victor_bellehumeur

Sean, this thread has been dormant for a while but I think that anyone interested in this system should read all of the responses. While my Mamiya has the potential for taking wounderful photo's my confidence in it is still lacking. The real problem lies in the fact that the rangefinder system is plagued with problems. The rangefinder on the camera can be adjusted to perfection but the lens, when fitted to the camera, can be out. They both have to be aligned and tested. Even my Leica M6 is slightly (very slightly) affected by misalignment. In fact when I talk to the technicians at Leica they candidly admit that as routine maintenance the camera and all lenses should be aligned. The only camera I own that is perfect in all respects is my Hasselblad (503CW). I trust it completely. I had a New Zealand trip planned for last winter but had to cancel it due to the problems with Anset Airlines. I may go next year but I still don't know which camera to bring. Given the potential for the Mamiya and its light weight you would think that this is a no brainer but the Hasseblad is an old friend that is faultless (except for its weight). Decisions, decisions. Good luck in your ventures.

Victor

To all who have responded I give my thanks. I finally have the Mamiya back. The repair center was very thorough this time around. I had supplied an elaborate cover letter and included samples of my tests so that they could see why I was so concerned. They not only, finally, corrected the range finder but also included test shots made with the lenses that I also sent along. Every negative they sent was tack sharp and they claimed that all tests were shot at wide-open aperture. They even included tests made with a depth of field system (very expensive system), which showed my lenses and camera body to be perfectly calibrated.

I conducted my own tests, but only on my resolution charts. They have, truly, solved the problem. The range finder works properly. I would, however, like to add comments on the lenses I have tested.

I own the 50, 80, and 150 lenses. I tested all of them on my standard resolution chart. I have also tested Hasselblad lenses, (super wide, 40, 50, 60, 80, 120, 180). Of the Hasselblad lenses I have found the 40 and 50 to be very soft on the edges until they were stopped down to at least F8 and then they were still a little soft on the edges. The 60 is much sharper than the 40 or 50 but still a little soft on the edges. The rest of the lenses, including the super wide, which is in a class of its own, are all tack sharp at all apertures.

The Mamiya lenses are also very, very sharp � even to the edges at wide open. The 50 is surprisingly sharp. I would recommend it to anyone building this system. At wide open it approached the Hasselblad Super Wide. It�s an absolutely wonderful lens. The 80 and 150 are also tack sharp edge to edge at wide open. This is what I had hoped to expect from this system. I had stayed with this exercise because of the encouragement from those who were happy with Mamiya lenses and the 7II.

I hope this helps any of you who may experience my range finder woes. Mamiya will and can fix this properly. The barrel markings on the lenses are very accurate and should be a guide for determining whether or not the range finder is out of adjustment at closer distances.

Victor

Tom,

After following this thread I decided to go to the Polaroid and Nikon sites. Now I know I have to wait. You can check out the press release from Nikon by going to:

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=105&STORY=/www/story/01-30-2001/0001415791

I have the luxury have waiting since My Umax can get me by till then. Also, I have produced stunning 12X12 prints from scans made on the Umax....although I wouldn't recommend that you go out and buy one.

The Nikon is going to be relased in April at a suggested retail price of $2995.00. If it can do what the press release says it can do then it is truly a bargain compared to the Imacon. Prices are comming down....and if the Nikon scanner is anything like the quality that I've come to expect from Nikon then it will be worth the wait. I've just got to wait and see.

Victor Bellehumeur

Thomas,

I also am considering buying an Imacon photo. I exclusively shoot medium format (although my trusty Leica is used now and then) and have no need for 4X5 capabilities. I followed the thread to this point and would like to offer some thoughts.

I have really researched the Imacon. I have had scans made, met with the rep, talked with their support people and am convinced of the units quality. I currently own a Umax powerlook 3000. I can't begin to tell you what I had to go through to get a sharp scan from edge to edge but I was able to do it. The real problem with the Umax is that it takes about 1 hour (with Powercolor) to produce a scan at 16 bit. Thats a long long time. The Umax isnt as sharp as the Imacon. In fact the imacon was so sharp that I had to set my unsharp mask settings to about half of what I was using on the Umax. I also detected grain? Noise? in the Imacon scan. I attributed it to the fact that it was so sharp but I'm not sure. I shoot Velvia with a Hasselblad and I think that film is just about grainless. Im still, though, a little concerned about the additional information I got with the Imacon scans. It wasn't just grain....it was as though there were randam specks throughout the scan. Very unusual. It appeared on both of my scans. I actually feel I would have to filter it out which is something I have never had to do with the Umax. It got me thinking that the Umax, (being a little softer than the Imacon), may actually be better for my purposes.

Anyway this thread has given me lots of information. I hope I've added some for your purposes. I'm going to do some more digging around before I part of ten grand.

Victor Bellehumeur

Dear Rob F...

If you notice my second posting you will see that I also own Hasselblad equipment (SuperWide, 60,80,120,180). I love the equipment and travel a lot and just got tired of lugging around an extra 35 to 40 lbs. Thats how I got interested in the Mamiya. I have done resolution tests on all of my Hasselblad lenses. I noticed that you own a 50mm.....I just thought that lens was a little too soft for me. Even the 60 is (although much better than the 50) a little on the soft side (at wide open apertures). When the lens is stopped down beyond F8 it becomes tack sharp. I had a 40 for a while and returned it after running some resolution tests. It was terrible. The SuperWide....now thats another story. Tack Sharp!!!! Edge to edge at any F stop. What a lens!! The 80, 120, and 180 are also tack sharp!!

But anyway I still think that this Mamiya has potential and so I'm willing to give it a chance. There's such a cult out there (although I am a little dubioius about experience) that its convinced me that the lenses are sharp enough and that the camera can be adjusted to my expectations. As I said in my second posting....time will tell. Thanks for your response. Don't ever, ever, ever sell your Hasselblad.

BTW I also own a Hasselblad projector. Now thats really a trip!!

Victor Bellehumeur

A follow up to my original posting of Range Finder problems with the Mamiya 7II.

First of all to those of you who have responded I give you my thanks. Some have given good advice; others have even offered to buy my entire system for a whole $1,000.00. Boy what a deal! Some have even said that I might be a little off my rocker and just go and take some pictures. You know, I just have to sigh at some of the responses.

I am far from a new comer to the photographic field. I have owned Leica cameras, including �Ms�, Linhofs, Hasselblads and now adding to those distinguished names the infamous Mamiya 7II. I have traveled the world with my Hasselblad and have taken thousands and thousands of pictures and thoroughly test my equipment before trusting it on a $20,000.00 vacation. That was the reason for my testing the Mamiya, which by the way, was bad out of the box. It was, and still is not calibrated properly (i.e. out of focus).

I once again set up my crude by very effective test and would like to pass on my procedures and discuss the results with any of you who may be interested.

I mounted my 150mm lens and framed my 30-inch ruler, which was set at a 45-degree angle. I focused at15 inches. The lens barrel indicated a distance of 8.3 feet. The focus point was actually at the 30-inch mark. Taking into consideration that the ruler was on a 45 degree angle the focus distance was off by about 7 inches. THAT�S A LOT!! I then set the lens barrel at 7 feet 6 inches, (which was the measured distance from the 15-inch point to the film plane), and shot the next picture. Do you know what?? The focus was dead on. I then mounted the 80mm lens and again framed the ruler and focused at 15inches. The lens barrel indicated a distance of 5 feet. In actuality the real focus point was at about 19 inches, which would make the focus off by about 3 inches. Again - THAT�S A LOT!! I then set the lens barrel at the measured distance from the 15-inch mark to the film plane, which was 4 feet 6 inches. The next exposure was perfectly in focus at the 15-inch mark. All of the exposures were shot at wide-open aperture. I think its kind of interesting that the barrel markings are very accurate. I have also found this to be true with my Hasselblad lenses.

Now I know that some of you may set your trusty Mamiya cameras at infinity and the f-stop at f22 and just shoot away. Well, that�s not how I take all of my pictures. I intend to use all of my Mamiya lenses and at times will want to shoot wide open for limited depth of field. My subject matter may be only 5 feet away, or maybe 7 or even 10 feet away. Do you know what??? I want to be in focus at those distances. Perfect focus.

When I originally sent the camera to Mamiya I had indicated in my cover letter that it was out of calibration at infinity. When the lens was adjusted to the barrel stop, the range finder would go beyond its focus point. There were, of course, other instructions in that cover letter stating that the focus was off at closer distances. However their trusty technician only seemed to focus on the infinity part of my letter and adjusted the range finder so that it was aligned when the lens met the infinity stop. That does not equate to a range finder that is calibrated for closer distances. I could care less what the range finder looks like at infinity. At that distance the depth of field is so great that it would be tough to be out of focus.

The camera and lenses (50,80,150) are once again on their way to Mamiya. They provided over night shipping at their expense and were quite sympathetic about my concerns. They promised that they would adjust the range finder to my satisfaction. Time will tell.

Thanks again for any and all responses. I suggest that any of you who are concerned try my focus experiment. I hope you are not disappointedly surprised.

Victor Bellehumeur

I recently purchased a Mamiya 7II with 3 lenses (50,80,150). I was a

little dubious about the focus and decided to conduct a small test.

With a 30 inch steel ruller set at 45 degrees I set the camera up so

that it was at about its closest focus range and focused at 15

inches. If the range finder was off it would show up on the ruller

easy enough. My suspicious were right in that all of the lenses were

off. The 80mm focused at 16 inches and the 150mm focused at 17 1/2

inches. Now that may not seem like much but when you start to go out

a little further this rangefinder error can become more devistating.

I called Mamiya and sent the camera back to them (at my cost) and

about 2 weeks later got it back. I decided to put the camera through

a resolution test and taped a standard resolution chart (Edmund

Scientific) to the wall and shot all lenses from wide open to the

smallest F stop. The only lens that came in Ok was the 50MM because

of its increased depth of field. I am so dissappointed that I'm

considering just selling this camera, but thought that maybe I should

try to resolve this problem myself. I've read about adjusting the

rangefinder yourself and have no doubts as to my ability but, where

do you start? I complained to Mamiya that the camera would focus

beyond infinity, which they fixed. However that did not equate to a

camera that would focus at distances closer. The 150mm lens has to

be in focus at all distances. I would suspect that if the range

finder was accurate at the closer distances then it would be accurate

all the way out. I wouldn't care at that point what infinity looked

like in the range finder.

Is there a way to use a ground glass on the back of the camera to set

the focus? If so then the range finder could be adjused to be in

focus at that distance and should then be in focus at other distances

(at least I would hope so).

Any comments....suggestions?

Victor Bellehumeur

Howard, After traveling to Europe and Asia with 30 pounds of Hasselblad equipment I can assure that I wouldn't even think of taking a picture without a sturdy three legged tripod. I normally shoot Velvia (granted very slow) which requires long exposure times when maximum depth of field is needed. I also never, never, never take an exposure unless the mirror is released first. I know that all of this requires a lot of hassel but the results will be stunning. You cannot hand hold a hasselblad unless you are shooting at 500 of a second. Good luck and happy shooting.

Victor B.