An ode to the utilitarian charme of Mamiya's TLR and 6x4.5/6x7 SLR cameras

RezaLoghme · 2025-10-14T05:28:57-0400

Lets discuss camera aethestics!!

While the late-model rangefinders and 645s having a bit of a 1990s camcorder vibe to it, the utilitarian charme of the C3, C33 and C330, the early 645a and of course the chunky RZ is reminding me of a 1970s Ford Bronco, "hardware stores", plaid shirts and some cold Long Island winds. Melville's "Gold Coast" springs to mind.

Owners and collectors, please post your treasures!

koraks · 2025-10-14T05:38:03-0400

As far as I'm concerned, this is bunching together cameras that have more differences than similarities between them.

There's the 645 family
Then there's the entirely different RZ stuff
Which is totally different from the 6's and 7's RF's
Again entirely different from the TLR's

The analogies with old cars etc. are beyond me. I guess I'm not much of a connoisseur. Does it work? Does it have a decent lens? Is it practically usable? That's what interests me. My 645 ticks some of the boxes, not all. It sees little use. On the rare occasions I shoot MF, I pick the Bronica 6x6 over the 645 9 times out of 10.

RezaLoghme · 2025-10-14T07:59:18-0400

It is about their "utilitarian charme" (esp. the brushed metal parts, leatherette, etc.) vis a vis the smooth 1990s plastic of the late rangefinders and 645 with their Contax siblings.

Donald Qualls · 2025-10-14T08:56:06-0400

My RB67 has something none of my other cameras have: extreme versatility. It mounts 2x3 Graflok backs, so I can put Grafmatics and Graflex 22, 23, RH-something backs on it. And I can run 35 mm film in the 220 back, plus I have a Mamiya 645 back. I have lenses from effective 28 mm to 180 and there are longer ones I haven't got (yet) -- and with a 2x teleconverter, I can cover some range of focal lengths.

And as mentioned, it's built like a truck.

ags2mikon · 2025-10-14T09:37:29-0400

As Donald just stated the RB67 is extremely versatile. I use the backs with my Horseman cameras, Graflex XL cameras and my Mamiya press G type cameras. It has great lenses and is reliable.

RezaLoghme · 2025-10-14T09:45:54-0400

Yeah, this thread is not for specs. It is about the special aesthetic of 1970s Mamiyas. Not to discuss features of the cameras I mentioned. Hope its clear.

grahamp · 2025-10-14T11:30:43-0400

I suppose the C series TLRs were a bit like the Volkswagen Beetle - basic, then upgraded as far as possible within the overall design. But the C series started about 15-20 years before the SLR and rangefinders came along. New generation, new materials, new demands.

Paul Howell · 2025-10-14T11:58:10-0400

Mamiya Press, good selection of lens, the Universal Multi Back allowed for 6X4.5, 6X6 or 6X9, with ground glass back and extension unit could be used for close ups, or used with 6X9 sheet film. Designed to used hand held. The Cs, I know folks rave about Rolli lens, but the TLR lens were top of the line, the 80mm was 2.8 and unless shooting with very high resolution film was as sharp as needed. Built in bellows, interchangeable finders, although the Konica Omgea Flex had interchangeable backs was almost impossible to use in landscape mode.

GregY · 2025-10-14T12:29:49-0400

koraks said:
As far as I'm concerned, this is bunching together cameras that have more differences than similarities between them.

There's the 645 family
Then there's the entirely different RZ stuff
Which is totally different from the 6's and 7's RF's
Again entirely different from the TLR's

The analogies with old cars etc. are beyond me. I guess I'm not much of a connoisseur. Does it work? Does it have a decent lens? Is it practically usable? That's what interests me. My 645 ticks some of the boxes, not all. It sees little use. On the rare occasions I shoot MF, I pick the Bronica 6x6 over the 645 9 times out of 10.

Nicely stated.

RezaLoghme · 2025-10-14T12:49:30-0400

Yes good point, the "Press" series also have that aura.

MattKing · 2025-10-14T13:13:21-0400

RezaLoghme said:
Yeah, this thread is not for specs. It is about the special aesthetic of 1970s Mamiyas. Not to discuss features of the cameras I mentioned. Hope its clear.

As far as I'm concerned, the "special aesthetic" of the 1970s Mamiyas resides mainly in the fact that when I started using them I was in my late teens or early 20s.
Family portrait taken by me (with the aid of a mechanical self timer) using, probably, my C330.
I'm in the white turtleneck at the front - doesn't the hair suit that Mamiya aesthetic ?

David Brown · 2025-10-14T13:44:21-0400

I have an RB67 (not RZ), a C220 TLR, and a 645. All have their appeal. But to turn the OP's analogy sideways: It's like having an F-150, a Mustang, and a Galaxy 500. All Ford, all useful, but nothing alike.

An ode to the utilitarian charme of Mamiya's TLR and 6x4.5/6x7 SLR cameras

RezaLoghme

koraks

Moderator

RezaLoghme

Donald Qualls

ags2mikon

RezaLoghme

grahamp

Paul Howell

GregY

RezaLoghme

MattKing

Moderator

David Brown

An ode to the utilitarian charme of Mamiya's TLR and 6x4.5/6x7 SLR cameras

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency