contax-N 50mm 1.4, and didn't seen enough

of a difference in character to justify keeping it. Bokeh-wise, it was quite similar to

the Lux, and all of the lenses seemed equally sharp, although i didn't test with a truly

high-resolving film. The Zeiss, though, was a 'chrome' barreled lens, and didn't look

as nice as the black Summilux on my camera....

But, back to your question - no, not too expensive (relative to a Leica lens), and quite

easy to do, once you find one.... But, ergonomically, though, the lens is a bit

'different' to use. The aperture ring was on the front of the lens, nearest the front

element, and was continuously variable / no click-stops. And, the aperture ring isn't

nearly as 'grippable' as you might be used to. It has a rather 'sharp,' tiny tab and it's

not really very comfortable to use.

Sorry to refer you off-site, but you should check out www.photosig.com.

If you register, you can select images from the galleries based on camera models,

film, lenses, filter, etc.... For instance, you could scroll down the columns of lists and

look at images from only the Mamiya C330, or Rolleiflex 2.8F Planar.... It's THAT

specific.

Sign in, then go to the tab at top labeled "Photos." Then, on the left column, you can

"browse" by all the various categories.... They even include "Shutter Speed...."

Although i love B&H, if i were to buy this particular kit, i'd buy from Hong Kong.

Anthony (amhlee): sales@accphoto.com

Poon (etefore) at www.HKsupplies.com / sales@hksupplies.com

or, see mehasselblad on ebay.

You should also consult www.keh.com for great used Hasselblad gear. I just bought a

(mint-ish) 203FE for what i consider to be a great price. Then, i got the lens and back

from Hong Kong....

Only you can answer the warranty question. Personally, i tend to baby my equipment,

and i've never needed to service any of my various systems. I don't mind the risk. I'll

take the savings now, and if i have to pay for repair, i'll be back to square one. But,

doesn't Hasselblad Sweden repair International Warranty items? I was under the

impression that, instead of shipping the item to NJ, i'd have to send it to Sweden....

not such a big deal, unless the turnaround time will be an issue for you.

Hi.

I think you may be referring to the Polaroid cameras, in the 160 series(?) that many

fashion guys like to use for tests, or just for instant 'previews/reminders....' They are

somewhat 'vintage' now - discontinued, although NPC has recently released a new

model. What you might also be seeing are the Mamiya versions which shoot Polaroid

pack film. I think it's a 600SE or somesuch. But, the Polaroids are 'folders' with

scissors extensions, so you wouldn't really confuse it with a Fuji 670, so, maybe i'm

way off?

Other possibilities, since i don't know specifically to whom you're referring: Plaubel

Makina 67, or Linhoff?

Yours really strikes me. Can you share details? Where? Film? Lens?

Thanks....

Unless he's switched recently, i think Scavullo's known for using a Hasselblad and a

35mm Nikon for most of his career.

I think the most well-known of the fashion photographers using RZs are Annie

Leibovitz, Patrick Demarchelier, and the late Herb Ritts.

I have no problems viewing the site with Safari (1.0 beta 2 v73) on Mac. Images and

graphics load quickly (DSL).

Nice job, Larry.

Antonio,

I'm not sure where in South America you will be moving, but you should consider that

labs for processing MF film in certain areas may not be as common as you are used

to. I've been spending a lot of time in Brasil over the last few years, and i know that if

i were considering making a career there, i'd seriously think about digital instead of

MF in order to be more self-reliant. As well, there are likely to be fewer resources for

renting equipment, so you may want to equip yourself with backup gear, and/or

make sure you scout out repair facilities in advance. Cities with major business

districts are better in most of these respects, but you still have to look closely into

what industry resources are available. For example, although Rio is a huge city, it is

relatively limited, compared to Sao Paulo....

Best of luck.

Mamiya 645s are very nice, compact cameras. I recommend them, although i prefer

Zeiss glass. But, as you have budget concerns, the Mamiya will work nicely. I used to

have the 645AF. I bought it when i was shooting fashion. Over the years, i found i was

getting better images from my EOS AF cameras, when i used them on the same

shoots as various Medium Format cameras. So, i kept changing MF systems in an

attempt to get more responsive, quicker MF. So, for me, Auto Focus was quite

instrumental to me. But, i was not the kind of person to lock a camera down on a

tripod and shoot 16 variations of the same shot. I like to move, and change

perspectives. If you work that way, as well, i'd certainly recommend a 645 over a

Hasselblad 6x6.

But, as i have since stopped shooting fashion, the Mamiya is gone, and i've just

received a Hassy 203FE. My needs have changed. Although i love the Hasselblad for

what it is, without a motor drive, it just isn't the 'fastest' machine, and for me, it

would be a bit difficult to work with in the way i like to shoot fashion.....

You mention you want "light and convenient." The Mamiya 645 is great in that

respect. In fact, although i went with the Hasselbad, i did consider getting a M645

and an adapter that would allow me to use Hasselblad lenses.... The 645 is very

compact and light, and would be great for travel. I don't know too much about the

various models ("TL" and such), but you should take advantage of the Mamiya

website's resources. Also, you can read good user reviews of almost any camera at

www.photographyreview.com. And, if you'd like to look at the results users have

achieved with any particular model of camera or lens, see www.photosig.com. In the

gallery section, you can make a search from most conceivable parameters - film, lens,

camera, filter, etc...

Regarding buying used: I am a great fan of used equipment. But, i never buy anything

that 'looks/feels' used. If it's already well-worn, it's probably a good bet that the

previous owner(s) have sucked the life out of it, and not treated it with the same care

i would. But, there are enough resources out there for top-quality used equipment.

Ebay is one of them. If you have doubts about a piece's age, ask/look for the serial

number and call the manufacturer or track it online. But, age isn't really the whole

story. I've sold pieces that sat in a closet for five years, while other photographers

could have put lots of wear on the same piece in a month.

If i were you, i'd certainy continue on the path toward a Mamiya 645. But, check top

used-gear shops like www.keh.com in Atlanta/USA, and look for similar operations in

Europe. And, ebay is wonderful. Check, though the seller's ratings, and make sure

those ratings have been for similar types of goods, and not lots of cheap items in

order to build a 'reputation.'

And, Hong Kong has recently been a great source of new equipment for me, at

amazing prices. I've just bought Contax 35mm and Hassy stuff, new, at better prices

than i've seen for 'used' here in the US. If you like, i can direct you to three very

trustworthy people over there.

But, maybe most importantly, when you are trying to decide on a camera system, try

to identify what you will want it to do and how/where you will want/need to use it.

For example, if you want to shoot fashion like Ellen von Unwerth, you shouldn't be

doing it with a Mamiya RZ.... Also, as it is particularly evident in fashion, the different

lens ranges/brands do have certain 'signatures.' It took me too long and too much

money to really believe in that.... If you're looking for what the Mamiya 645 can do, i

know Antoine Verglas uses it a lot.

Good luck.

[Don't apologize for your English.]

You couldn't post your objection to the technical issue without making it a personal

attack?

Seriously, there is no consensus #1. Two of the best are reported to be the Nikon and

the Minolta. You should read the comprehensive reviews at www.imaging-

resource.com. I haven't found any better information, but still, after you've absorbed

the info, you'll have to make a choice that involves compromise somewhere.

Marc,

Thanks for the reply. But, i'm getting different information. From the Canon site:

The 250D/500D series incorporates double-element achromatic design for

maximum optical performance while the 500 series features single-element

construction for maximum economy. The 250D is optimized for lenses between 50-

135mm, while the 500D works best with telephoto lense from 70-300mm. Manual

focusing is recommended.

Also, i emailed Canon about this a month ago, but when i was planning only to use

the filter on a 35mm SLR lens. I was told that there is a specific reason why the 250D/

500D are meant for the various focal lengths. Unfortunately, i don't recall the reason,

nor can i find the email reply....

So, i'm still lost.

Canon or Nikon closeup filters.... Brings up, though, an interesting question. If, say,

the Canons are meant for specific focal length ranges, do those ranges correspond

only to the 35mm camera lens focal lengths, or to the lens 'rating' in millimeters?

For example: the Canon 250D is suited for lenses with a focal length from 30-

135mm. The 500D is geared for lenses from 70-300mm.

I'd like to use an 80mm Hasselblad Planar lens. Would this fall in the category of 70-

300mm, or, because it would be a 'normal' lens, does it fall in the category of 30-

135mm in 35mm terms? Sorry for the awkward wording.... You know what i mean,

right?

If it's based solely on the millimeters figure, seems either filter would work, right? So,

which would be more appropriate for tight portrait work with an 80mm medium

format lens? And, then, how does this affect your infinity focus? Can you still operate

as far away as, say, 10 feet?

Thanks.

You'll get 'cleaner' images from a DSLR like a Canon D60/10d than from the film

scan, but the final results will depend on how large you need to make prints. I think

6mp DSLRs are great up to 11x14. I've read that those images can be upsampled to

much larger print sizes without problem, but i haven't tried it myself.

Versus 645, digital may be even. Depends, maybe, on whether you prefer the look/

feel of film grain versus pixellation. Probably at the 6x7 neg size, film still wins. Of

course, you will find all manner of differing opinion on this matter. You should be

reading posts at www.dpreview.com and www.robgalbraith.com

One thing, though - if you're planning to shoot b+w neg film like Tri-X, or sometimes

need to push film, digital isn't so good at high ISO ratings. Noise, to my eyes, isn't as

appealing as classic film grain. I spent a lot of time trying to make a D60's output

look like Tri-X. Got close, but eventually went back to real film for b+w. For color, i'd

have no qualms shooting digital. If high ISO is a need, and you do go digital, the most

recently released cameras will be better at noise reduction.