gregruskin

Agree. 28 or 35 make great walk around primes (and fine for landscapes too) - a pancake 28 would make the E420 like the GRII with much better image quality.

A light 9-18 sounds encouraging - though one wonders about quality vs. a prime. A 14mm prime or thereabouts would be perfect - perhaps design considerations would require it to be as bulky as a zoom. This recalls the design advantages the older rangefinders had over their 35 mm equivalents in lens design (a less bulky rear?): I'm thinking of the awesome and very compact lenses designed for the Contax G series, which trounced SLR equivalent lenses in part due to ability for a very close distance to the film plain.

Am very tempted by the E420 due to size and weight considerations. Combined with

the pancake 25mm lens, the system is quite small. From a cursory look, it seems

that there are no 4/3 wide angle primes around - one is stuck with zooms ( eg,

11-22, 12-60) which are bulkier and heavier, somewhat defeating the purpose of

the small body. While the E420 weighs in at 13+ oz, the pro zooms are in the

range of 16 oz. A Pentax 200D, while significantly heavier (23+oz) can be

matched with pancake lenses in the 4-5 oz range. Are any third party small prime

lenses adaptable for the Olympus bodies?? Or rumours about future production??

With more pancakes, the system would be perfect as a travel/hiking setup.

Certainly lighter than my Mamiya 6!.

The Epson 3800 ships with profiles of Epson papers on its installation disk.

These seem pretty good. I was told at B&H that newer (and better) versions are

downloadable from Epsons website - I am not able to find them anywhere on the

site. Any one have an inkling????

Just started printing with the Epson 3800. I've found that the canned profiles

are excellent. I'm printing color images, and have used Legion Photo Silk and

Epson Premium Luster to good effect. How does the Hahnemuhle Fine Aret Pearl

compare? Is there a higher Dmax? Is the Hahnemuhle profile for the 3800

accurate, or does the paper require custom profiling for the 3800?

I've been printing primarily on premium luster (some semi-gloss), not the traditional "fine art" papers like rag, matte, etc. I don't like velvia style hypersaturated prints - I shoot Provia - and aim for natural rendition. One complaint I had with the 2200 was a lack of "snap" or sharpness - possibly due to inadequate density in the blacks.

Thanks. Quite useful

Any hands on experience comparing the 2200 with ultrachrome inkset vs.

the new 2400 or 4800 for color prints. From what I've read, the new

printers are vastly superior for B&W printing. But I've seen little

written about improvements in color, other than the pre-release claims

about increased color gamut, lack of metamerism, and greater color and

black density. I print color landscapes from drum-scanned medium

format slides.

The highlights look "blown" on the childs shirt and in the trees. The dark areas are lighter than they should be, thus compromising contrast. You need to reset the highlight and shadow points. This can be done using levels or curves. I cannot tell whether there's any salvagable detail in the blown highs - there may be. Experiment with the sliders in Levels. There also may be a reddish cast, but I can't be sure, as I'm looking at the image on a non-calibrated monitor.

My experience has not been a bit different than the above posters. I have compared prints using a profile city custom profile on the 2200 vs. ImagePrint demo. The color prints tend to be "lighter" and a bit less saturated. This is something that IP admits. In the latest version, one can partially correct for this by using the new black point compensation slider in the color settings, turningit from the default 50 to zero. This increases black density, and improves color saturation. The IP profiles have a bit more "detail" particularly in shadows than my custom profile, but are sifnificantly "lighter". They are not as close to the screen (my monitor is calibrated with EyeOne) as the custom profile. IP says that the native driver for the 2200 tends to distort the print with excess ink deposition, resulting in artificially increased saturation at the expense of shadow detail. Profile city, when I made my profile, suggested to run the targets not using the NO COLOR ADJUSTMENT option (which is the standard way to use ICC profiles with all epson drivers) and instead, print the target with color correction ON, in the standard setting. This resulted in clear separation of blacks, and escellent shadow detail. So, it is not at all clear that the IP RIP is superior for color to custom profiles on the 2200. The "lightness" of prints with IP may not be universal; i.e., only effect some types of prints. I have not made up my mind. For B&W printing, it is supposedly vastly superior. I've found, by the way, that many reviews of IP on the net (luminous landscape etc. ) are not very good: they focus on B&W, with little critical review of color. If you call IP, they will admit the "lightness" problem.

I am considering purchasing ImagePrint 5.6 for use with the Epson

2200 (also 1280). I've read a number of positive reviews -

particularly with regard to B&W printing and the quality of the color

profiles. Anyone with experience for color printing? Are the prints

of better quality (sharpness, gamut, ink deposition etc) than those

one can achieve with the Epson driver? I purchased one custom profile

from Profile City which seems to be quite good. Is imageprint

significantly better?

Ive used the original GR1 in the alps, while climbing. I shot photos using aperture priority, usually between F11 and F16 for maximal depth of field. I did not compensate for the exposures as I usually do in snowy conditions (incr. 1/2 to 3/4 stop), but used NPH print film, which has a wide latitude. Examples of prints are in my lphotonet folder. With slide film, I would definitely compensate. I've read that the Gr1 meter is good enoug for slide film. And there is an exposure compensation dial, so if youre shootine, say, Provia, I would use it. Great camera for climbs.

Like many, I'm struggling to fine tune output with the excellent

Epson 2200P. Epson's canned profiles are mediocre at best. I've been

working with WCI drum scans of 6X6 (mamiya 6) color negs. WCI

recommended ProfileCity for custom profiles for the the epson

ultrachrome printers. Does any one have experience with their quality?

This exact problem has happened with my 1280 on multiple occasions,and seems to be a "cleaning" issue: it has always disappeared after using the automated head cleaning function. It ususally takes MULTIPLE cleaning cycles (3-5) to work. Your printer is not defective, just needs vigourous cleaning.

Ditto for the Mamiya 6. Great for treks/hiking: used mine recently for two weeks in the Cordillera Blanca, Peru. Pattie is correct about the collapsible mount: it makes a huge difference vs. the Mamiya 7 in terms of portability/comfort while hiking. Only three lenses, but they are superb. The camera shines for landscapes and environmental portraits. I chose it over the 7 for treks/hikes.

Regarding the comment made above regarding metering on the 6 vs. the 7. The 6's meter is really an averaging meter, slightly center weighted. Both the 7 and 7II have extremely center weighted meters which are effectively spot meters. Your choice. I find that its easier to get reliable exposures with the broader, averaging meter than a spot meter, unless your quite experienced in visually judging a neutral grey in your scene.

The "6" is awesome: compact, and great for hiking, travel. With the collapsible mount, if FEELS much smaller than the 7, even though the specs aren't that different. Lense quality is equal. the 50 mm is phenomenal. Buying used from a reputable dealear should pose no problem. Many so called "used" lenses sold by dealers are actually new in box old stock distributed by Mamiya. I've had no problems with my 6 and its three lenses. The cost savings is huge. The brighter viewfinder in the 7II is nice, but I've had no problems whatsoever focusing the 6. If you go with the 7II, you should buy from Robert White in UK - totally reliable. I bought a gitzo mountaineer and gr1 from them at considerable savings. Check the medium format thread and look up user comments on the 6: its one of the ergonomically great cameras of all time. Stunning prints.

To directly answer your weight question regarding the Mamiya 6: Body weighs 31.7 oz,, 50 mm lens 11.7 oz, 75mm lens 8.8 oz. The Fuji GA645Wi weighs 29.5 oz.

 

I disagree with some of the previous posts. I bought the Mamiya 6 specifically for hiking - actually for mountaineering, where weight is even a greater consideration. The fugi 645 auto-focus cameras are roughly 10-12 oz lighter, however, the M6 is compact, easily packable, and quite light: i the same league as a Nikon/Canon pro SLR + lens. I find the M6 to be awesome: the 50mm lens is legendary, certainly the equal, if not better, than the Hasy 50. The advantage over the fugi, aside from the interchangeable lenses, and awsome optics, is the larger negative size. The 50mm on a tripod rivals large format. I like the 6 more than the 7 because the collapsible mount makes the camera small and unobtrusive. You should compare the Fugi 645 and Mamiya 6 in your hand if you can. The ergonomics on the 6 are fantastic.The manual focus makes battery life considerably longer, which may be an issue on longer trips. Prices on the 6MF are excellent now in mint condition: I would avoid EBAY.

Linhoff Profi II is commonly used with the Mamiya 6/7. Regarding carbon fiber, the 1227/1228 can be quickly shipped by Robert White in the UK for around $350. The ProfiII/1228 combo is popular for the Mamiya's.

Off to the Andes tomorrow!! Thanks kindly for your answers.

Just got a Profi II, and have been Extremely pleased with it. I'm

planning on bringing it on a trip to the Andes for a couple of weeks

trekking/camping, and am concerned about damage to the ball with

exposure to grit, dust, etc. in the field. How susceptible are heads

to lock-up or permanent failure during field use. Do they need to be

covered except while shooting?

Ditto on Robert White: I've purchased a camera and tripod from them. Excellent service, reliable.

A simple question: I'm new to 6X6 format, and will be on a field trip

for several weeks in the Andes, shooting mostly 120/220 film. 1. Does

roll film need to be protected in a dark container after exposure? 2.

Any tips on preventing damage to exposed rolls from moisture

condensation: with 35mm film, I always put exposed roles in the

plastic container. Zip lock bags? Double bags?

I just purchased a Mamiya 6 for travel, hiking etc. I chose it after renting a Mamiya 7. The six feels considerably smaller/compact due to the collapsable mount, and the lenses do not require accessory viewfinders. The 50mm lens (28 in 35mm) is an excellent compromise if a single wide angle is desired. They're easily found in excellent shape used. Many have bemoaned Mamiya's decision to discontinue the 6. Cost was not an issue since a used 6 costs the same as a new 7 (if you get the 7 from Robert White in the UK).

Jeff: this may be too late, but check out my portfolio on photo.net for several examples of mountain summits shot with the Ricoh GR1