and trade the TLR and 35mm for a Mamiya 645 Super or Pentax 645N. Pentax has Af and that has some utility, but comments about the dark viewfinder for manual focus are a bit of a concern.
... and trade the TLR and 35mm for a Mamiya 645 Super or Pentax 645N.
pentaxuser: Thanks! Oddly, there is no "LIKE" button this forum.
JParker: Can I ask whether you've looked through both viewfinders for comparison? Meantime I'll check out how the specs differ between the PRO and PRO TL. Again, need a "LIKE" button.
maybe a 645 would be modestly smaller and more compact
Decades ago I considered the Mamiya 645 vs. Bronica ETRS vs Pentax 645. I examined all three in a pro store, and carefully considered the many differences in the designs. If choosing betweeen Mamiya 645 vs. Pentax 645, my preference would lean to the Mamiya...why? Because the P645 handle grip is attached at the very rear, so ALL weight is forward of the handle and there is zero counterbalance of lens weight by the portion of the body that is to the rear of the handle...a long lens especially exaggerates this forward weight bias in the hand. Handling all three bodies in the store allowed me to realize the difference in the mounting point of the handle to the body.
@JWMster I find the Hasselblad easier to deal with in a backpack because it is a symmetric cube. So what happens in practice is that my backpacking kit with the Mamiya weights more or less that same as the Hasselblad, unless I take three or more lenses with me. So the weight/compactness benefit is not really there, so of course I take the Hasselblad far more often.
Funny enough, both of them are very similar to my 4x5 kit from the weight perspective. IMO the primary difference between 4x5 and MF SLRs is not weight, as you correctly pointed out at LF lenses being very light, it's the speed of shooting.
I'd be looking at Mamiya 6 or Bronica RF rangefinders if I were in your situation.
I went through the same thought process and bought a a 645 Pro TL and a nice set of lenses. I sold it after a few years because it just didn’t quite work for me as a 4x5 or a 35mm replacement. With the small power winder and prism it was a very nice handling hand held camera, but not a small one. On a tripod the need to rotate the whole camera was an issue. I cobbled together an L bracket that allowed it to rotate over the tripod head, but it added bulk and complexity. I eventually found I would take the 4x5 or a 35mm out much more, and I eventually sold off the system. I sometimes wish I still had it, but I doubt I’d use it that much.
The 645 cameras can use a waist level finder, but without a rotating back you can’t easily change orientation. The prism adds weight, but works great handheld. There isn’t a good built in grip, which also affects how you hold it when rotating to portrait orientation.
You can crop a 6x6 to 645, but cropping 645 to square results in a relatively small negative.
Medium format SLRs have relatively large mirrors so are not as easy to get sharp shots handheld in low light as your TLR. Mirror lockup helps a lot on a tripod, but blocks your view through the lens.
I’m always tempted to take extra lenses if the camera supports interchangeable lenses. When using a camera with a fixed lens I don’t usually find that limitation a detriment. A TLR with one lens will be much less bulky than the 645 setup with prism and a single lens. I personally find it hard to leave that other lens home, so I usually end up with a bag as well to carry, but that may be just me.
I eventually found a bargain on new Hasselblad and I’ve been happy with it, but I still like my 4x5 kit more if I’m going to use a tripod. The Hasselblad seems less bulky than the Mamiya the way I had it setup to work for me. Extra lenses are significantly larger however. If you have the option to rent a system first it could save you a lot of money and frustration.
Think maybe my miscues with 120 cameras have been due to my favoring 6X6 and the resulting weight kind of begs the question "Why not 4X5?" as the "pack" begins to weigh in close to the same. MF lenses can be kind of bulky whereas many LF lenses can be quite small. That conclusion pushed me to the Rollieflex TLR which has worked fine - even within the limitations for most purposes. But maybe a 645 would be modestly smaller and more compact.... push some of the everyday shooter benes into 120?
But I do like the larger negatives I can see without magnification. The risk is that to my eyes, 120 seems to be unique in that roll film seems more vulnerable to mishandling somewherre in the chain than either 35mm or LF 4X5 which are both protected for the most part and easier to handle. I mention this because I find 120 film defects from time to time in the middle of the roll.... the image forms just fine, but it looks as though there's been a twist or a poke from rough handling. I don't think it's me either though I can't rule that out entirely. But I find these things ONLY with 120, so I wonder whether it's something that might happen in the course of slitting, rolling and confecting or whatever. Sounds unlikely to me, but anything is posible and I wonder whether I'm alone in this.... and therefore it really is moi.... but I've not mentioned this to anyone before. At any rate, it doesn't affect the image or the scan per se, but when the film is dried after development and still hanging before cut and sleeved, you see it fairly clearly.
My 35mm Nikon F4 does duty in the SLR category, and don't really need to duplicate that but hasn't got a lot of show lately - replaced largely by digital when needed.... even my iPhone these days. But the question I'm edging toward is whether to dump the TLR and 35mm and use just 4X5 and MF 645... and trade the TLR and 35mm for a Mamiya 645 Super or Pentax 645N. Pentax has Af and that has some utility, but comments about the dark viewfinder for manual focus are a bit of a concern. The Mamiya 645 Super doesn't have AF, but I'm wondering whether about the brightness of the viewfinder. And the risk in this move is that the Nikon F4 is a truly wonderful system... while the Mamiya might not be in the same league.... ergo the net gain minimal.... And if the only net gain were a slightly bigger neg that was less easily made and not of the same quality as the F4's production... than the whole would be a fool's errand just after a ride on another horse that after a brief thrill could soon lead to "Why'd I do that?" The TLR by contrast is just a wonderful piece of hardware... fun to shoot for the challenge of taking it manual... fully... but while I have a set of filters, doesn't really facilitate a yellow-plus-polarizer combo without a lot more futsing. It's a candidate who's served well but might be time to go.
Read over comments on MF collections and one that resonated: "We keep buying MF cameras looking for one that will get it done...." to which I'd add "Yeah we just don't have stores anymore where you could try before you buy" for these beasts, so it's pretty much "Buy-Try-and-_______" where ______ means "hoard" or "dispose". I've takent the hits and disposed using that dummy math that the unused gear is "found money".
So I'm open to suggestions, thoughts - even counsel.
there is no atofocus for LF
The OP is interested in the P645N and not the P645. Is this a separate handle grip that you attach as an accessory to the P645 On the P645N a grip is built-in and shaped on the right side. I cannot see any way to attach a separate grip to it except by attaching a non standard grip underneath by means of the tripod holder or the tripod holder on the left side
So your grip is directly built in on the right side so it supports the camera body and your left hand supports the front box of the body. Of course any lens attached to the body is unsupported on the front but then only the lens applies some weight leverage to the front as lenses do on most cameras
I may of course be wrong about there being no Pentax grip designed for the P645N. Can you say what this grip is and where and how it fits the P645N
I should add that the P645N is not a light camera but that true of most if not all the medium format SLRs
Thanks
pentaxuser
Conversely the Pentax only has a prism finder, and with the original Pentax 645, using it vertically not an issue at all. I assume the same goes for the successors. There are tripod mounts on bottom and side, and it's at least as well balanced in the hand held vertically as it is horizontally.The 645 cameras can use a waist level finder, but without a rotating back you can’t easily change orientation.
In BOLD all reasons that 6x6 is so beautiful and as Hasselblad advertized "Square is the perfect format."
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?