Over a year later, and that’s exactly what I’ve done.The Fuji GW690III is a 90s-era 6X9 medium format rangefinder with a fixed. He wanted to loan me Mamiya 7 so I could compare these two medium format giants. You might be wondering what this fact has to do with the Mamiya 7? Well, it all comes down to a conversation I had with a chap called Anais Faraj after I shared my Makina 67 review. Image quality is compromised and while I still shoot 35mm from time to time, I prefer shooting what I like to shoot in medium format.Last summer I finally bought myself one of my dream cameras, the Plaubel Makina 67.
Ive had mine since the fall of and have.Anais is someone I’d been chatting to for a little while on Instagram when he got in touch and asked if I’d like to try his Mamiya 7. SPONSORED Rare UNUSED in BOX Mamiya 7 Medium Format Film Camera w/ N 80mm f/ 4L JAPANThe Mamiya 7II is a 6x7 medium format 56mm x 69mm image size rangefinder camera system with 6 available lenses. SPONSORED NEAR MINT 6x7 Film Back Mamiya Universal Press with Sekor P 127mm F4.7 JAPAN.
Shooting the Makina 67 proved a few things to me. I actually had to force him to only loan me the camera and 80mm lens – if he’d had his way, I’d have been shooting it with a set of 3 lenses.It might seem daft not to have taken him up on the loan of all three lenses, but there’s method in my madness. It was at this year’s Photography Show when we finally met and he handed it to me.
The second was that the rangefinder patch in the Mamiya 7 is excellent. The first was that he thinks the 80mm lens is sharper than the Nikkor on the Makina. The bigger they are, the less I find myself inclined to carry them… so I certainly wasn’t going to be happy carrying a bigger camera and two extra lenses.As I remember it, Anais wanted me to try the Mamiya 7 for a couple of reasons. I like taking photos, but I don’t really like carrying cameras. As I talk about in the Makina review, I find its size and weight only just on the right side of palatable.
I say this fairly objectively, but subjectively I also much prefer this type of rangefinder patch and would actually go as far to say that I find the soft edged patch found in the Makina 67 and cameras such as the Canon P makes them quite a bit more difficult to use… at least as rangefinder cameras.The reason it doesn’t matter so much to me when it comes to medium format gear is simply what I would choose to use these types of camera for. The hard-edged more distinct rangefinder patch the Mamiya offers is definitely of a higher standard than the Makina. 6.1 Final Score: Makina 67 4:0 Mamiya 7Despite the Mamiya 7 losing the battle, I suppose it’s only fair to first point out that Anais was seemingly right about the two things he asserted. And though the Mamiya put up a good fight, the reasons my preferences remain with my Makina 67, it didn’t just come down to size. The Makina 67 wins this battle in my world. I was intrigued to know if either or both of these factors could sway my opinion or preferences toward a Mamiya, or if my overall preference for smaller easier-to-carry cameras would win out.Spoiler alert, the answer is the latter.
The fact is, I don’t print much of my work – I mostly enjoy it on the computer screen where any resolution difference between these two lenses is going to be largely inconsequential.What I appreciate when I view medium format images is the added clarity, and 3D pop that comes with it. But that’s just not what I’m interested in shooting these cameras for, so it feels largely irrelevant to me.So what about the lens then? Surly if Anais is right that it is higher resolution, I’ve just made a pretty good argument for a preference for the Mamiya 7 lens? In reality, to my eye, the difference is negligible, though looking at the detail rendered in this next image I suspect Anais might be right about the lens being higher resolution.That said, if asked to tell images from the two cameras apart blind, I’m fairly certain I couldn’t. And if I’d borrowed the 150mm lens off of Anais and had pursued some portraiture then I’m certain I’d have benefitted from being able to focus easier. In fact, for all but a few of the shots I’ve taken with either Makina 67 or Mamiya 7, I’ve scale focused, and where I’ve needed the rangefinder, I’m mostly been shooting at a reasonable distance where accuracy isn’t paramount anyway.Of course, your mileage may vary. To me, landscape photography benefits from the extra clarity that medium format brings, but the benefit a distinct rangefinder patch brings is fairly nominal.
And, unfortunately for the Mamiya, this early position of 0:0 draw is almost moot, as the rest of the game involves it getting a bit of a shoeing. As I’ve said, I’ll concede that Anais was right about both the above factors, but for my personal usage case – and that really is all I’m talking about here – both “advantages” the Mamiya 7 brings don’t really add anything to my shooting experiences. The Mamiya 7 shortcomingsSo, at this stage being fair, I think we are essentially at a position of 0:0 draw. Not that I’ve used it at 2.8 much, but all other things being equal, a 2.8 lens is going to have some slim advantage over an f/4 lens once in a while. Both Mamiya 7 and Makina 67 lenses are modern enough that combined with the added real estate of the film, the results have an effortless 3-dimensionality to them.And so with them being pretty much equal in that regard, actually the slim benefit of the Makina 67 lens being a f/2.8 swings favour it’s way anyway.
In the end, I resolved to take the Mamiya 7 on a couple of holidays with me and even then had to almost force myself to shoot it. To me, there is nothing particularly comfortable about the idea of carrying the Mamiya 7 – the lens just pokes out too far. An element of this might have been due to a dwindling sense of excitement about cameras that I’ve suffered over the course of this year, but actually, more than anything else, as soon as the Mamiya 7 came home with me I had the sense I was going to struggle with taking it out.The collapsible lens of the Makina 67 swings an incredible amount of favour its way.
Mamiya 7 Ii Medium Format Rangefinder Portable In A
Again, this means that for my personal usage case, the Makina 67 wins this round. This means that I can quite comfortably lug it around with the family in tow and just get it out when I need/want to without too much bother. Unfortunately, for the likes of the Mamiya 7, I rarely get out to shoot by myself like this.The Makina 67 on the other hand is transportable in a small shoulder bag. What I realised on the occasion I was wondering around the Herefordshire side of the Welsh border was that provided I am out by myself and don’t have a pair of kids, a pair of dogs or a Hannah with me, carrying a slightly bigger camera isn’t too much of an issue. This certainly wouldn’t have been the case if I’d been carrying it with the extra lenses Anais tried to force on me, but with the 80mm it was ok provided I was out by myself with the sole intention to shoot it.
Makina 67 2:0 Mamiya 7 Repairability and costIt’s often said about the Makina that it’s a fragile camera. But, its simplicity as a camera still wins it a point over the Mamiya 7 here. In fact, I’d probably be happier with the Makina if it didn’t have a meter at all. I don’t need a medium format camera with AEL. For me, it’s more basic than that, I just prefer simple cameras that don’t do stuff that I don’t really need. But read back my Makina 67 review and you’ll find I didn’t even bother to put batteries in it.Rest assured though, I’m not even going to pin this on the whole “if it runs out of batteries when I’m out shooting I’m screwed” thing that is often perpetuated about battery reliant cameras.
Personally though, despite me not being worried about a battery dying on me when I’m out shooting, I am increasingly worried about terminal camera failure.
0 kommentar(er)
