Hello all, I've been considering a MF film body for a while( to be clear, that's medium format, not manual focus). I do a lot of landscape/cityscape shots. I do occasionally sell some images but, it's mostly for fun. I currently have a 5D2 that I'm happy with so 645 doesn't really interest me as it seems to be kind of a "half stop" from 35mm to MF. My research has settled me on a few options and I'm looking for opinions on the different systems. I am mainly interested in the Pentax 67 system or the Mamiya RB/RZ 67 system. I know the Mamiya offers removable backs and is excellent quality but, I don't really know the differences between the RB line and RZ line. The Pentax is also excellent quality, seems to be more user friendly, and is more affordable in my research. Let me hear any opinions or alternate suggestions you might have.

Thanks,
Dan

Contax 645 was one of the nicest medium format systems I used. Prices should be low enough now to pick up a body and an 80mm f2.0 lens for around $600 or so.

I picked up a Pentax MLU body with a 105mm lens for ~$300. I love the way it handles and sits in my hand. You get more of a SLR experience with it too, though I also have and prefer using the WLF with it. The 105 lens as much as anything got me seriously looking at the Pentax, but the lack of switchable backs is unfortunate.

pascal03 wrote:
Contax 645 was one of the nicest medium format systems I used. Prices should be low enough now to pick up a body and an 80mm f2.0 lens for around $600 or so.

I seriously doubt you'll find a Contax/Kyocera 645 with the Planar f/2.0 for that sum, unless it's utterly thrashed. I follow these fairly closely and feel $600 is unrealistic. Perhaps a little-visited Baltic E-bay auction..perhaps... but I wouldn't count on it! More like $1,000 to $1,300 with back and lens, in varying states of condition.

As to the OP - for cityscapes and general walking around, I'm loathe to put more options on the table for you, but have you considered a Mamiya rangefinder? The lenses are excellent, there's no mirror slap (though heck, you don't get much in the way of long lenses like you could with a 645 or 67), and they don't weigh much - you can carry one around all day!

The 645 is a bit of a waste, if you ask me. The negative is not that much larger than a 35mm. Going to 6x6, 6x7, or even 6x9 really does make a difference in terms of resolution (as well as camera bulk, unless you're going with an RF system like the Mamiya 6 or 7).

The Pentax 6x7 is a nice system, but there are things that have kept me away from it. First off, unlike the Hassies or the Mamiyas it has a focal plane shutter, rather than a leaf shutter (there are 2 lenses for it that are leaf, but can't think off the top of my head which they are). What that means to you is that one of the best attractions to MF cameras- the flash sync at any speed is gone. Another reason the P6x7 has been maligned is the notorious mirror slap, which causes vibrations in some situations. You can probably read about this by googling it.

The Mamiya RB and RZ 6x7 system is very nice (and I'm actually getting an RZ body soon, after I got rid of my RB back in 2001). The difference between the two is the fact that the RB is fully mechanical, while the RZ has an electronically controlled shutter. More accurate, but requires a battery. Another difference is the heft. The RB is really a beast, while the RZ is a bit more manageable. If you do look at the M 6x7s, I would go for an RB Pro-SD (can be used with the newer KL lenses), or the RZ Pro II. The difference between the RZ Pro and Pro II bodies is that the II has half stops on the shutter speed, and a fine focus.

If you're looking for bigger like a 6x8 or a 6x9, I would suggest the Fuji fixed lens models GW680III or the GW690III. I've heard wonderful things about these (but alas have never used them).

The other major players are the Hassies and Rolleis, which are wonderful cameras, and I know some will snipe me for this, but I think that they are over-hyped, and subsequently overpriced. I've used a 503CW, and while a really nice design and intuitive interface, to me it just wasn't worth the extra $2500 over an RZ. YMMV.

645 is plenty bigger than 35mm don't worry about that.
I shoot 35, 645, 6x6, 6x7 and occasionally 4x5.

645 offers significant film real estate advantage for the small package.

They all have their place.

You should also consider the Fuji 6x7 and 6x9 series rangefinder cameras. They offer fantastic IQ in a simple and very robust package. http://www.dantestella.com/technical/gw.html

If I ever get back into shooting medium format film, it'll be on a Voigtlander Bessa III (Fujifilm) folding 6x7, http://cameraquest.com/voigtl_bessa_iii.htm

Possibly look for a Fuji fixed lens camera. People seem to like them.

FWIW, Hassleblad setups (camera, back, 80/2.8) are going from 800-1500 depending on the age.

kidtexas - did you know the Fuji 6x7 and 6x9 rangefinders were known as "Texas Leicas"? 'Cause they're big like Texas and they produce wonderful photos, like a Leica.

I thought the Pentax 67/67II was the TejasLeica

Mamiya 7 I think is the best all around system in the MF world, (if you can live with rangefinder caveats), second only to the Fuji GW/GSW690III series. I have both, and really enjoy them both. The only downsides are lack of close focusing, no really long teles, and fairly slow lenses (f-stop-wise). Other than that, nothing to complain about and even those things are minor.

RZ is a nice system too, esp. if doing portraits and or studio work, but it's a bear to carry around or go hiking with, and the mamiya 7 lenses are better.

-Ed

dancam wrote:
Hello all, I've been considering a MF film body for a while( to be clear, that's medium format, not manual focus). I do a lot of landscape/cityscape shots. I do occasionally sell some images but, it's mostly for fun. I currently have a 5D2 that I'm happy with so 645 doesn't really interest me as it seems to be kind of a "half stop" from 35mm to MF. My research has settled me on a few options and I'm looking for opinions on the different systems. I am mainly interested in the Pentax 67 system or the Mamiya RB/RZ 67 system. I know the Mamiya offers removable backs and is excellent quality but, I don't really know the differences between the RB line and RZ line. The Pentax is also excellent quality, seems to be more user friendly, and is more affordable in my research. Let me hear any opinions or alternate suggestions you might have.

Thanks,
Dan


In case you haven't, here's a comparison between Pentax 67 and 1Ds
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/shootout.shtml

I've seen comparisons on this forum that are at odds with that link. Not saying he's wrong, but different methods produce different results. I would any such comparison with a grain of salt.

^
fer real

I love my 6X9's. The Fuji GSW690 and GW690's are glorious. I also had a Mamiya 6 with all 3 lenses. It was nice too, but I am not a huge fan of square format.

As much as I really liked the Contax 645 (considering it way ahead of the contemporaneous Pentax, Mamiya offerings, and continues to show it mettle), I think 645 film is pretty much dead. Hard to find a compelling argument for its use with the 21+ mp DSLR offerings out there, unless you absolutely had to have a film look precisely. If you are going to go through using film in this day and age (and don't have a film fetish) you need to go to 6x7 and larger to make it worthwhile. The Contax 645 is best used these days with a Phase One back attached to it.

With 6x7 film, it is really hard to beat the Mamiya 7ll, if the limitation of a rangefinder and and a small set of 6 slow lenses doesn't bother you (It doesn't bother me, I love using it). Unmatched IQ along with compactness and lightweight. The Mamiya RB and RZ cameras are really studio only beasts (big, heavy and cumbersome, but flexible full system set-ups. The Fuji rangefinders are good, but if you are going to a rangefinder you might as well do the Mamiya 7 (unless you had to have 6x9). The other Choice is the Pentax 67. An SLR with an SLR system. It will give you more options, choices and flexibility than the Mamiya 7. it will be bigger and heavier than the M7 (body and lenses both), but not at the level of the colossal RB/RZ. Handling is 35mm SLR like, so it should be comfortable if big. Of course, you won't the Mamiya 7. Pentax 67 vs. Mamiya 7 trades off IQ and compactness for system and SLR flexibility and options. Another option not mentioned, and perhaps a bit harder to find, get an Exakta 66 (mod III) with a handful of lenses that Schneider made for them (Pentacon 6 mount). Should be cheap. Simple, straightforward camera with no frills with outstanding lenses. I used to have 4 of the lenses, sorry I sold most of them. Still have the 80mm which is razor sharp (son to find new life with a tilt adapter...). All in all, it's hard not to recommend the Mamiya 7 as a great place to start. After that, you can move into the space covered by Alpa/Silvestri/CamboWide/etc.

Thanks for all the input so far everyone. Looks like I'll be doing more research..... As far as fixed lens bodies go, I have looked into a few. However, I felt they would be somewhat limiting for my use. Perhaps I need to think about it a little more.

I think lens choice is more limiting than a fixed-lens 6X9.

dancam, what is your budget for this? How much do you want to haul around?
Thoughts about how the output will be used?

Any of the formats are medium format, 645...which has 2296 sq mms, 35mm has 864 sq mms, so 2.66 times larger; and 645 lenses need less coverage, have fewer film flatness issues, take more frames, have sharper lenses all other things being equal. And there is a threshold of quality at work here...which good 645 cams clear effortlessly.

jcolwell wrote:
kidtexas - did you know the Fuji 6x7 and 6x9 rangefinders were known as "Texas Leicas"? 'Cause they're big like Texas and they produce wonderful photos, like a Leica.

another vote for the fuji rangefinders, if that^^^ was indeed a vote.