645 Shootout?

[rhyno0688]

I have recently been wanting an autofocus MF camera and there aren't many options. I don't have the money right now but will more than likely end up with one of them. I want to do mostly portraiture but will use it for other styles as well and will also eventually (I think) get a digital back for it so that will influence my decision.
The ones I know of and looking at are contax 645, mamiya 645 afd, and hasselblad H2 (others I should look at?)

My question is, is the price difference between the mamiya and other 2 really worth such a drastic jump? I mean come on, $1500 for a used film back on a hassy???? It seems like the Mamiya can be had for $800-$1000 for a complete camera and lens and the Contax and Hassy are more than double from what I have seen as of recent. You can get a complete camera (mamiya) for less money that just the film back on a hassy, just seems a little overpriced to me or am I missing the specs saying it will make a cappuccino and develop c-41 on its own?

Break down.

Mamiya -
$800-$1000 for complete camera with standard lens
can use older manual focus lenses
various digital back to choose from
cheap lenses - $300-$800 on the used market
obvious lower end compared to the other 2 options
could get camera with 1-2 extra lenses and second back for less than the other 2

Hasselblad H2
$2300+ for complete with 80 f2.8
Can use adapter to use older lens's
better build than mamiya
more modular
better optics but range from $1000-$3000 on used market
expensive film backs - could only afford to have 1
fewer/more expensive digital backs available from what i can see

Contax -
$3000+ for complete with 80 f2
legendary 80 f/2
zeiss lenses
very few options for digital back
$500 film back
single point autofucos that doesn't work well with razor thin DOF of 80mm


I currently have the Mamiya 645 super and power winder w/ 55/2.8 80/2.8 150/4 and 210/4 so I could use those lens's as a manual option.
Also have a hasselblad 500 c/m

I'm leaning towards the mamiya just from the price point but if the others are worth the price then I could save up for another few lifetimes to get the full getup. I want to use the camera in studio and on location in varying conditions with/without flash.

Opinions?
Have you used 2 or more of the above plus other options that you think would fit the bill?

 

[Dr Croubie]

Interesting that you said Contax 645 had only 1 autofocus point.
I read somewhere (although I can't find it now, luminous-landscape just downgraded their website to something rather unfriendly), that the contax had a contrast-based 120,000 pixel autofocus sensor. Shite slow, like using an early P&S digital, but accurate.
The mamiya 645AF has only one AF point, I've got one but don't have any AF lenses so have never used it. The AF confirmation works with manual lenses though, if you don't trust your own eyes or the focussing screen C. Also note that with MF lenses on Mamiya 645AF, you're limited to spot-metering, full only works with AF lenses.

Given that you've already got M645 MF lenses, I'd lean that way too, use them until you get AF lenses. Also note that your Hassy V lenses will work on any 645 camera with adapter.

The thing about digital backs is, they're expensive. And if you're not getting one now, get something that's right for you now. You can always upgrade bodies later for a fraction of the cost of the back itself.

 

[Oren Grad]

The ones I know of and looking at are contax 645, mamiya 645 afd, and hasselblad H2 (others I should look at?)

Pentax 645N/NII, which will be much closer to Mamiya in price, though some of the AF lenses have become a bit pricier second-hand since the 645D was released.

 

[Dr Croubie]

Yeah, I was going to mention Pentax 645 as well, but figured out someone else would eventually anyway.
The one thing that put me off Pentaxen when I was looking for a system was the lack of interchangeable backs and mid-roll swappage. Maybe that's not a problem for the OP.
Technically you also can't get a digital back for these either, but if/when you do you can just get a whole 645D camera for about the same as a back for the other systems, so maybe it's worth investigating too.
Pentax also do great lenses, but then so do all the others on the list.

 

[rhyno0688]

I am a chronic back swapper, I have a second back for my hassy and 645 and swap them often so the pentax would probably not work for me unless I got a stupid good deal. I guess I didn't realize the Mamiya only had a single AF point. I just need to get my hands on one. There is a local guy that has the contax that I will put my hands on next weekend and will see if he will let me use it for a day. As of right now Im leaning towards the Mamiya for 1. Price 2. I have a few lenses that I could use till I get some AF lenses and backs are relatively inexpensive. But if I win the lottery I'll get atleast 1 of each system so this post will be irrelevant but I don't see that happening.

 

[nanthor]

My vote is for the Mamiya 645 afd system. I have it and have experience with Hasselblad and some other MF systems but not Contax or Pnetax MF. The results on film or digital with Mamiya 645 are wonderful with both the prime and the zoom lenses, especially the later AF lenses, which I believe are better coated and some have newer formulas. All the available lenses are excellent and a few are standouts. If you look on flickr you can get a good idea how the Mamiya 645 lenses render, I like the moderate contrast and excellent bokeh they exhibit. Unless you absolutely need the square (hassy) or desire the zen of zeiss lenses (contax), you are spending extra money to get any other system and even then, I use a few zeiss lenses with adapter on my Mamiya 645 afd III. As far as only having one focus point, I do believe they have 3 points in a horizontal row and you can select which one to use, it is quite limited but I have gotten used to using the one point and locking the focus, then reframing. Still faster and sometimes more accurate than manual focus. When using the zeiss lenses on the Mamiya the focus indicators are wonderfully accurate, more so than just using the screen and mine eyes. I just don't think you can beat the system with the range of inexpensive lenses, interchangeable backs, autofocus, auto-exposure, and the real estate of 645 film negatives, not to mention that Mamiya takes most all the digital backs with readily available adapters. Good luck, Bob in Michigan.

 

[Alan Gales]

I used to shoot the Pentax 645Nll but I really don't think you can put a digital back on one. They took film inserts instead of film backs. The 645D is digital but I doubt Pentax made a film back/insert for it.

The Hasselblad H2 is a newer camera and designed for digital. I doubt they made that many film backs for it so they are going to be expensive.

The newest and best digital backs are really expensive. The newest high end DSLR's now are said to out perform the early medium format digital backs. You may be better off buying a Mamiya 645 outfit and a high end DSLR outfit. I don't know. I'd read up well on the subject before investing.

 

[John Koehrer]

Digital backs. Poop!

 

[Sirius Glass]

Digital backs. Poop!

+10,000

The best 645 is a 6x6 by Hasselblad.

 

[rhyno0688]

Thanks for the info guys, I really am leaning towards the Mamiya

As far as only having one focus point, I do believe they have 3 points in a horizontal row and you can select which one to use.

I read up on the autofocus of the afd, ii, and iii and the autofucus goes to the three points on the afd iii but not the first 2 from what I can find.

as far as the digital back goes, it would be nice and its more wishful thinking but I doubt I'll ever get one. By the time I would be able to get one i can probably get something far better for the price but its nice to know that I could rent a back if needed.

 

[Pioneer]

The Pentax 645Nii makes the best 645 by far. The only thing missing is the ability to change film backs in mid-roll. I guess I will never understand this. It must be really difficult for some people to shoot 15 shots in one go!

Instead you are willing to put up with medium format cameras that are almost as large as a good 4x5 just so you can change film before the roll is finished.

Odd!

 

[Sirius Glass]

Instead you are willing to put up with medium format cameras that are almost as large as a good 4x5 just so you can change film before the roll is finished.

Especially if one loads the film and if one takes the lens cap off before taking the photograph!

 

[Alan Gales]

The Pentax 645Nii makes the best 645 by far. The only thing missing is the ability to change film backs in mid-roll. I guess I will never understand this. It must be really difficult for some people to shoot 15 shots in one go!

Instead you are willing to put up with medium format cameras that are almost as large as a good 4x5 just so you can change film before the roll is finished.

Odd!

I liked my Pentax 645Nll. It had a huge viewfinder and auto everything so it was great for carrying around and shooting hand held. I didn't mind the inserts at all the way I used it.

The ability to change film backs on my RZ was nice when shooting portraiture and switching between b&w and color film.

 

[Sirius Glass]

One great thing about MF is that the view finders are LARGE.

 

[Pioneer]

One great thing about MF is that the view finders are LARGE.

That is a fact!

 

[Alan Gales]

One great thing about MF is that the view finders are LARGE.

I especially enjoy the waist level finders. I once owned a 35mm Praktica camera with a waist level finder. You had to squint to use it!

 

[Sirius Glass]

I would use the waist level viewfinders except the left-right reversal on the Mamiya-Hasselblad-Kiev-Rollei always drives me nuts. I put prisms on them and I still have the great view finders, some darker than others.

 

[Roger Cole]

The Pentax 645Nii makes the best 645 by far. The only thing missing is the ability to change film backs in mid-roll. I guess I will never understand this. It must be really difficult for some people to shoot 15 shots in one go!

Instead you are willing to put up with medium format cameras that are almost as large as a good 4x5 just so you can change film before the roll is finished.

Odd!

1. It often IS difficult. I sometimes have a 15 shot roll in a back for a couple of months. I'll take it out somewhere, shoot a few frames, put it back and not have occasion to use the 645 again, which is my least used camera in spite of its versatility, for a long while. For casually walking around with medium format I take the Yashicamat. For fast moving stuff or if I need a long lens or a zoom or want to shoot slides for projection or in very low light it's the 35mm gear. For a slow deliberate photo outing 4x5 (ok, the 4x5 is least used of late, but still 15 is plenty.) I've never handled a Pentax so I'm not sure if it's that much smaller and lighter than my M645Pro or not.

2. It's actually more about being able to have more than one type of film already loaded and switch types to suit conditions or subjects. In 35mm the bodies are small enough and cheap enough now to have an extra body or two and, in any case, easy enough to do a mid-roll change maybe wasting one or two (pretty cheap) frames for insurance. Neither really applies to my 645. The biggest lack in my Yashicamat I find is just this - having color in it when I see something that wants black and white, having the light fade while I still have half a roll of Pan F+ in it etc.

 

[hsteeves]

the Pentax 645 was designed for hand-held shooting with a much more dampened mirror than other 645 cameras of the day(it may have designed just for the Japanese market). Unfortunately, no-one made a perfect 645 - handling of the Pentax, interchangeable backs, multiple leaf shutter lenses(easily operated). The Bronica 645si came close but their glass was over-all not as good IMO. The Contax is there(although I think the Pentax 645Nii handles better) but prices are still pretty high for them, even though they haven't been produced for a few years and should be considered a dead system. One benefit of the Pentax these days is, like Mamiya, those early bodies(Pentax 645) are dirt cheap so you can get away with an extra body rather than an extra back.

 

[Pioneer]

the Pentax 645 was designed for hand-held shooting with a much more dampened mirror than other 645 cameras of the day(it may have designed just for the Japanese market). Unfortunately, no-one made a perfect 645 - handling of the Pentax, interchangeable backs, multiple leaf shutter lenses(easily operated). The Bronica 645si came close but their glass was over-all not as good IMO. The Contax is there(although I think the Pentax 645Nii handles better) but prices are still pretty high for them, even though they haven't been produced for a few years and should be considered a dead system. One benefit of the Pentax these days is, like Mamiya, those early bodies(Pentax 645) are dirt cheap so you can get away with an extra body rather than an extra back.

That is usually what I do. I carry Portra in the 645Nii and TMX or TriX in the 645. Same lens setup.

Have only packed them a couple times so far this year since the Rollei and Ikoflex TLRs have been getting center stage. That will change when softball and soccer starts up next month.

 

[Alan Gales]

That is usually what I do. I carry Portra in the 645Nii and TMX or TriX in the 645. Same lens setup.

Have only packed them a couple times so far this year since the Rollei and Ikoflex TLRs have been getting center stage. That will change when softball and soccer starts up next month.

Hi Dan!. Do you shoot sports with your Pentax at all? I did team pictures with mine for my daughter's fast pitch softball team. For action shots I used Nikon D200/D300 dslr's with the 18-200mm DX zoom.

I know Pentax made a 400mm AF lens. I picked one up off Ebay for $400.00 just before I sold my 645Nll. I knew the 645D was coming out so I held onto the lens until the 645D was out for about a year and listed it on Ebay. I couldn't believe it when the auction closed at almost $1,300.00.

 

[Pioneer]

I shoot sports quite frequently with it. I love the 45-85, 150, the 200 and the 300. Once in awhile I drag the 400 along but have rarely actually used it. Even the 300 gets "noticed", if you what I mean and people tend to start backing away when I hook up the 400.

I usually have the 150 on the 645 and the 200 on the 645Nii. Long telephoto isn't really all that necessary for kids soccer and softball. Actually with soccer I frequently forgo the really long stuff and mount the 45-85 on the 645Nii. I get some decent goal action that way. Something almost scary about a herd of young boys headed your way, each trying to kick a soccer ball.

I also like the 45-85 for those bleacher shots as well. Sometimes there is more excitement to photograph in the bleachers than on the field.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Soccer played by five and six year olds is amazing. Both teams swarm the ball and the swarm moves up and down the field. When the ball gets near the goal it eventually gets kicked in, not necessarily by the offensive team.

 

[Pioneer]

Soccer played by five and six year olds is amazing. Both teams swarm the ball and the swarm moves up and down the field. When the ball gets near the goal it eventually gets kicked in, not necessarily by the offensive team.

I like that. THE SWARM!!

We call it THE HERD! Many little kids get trampled by the HERD.

Defensive positions are a completely foreign concept.

 

[Dr Croubie]

I can still hear my primary school soccer coach, the father of a greek kid in my class, yelling out across the field every game,
"ONE OF YOUS! ONE OF YOUS!"