PDA

View Full Version : Sharpest 67 set up?



Former Member 8144
21-Jan-2008, 14:11
Hi,

For those occasions when the slow working method of the generally large 54 and tripod etc aren't possible to get the shot what handheld (and sometimes tripod if you can) options do we think will provide the sharpest large prints from the smaller, more portable 67 (not 69) options, whilst still having the ability using different focal length lenses, etc?

By large prints I am talking about over 24 inches wide and up to 40 inches on occasions.
And by sharp I am talking not about close up or studio situations where even a top dslr can do well but with the distant focus detail of city and landscapes.

Its not for any close up work, just the type of landscapes you would use a 54 camera for, so helioid / rangefinder focussing and viewfinder viewing is fine?
The Mamiya 7 with the fabled 43mm and other lenses?
An Alpa SW or similar with some pin sharp large format lenses (schneider xl / sironar s etc) which also gives you some shift movement for the tripod occasions with this camera?
A horseman or other make version of the above?

Marc

lenser
21-Jan-2008, 14:17
I've always been delighted with both older Hasselblad (6x6) and Mamiya RB67 (6x7) equipment. Each has it's own benefits and drawbacks, but the images are wonderful.

The Hasselblad is helicoil focusing, while the RB relies on a bellows. The RB is much heavier. Both have a wonderful range of lenses and backs as well as viewfinders.

Daniel Strasshofer
21-Jan-2008, 14:30
Marc, my favorite small LF-like camera is a Hasselblad Arcbody. Lenses are Rodenstock APO-Grandagons 35, 45 an 75mm and I made an adapter / extension ring for an Apo-Sironar digital 150mm. This lens is tack sharp! Perfect for travelling and climbing!

Michael Graves
21-Jan-2008, 14:40
I'm voting for my Mamiya 7. The lenses are fabled for a reason.

Kuzano
21-Jan-2008, 14:41
Mamiya Press with the Universal offering widest options and the Super 23 offering some slight bellows activity on the back.
Graflex XL.... If you can find one with all 3 focusing tabs
Konica Press

All have 6X7 rollback options... The Universal offers 6X9. The Mamiya K style backs are reputed to be the leader in film flatness. Graflex backs with the extra pin rollers at the ends of the frame and in front of the film excellent for film flatness.

All the varied lens options (Mamiya has the most) are Sharp, Sharp, Sharp.

And almost all these cameras and all accessories are reasonably priced unless near mint. However, demand seems to be rising and so prices on the nice ones.

My personal favorite is the Mamiya Universal, equipped with a 50mm, 75mm, 100/2.8 and 127. The 50 and 75 will almost cover 4X5 at infinity, with some vignetting. The
75 and the 2.8 100 are incredibly sharp. The 50 and 75 need finders.

There are cut sheet and roll film backs, as well as graflok and vertical, horizontal adaptors, not to mention Ground Glass viewing adaptors, if you can find all those pieces.

The Mam RB67 was mentioned, plus there is the Bronica GS-1 at 6X7, both incredibly sharp and a wide array of lenses. Then there is the Pentax 67 with prism ttl viewing, interchangable screens and fair choice of lens. Don't forget the atrociously expensive Plaubel Makina 67.

The Graflex XL comes in rangefinder, and Superwide, with a 47mm lens choice. The big caveat as I mentioned before on the Graflex is the weak link in focusing tabs. Normal handling of these cameras over the years has broken one or more of these tabs off. It's a plastic ring and weak design at the tabs almost precludes repair. However I think there are a couple of people who do such work.

Ron Bose
21-Jan-2008, 14:43
Mamiya 7ii, rangefinder, leaf-shutter unfeasably sharp negatives ...

I agree with the RB67 versus 'blad. For some reason I can hand-hold and focus an RB successfully, but can't focus a 'blad worth a damn.

Gene McCluney
21-Jan-2008, 14:43
He, he, I have to chuckle. With me, 4x5 IS the lightweight option to get the shot fast, or in situations when I can't carry the larger cameras. My 4x5 Super-Graphic can be up and on the tripod in 15 seconds and I can be composing the shot.

Frank Petronio
21-Jan-2008, 14:48
(A tripod mounted $150 Kowa will beat the handheld $12,000 Alpa.... so investing in an excellent, fast to use and easy to carry tripod and monopod would be the the greatest "bang for buck" way to spend money to get ultimate sharpness...)

Any of the rigid bodies - Mamiya 7, Alpa, etc. will do better than a flexible body.

Either the Mamiya 7 lenses or using the Digital View Camera lenses on the Alpa will be the absolute sharpest. Using a common Sironar-S or Symmar-L designed for 4x5 won't be as sharp.

Of course you need a superior scanner and technician/skills to realize the difference as well, no point in having a $10K camera and trying to scan it on an Epson.

john collins
21-Jan-2008, 14:49
The Mamiya 7II is a really great portable camera with some fabulous lenses. I prefer it over a Hasselblad as the 7II has a weight and bulk advantage.

Walter Calahan
21-Jan-2008, 14:51
Mamiya 7II. The lenses are superb. I also have a Hasselblad system. The Mamiya rangefinder lenses are equal.

Don Boyd
21-Jan-2008, 15:27
Marc, I just sold a 32x41 inch print of this image made with my Pentax 6x7 and 135mm lens. I have found the 45mm and 135mm lens to be very sharp and the 200mm almost as good. Pentax gear can be found at very reasonable prices now.

http://donboyd.com/gallery01/image06.htm

Brad Rippe
21-Jan-2008, 15:42
Be sure to check out the old Rollieflex twin lens reflex cameras. I have one with the Ziess 80mm planar lens. I think Chris Perez did some tests with this camera.

It is an amazing camera and lens combination, super sharp. I think mine was made in the early 60s. They are commonly available and a whole lot less expensive than the alternatives mentioned.

-Brad

Ed Richards
21-Jan-2008, 16:29
Frank,

6x7 has the advantage of the Nikon MF film scanners. They are terrific and under 2K. Shame there is nothing like it for 4x5.

Ron Marshall
21-Jan-2008, 16:58
I'm very happy with the Mamiya 7 and 80mm f4, very sharp even wide open.

Photodo has mtf ratings for many mf lenses:

http://old.photodo.com/nav/prodindex.html

thetooth
21-Jan-2008, 17:05
i have been very pleased with a mamiya rb67 . sharp photos , fairly inexpensive lenses and accessories , and you can use it to beat would be camera thieves and still tale a photo once their down : )

BarryS
21-Jan-2008, 17:12
Another alternative is the Fuji GSW 690 camera. It's got a fixed 65mm Fujinon lens that was one of the sharpest lenses I've ever used. I have a full Hasselblad system, but I preferred the Fuji for it's portability and simplicity. The 6x9 negs are just beautiful and as good or better than the Mamiya 7 negs I've seen. The good thing about the Fuji is you buy the camera and then--snap!--you're done, there's nothing more to buy. Hasselblad is like a vortex with its extensive system--be careful about jumping down that rabbit hole. :)

r.e.
21-Jan-2008, 17:13
Over Christmas, I paid a visit to the Natural History Museum in London, where they are holding the rather impressive NHM/BBC annual wildlife photography show. One of the categories is "In Praise of Plants", which is pretty much a euphemism for landscape. The winning photograph (of The Dark Hedges in County Antrim) was shot with a Fuji Finepix and a 28-300 zoom lens on a tripod. Bringing up the rear (but praised) were photographs taken with Ebony and Arca-Swiss 4x5s, a Hasselblad X-Pan, a Fuji GX 617 and a Nikon D-200.

Just an observation :)

This is the site for the show, which has some pretty amazing wildlife photos: http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/whats-on/temporary-exhibitions/wpy/index.jsp

Ted Harris
21-Jan-2008, 19:04
I spent all day today working with a client and one of the things we were doing was scanning osme 6x7 transparencies. One was shot with an RB and scanned on the IQsmart 3 it could easily have been printed 12x.

I agree that the suggestion for a rigid body RF is a good one. I would be wary of many of the Graflex XL's available ... many have broken focusing nipples and some of the film backs are difficult. Somewhat less expensive than the Mamiya 7 is (sometimes) the Plaubel Makina with Nikkor optics but its heavy. Reasonable is the Fuji GW67II/III, built like a tak and with optics almost as sharp as the Mamiya 7. My GW69II has been beaten and bounced and just keeps going.

wfwhitaker
21-Jan-2008, 19:09
The Mamiya 7II with the 80mm lens is insanely sharp. In fact, mine was so sharp I sold it.

vinny
21-Jan-2008, 19:47
I believe the original poster stated 6x7 only, not 6x9 or 6x6. Maybe he's like me and would rather have standard enlargement sizes over all prints.
While i've never been happy with a 4x5 darkroom enlargment over 16x20 my Pentax 67II is a great option for windy days and quick set ups. The AE prism is the best i've used on anything. The 45 and 55mm lenses are probably the sharpest of any kind i own. The 90 and 165 are fantastic as well. A second body can be had for cheap as a color only or b+w body. The only issue is shutter vibration: an expensive head and legs are required for sharp negs. I wouldn't consider this a hand held camera if you like to stop down for dof.

sanking
21-Jan-2008, 20:15
Hi,

For those occasions when the slow working method of the generally large 54 and tripod etc aren't possible to get the shot what handheld (and sometimes tripod if you can) options do we think will provide the sharpest large prints from the smaller, more portable 67 (not 69) options, whilst still having the ability using different focal length lenses, etc?

Its not for any close up work, just the type of landscapes you would use a 54 camera for, so helioid / rangefinder focussing and viewfinder viewing is fine?
The Mamiya 7 with the fabled 43mm and other lenses?
An Alpa SW or similar with some pin sharp large format lenses (schneider xl / sironar s etc) which also gives you some shift movement for the tripod occasions with this camera?
A horseman or other make version of the above?

Marc


Marc,

In my opinion there is absolutely no question but that the camera that best fills the needs you express is the Mamiya 7 or 711 and its fantastic set of lenses. I don't believe any other 6X7 camera outfit even comes close.

A Mamiya 7/711 outfit of 43mm, 65mm, 80mm and 150mm takes up only a bit more space than the equivalent in Leica, and the camera is as least as quiet as the Leica. The shutter release is so smooth I have actually been able to hand hold the camera at 1/4 second with outstanding results.

The Fuji GS/GSW 670/690, fixed lens cameras, are also very good, but they are about a generation behind the Mamiya 7 in terms of features. In an absolute sense the Mamimya optics easily beat the optics on the Fuji GS/GSW cmeras in terms of resolution. Still, a Fuji GS/GSW 690, because of the larger negative size, can equal Mamiya 6X7 quality. But I don't believe that any other 6X6 or 6X7 MF camera can come close. BTW, my comments about the Fuji GW and GSW are not off the cuff. I owned and used a GSW690III and GW690III for about five or six years before getting my current Mamiya 7 outfit. I have held on to the GW690III and still value it highly.

Sandy King

philipmorg
21-Jan-2008, 20:31
While deeply comprimised as a "test," you might enjoy seeing these results from my Fuji GW690III:

http://www.philipmorgan.net/AltaWebPreview/

The scenes photographed are 2 - 3 miles distant in most cases; the camera perched on a Ries tripod with an ordinary but adequate head; the film Fuji Provia 100; the scanning on a Nikon Coolscan 9000 (I think). If you float your mouse over the 100% detail extracts from each scene, a marker will appear on the overall scene showing where the detail extract came from. Naturally, the scans are unsharp-masked and color-adjusted.

I'm always impressed at the detail that resides within these 6x9cm negatives.

--Philip.

bglick
21-Jan-2008, 20:41
> In my opinion there is absolutely no question but that the camera that best fills the needs you express is the Mamiya 7 or 711 and its fantastic set of lenses. I don't believe any other 6X7 camera even comes close.

I concur with San, the M7II system is the ultimate Hi Resolution P&S camera. Other systems offer more versatility in lens offerings, options, etc. But if you need 4 amazing lenses, that pack amazingly small, is very handhold friendly, then IMO, nothing beats it. The camera was designed for wedding photographers, who often handhold... The fine precisioned electronic leaf shutters make this camera / lens system the easiest and quietest P&S 6x7 ever made. Many consider it just slightly larger than a Leica, but 4x the film area. And used prices are falling like a rock - so that is working in your favor too...

Also, as another poster mentioned, these chromes are a perfect match for the Nikon scanners.... near drum quality scans in a small footprint and reasonable price. I would rate this up there with some of the best digital backs, at a fraction of the cost.

The only downside for the M7 is.... its not ideal for close-ups as it is a rangefinder......the body is solid, but not rock solid, so you must treat it with some care. The focus has been known to go out of calibration at times. Of course, it has no movements like the Alpa, but you will pay 5x the price for a similar Alpa set up.

r.e.
21-Jan-2008, 21:37
I realize that it's tempting to draw comparisons between the Mamiya 7 and a Leica M, but as the owner of both could I just throw out the observation that it's easy to push this a bit far.

Right now, I've got a Mamiya 7II, a Leica M3 and an M6 on the desk in front of me. The Mamiya, when fitted with a lens, is about twice the bulk of the Leicas, moreso when fitted with its 150mm lens. Compared with a Leica, the Mamiya is pretty much useless for flashless low light photography due to the relatively slow speed of the lenses. Also, there are situations where having 10 shots per roll rather than 36 is not helpful. If I want to use a small, easily manipulated and reasonably discrete camera, I take one of the Leicas 10 times out of 10.

There's also the question of personal predilictions and suitability. Michael Reichmann, despite his initial enthusiasm for the Mamiya 7 for landscape work, ultimately abandoned the camera in favour of a Pentax 6x7. His experience, worth reading, is here: http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/M7_Hands-On.shtml I use the Mamiya myself for landscape, and it works for me, but it appears that it doesn't work for everyone.

Cheers

sanking
21-Jan-2008, 21:47
I realize that it's tempting to draw comparisons between the Mamiya 7 and a Leica M, but as the owner of both could I just throw out the observation that it's easy to push this a bit far.

Right now, I've got a Mamiya 7II, a Leica M3 and an M6 on the desk in front of me. The Mamiya, when fitted with a lens, is about twice the bulk of the Leicas, moreso when fitted with its 150mm lens. Compared with a Leica, the Mamiya is pretty much useless for flashless low light photography due to the relatively slow speed of the lenses. Also, there are situations where having 10 shots per roll rather than 36 is not helpful.

If I want to use a small, easily manipulated and reasonably discrete camera, I take one of the Leicas 10 times out of 10.

Cheers

OK, may I should not have pushed that point. But for some years I also owned and used Leica M sytem with several lenses. I am sure the system weighed less and took up less space than an equivalent Mamiya 7 system , but the relative difference just does seem all that significant to me at this time. Either system straps on your shoulders or carries on the back with about the ease.

I grant you the second point. For low level light conditions the Leica, with certain lenses, wins handily. But low light shooting was not an interested expressed by the OP.

Sandy King

russyoung
21-Jan-2008, 22:09
I currently own a Mamiya 7 and an old Pentax 6x7. Both, IMHO, are sharper in my hands than the 'Blad which was sold to buy the Pentax in 1984 or thereabouts.

Although the Mamiya lenses are legendary, SOME of the Pentax lenses are their equal. The Pentax 55mm is superlative -at all apertures- and was noticeably better than the Blad 50mm. The Pentax 135 Macro is outstanding and of course has no analog in the Mamiya system. I'd rank the Pentax 120 Soft-Focus one of the best soft lenses made for any format.

No camera I've ever owned fits my hands like the Mamiya and (as noted by others above) this allows me to hand-hold longer exposures than usual. The 80mm lens is the finest all-purpose lens I can imagine for my uses- your mileage may vary.

If traveling by automobile, I take the Pentax. If flying or walking a great deal, the Mamiya 7. In the studio I find the SLR easier to use.

You can't go wrong with any of the modern rigid-body cameras. They're all excellent and would be deeply envied by any of our predecessors.

Russ

Eric Leppanen
21-Jan-2008, 22:16
I've shot both Pentax 67 and Mamiya 7, and if you're looking for the absolutely sharpest lenses system-wide then the M7 wins. An upshot of the rangefinder design is that the wide-angles lenses are virtually distortion free; I've had very camera-savvy people think images taken with my 43mm lens were taken with a normal lens or longer. The 43mm has some light falloff but it's not serious.

Of course, trade-offs of the rangefinder design include no TTL metering with filters, ND grad placement is largely guesswork, etc.

The only consistent frustration I encountered using the M7 (or any rigid-body 6x7 camera) for landscape work was limited depth-of-field. LF-style near-to-far compositions were virtually impossible with the 80mm and sometimes even the 65mm lenses, even after stopping down to f/22 (undesirable since it really softens the M7 images). And of course no long lenses are available, although the 150mm is extremely sharp so cropping it somewhat is not a big deal. The 210mm is not rangefinder coupled and usable only for distant subjects, so I never tried it.

r.e.
21-Jan-2008, 22:28
Mamiya 7II snapshot, 80mm lens at f16...

r.e.
21-Jan-2008, 22:41
Leica M3 snapshot, 90mm lens at f2.8...

Dave Parker
21-Jan-2008, 22:48
Can I ask, just one question, and yes, I have read through this whole thread, but what does it have to do with Large Format?

I am confused!

Dave

David A. Goldfarb
21-Jan-2008, 23:23
With a Linhof Tech 70, IV or V 23, you can use lenses as sharp as you can afford, have them cammed if you need rangefinder focusing, and still have all the normal Technika movements with groundglass focusing, plus the outstanding film flatness of the Super-Rollex backs or the option of 2.25x3.25" or 6.5x9cm sheet film.

Former Member 8144
22-Jan-2008, 02:14
Can I ask, just one question, and yes, I have read through this whole thread, but what does it have to do with Large Format?

I am confused!

Dave

Hi Dave, and everyone else.
When I posted the thread late yesterday I did not expect to wake up to so may replies!
Perhaps I should have mentioned that I have used and printed from hasselblads extensively over the last ten years or so, as well as various other medium format cameras, both square and rectangular format, both rangefinder and slr, including Mamiya 7, Pentax 67, and a fuji 69 for one shoot, and always drum scanning and top end lightjet printing.!
Whilst not near 54 quality these prints have been good, hence my wondering about them compared to the body/lf lens/film back combo.

The current project I am shooting requires the 6x7 (or5x4) proportions not square or 1 x 1.5 (69)

Basically I was really asking about anyone experience with larger prints in comparison between the Mamiya 7 (or similar) and the camera bodies (alpa, horseman, fotoman, etc) that use large format lenses, offer some movements and 67 film backs! (thats's the large format connection Dave).

When just one camera can be with you:
The advantages of the Mamiya 7 are fairly obvious, very handholdable, not too bulky or obtrusive, light meter if necessary, light, easy to change lenses, pin sharp lenses, etc, etc
The forseable advantages of the other type: in just one camera you have still handholdable when used with external viewfinder, more regular rise/fall and ground glass composing when used with tripod on those occassions...but if the final print I.Q. from this type of body & lf lens combination is far less than the other its perceived advantages may become moot. (assuming the digitar lf lenses do not have the image circle for 67 film).



Nonetheless its been very interesting to see the wide range of cameras we use outside of the more traditional large format!

Cheers,

Marc

Rory_5244
22-Jan-2008, 07:21
Um, well, if you're rich you may opt for the Rollei 6008i/AF, and a couple lenses. This may sound weird but I never really liked how the Mamiya 7 lenses rendered black and white scenes. They always looked kind of 'hard', or 'etched'. I dunno. The Rollei's Schneider, and Zeiss lenses render scenes with a sense of 3 dimensionality and 'glow'. I like it.

Ken Lee
22-Jan-2008, 07:34
Mamiya 7, provided the following:

1) Make sure you get your rangefinder/lenses calibrated by Mamiya.

2) Use TMAX 100 film shot at ISO 50, or equivalently fine-"grained" color film.

3) Make darkroom prints, or use a dedicated MF film scanner like the Nikon or (now discontinued) Minolta.

sanking
22-Jan-2008, 08:18
Mamiya 7, provided the following:

1) Make sure you get your rangefinder/lenses calibrated by Mamiya.

2) Use TMAX 100 film shot at ISO 50, or equivalently fine-"grained" color film.

3) Make darkroom prints, or use a dedicated MF film scanner like the Nikon or (now discontinued) Minolta.


If you scan I don't believe that even the Nikon LS-9000 or the discontinued Minolta would be able to pull all of the detail from a good Mamiya 7 negative. For that you would need a drum scanner or high end flatbed with resolution of 6000 spi.

Sandy King

Jeff Keller
22-Jan-2008, 09:43
I would also recommend the Mamiya 7 II. You mentioned limited close-up wasn't a problem for you. Also note that long lenses are limited. Numerous people have complained about the focusing accuracy with long lenses. People who use hyperfocal settings often use one f-stop smaller markings to determine the hyperfocal setting range limits. So far I've only gone up to 16x20, but the prints are great.

In summary the Mamiya 7II has superb lenses and is much lighter than a SLR but the system has limitations which probably aren't significant for many people's landscape images.

The Mamiya 7II seems to be a little sharper than what I get from a Horseman VHR using "Horseman" lenses. The Horseman VHR doesn't have much movement for the shortest focal length lenses. The Mamiya is much quicker to operate.

bglick
23-Jan-2008, 22:13
r.e. Your points are duly appreciated. I meant the comment more in the figurative sense, vs. the literal sense. Surely the smaller Leica has more to offer, not just size. I think the comment circulated as a result of the M7's razor sharp lenses and ease of handholding....

Another comment to the OP. In all fairness....if you scan the film, (vs. enlarge the film in the darkroom) the differences in lenses become less of an issue.....instead, your digital skills become more important, as its amazing what you can do with a good digital file. Not true in the dark room days.... even today, I often forget this...