Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Mamiya Design Philosophy - 645 System
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2012 3:42 pm    Post subject: Mamiya Design Philosophy - 645 System Reply with quote

I've been contemplating buying into the Mamiya 645 system. I've looked at a lot of samples from the various lenses and I'm having trouble determining if there was a specific goal that Mamiya sought when designing lenses. Anyone have an idea?

Also, what does everyone think about the 645? I'm liking the look of that 1.9/80 a lot.


PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2012 11:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I had an M645 for many years, loved it, but I never looked back when I bought an RZII. The image quality (from 6x7 film) is very very hard to beat, but the disadvantage is a very large and heavy camera.

Last edited by jjphoto on Sat Mar 30, 2013 10:23 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 12:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Before I say anything, thank you so much for your response!

I understand the quest for profit. Successful manufacturers often have to differentiate their product however, especially in a field such as photography. I've read pre-1980s Minolta sought color rendition consistency throughout their series even if it came at the cost of overall contrast or flare protection. Pentax Takumar's sought high level macro contrast. Zeiss took an approach that extenuated micro contrast at least post '70's. I was just wondering if Mamiya had a certain philosophy.

My intention is to shoot film. The body I was looking at was the 1000s. Don't really need the features of later models.

The 6x4.5 format appeals to me, but yes, it may just be too close to 35mm for any significant quality jump. 6x7 would be much better in that department. The only problem with that is I would have to buy completely into another system. The 645 is sort of a compromise in my case because I can use some of my Kiev lenses.

Truthfully, sometimes I get tired of the complexity and choices of entire systems. Some of my favorite pictures have come from an old Ikoflex II TLR with a triotar lens. Maybe it's time I just buy a Rolleiflex with a Planar and call it quits...shoot more, talk less Very Happy

Thank you again for your insight!


PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 1:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

themoleman342 wrote:
Before I say anything, thank you so much for your response!

I understand the quest for profit. Successful manufacturers often have to differentiate their product however, especially in a field such as photography. I've read pre-1980s Minolta sought color rendition consistency throughout their series even if it came at the cost of overall contrast or flare protection. Pentax Takumar's sought high level macro contrast. Zeiss took an approach that extenuated micro contrast at least post '70's. I was just wondering if Mamiya had a certain philosophy.

My intention is to shoot film. The body I was looking at was the 1000s. Don't really need the features of later models.

The 6x4.5 format appeals to me, but yes, it may just be too close to 35mm for any significant quality jump. 6x7 would be much better in that department. The only problem with that is I would have to buy completely into another system. The 645 is sort of a compromise in my case because I can use some of my Kiev lenses.

Truthfully, sometimes I get tired of the complexity and choices of entire systems. Some of my favorite pictures have come from an old Ikoflex II TLR with a triotar lens. Maybe it's time I just buy a Rolleiflex with a Planar and call it quits...shoot more, talk less Very Happy

Thank you again for your insight!


No problem.