Comparing the Mamiya 645 and Pentax 645???

[stradibarrius]

For those of you who have had experience with both, I wonder how you would compare the two.
I have a Mamiya M645 and really love it.

 

[keithwms]

The p645Ns are *very* fine pieces (as are the comparable contaxes). My decision was based on practical concerns: availability of lenses, ongoing manufacture of related systems and newer ones that can take my older lenses, and overall system cost. If those issues didn't matter then it would have been a tougher choice and I might well have gone for a p645n2. (I ultimately settled on a mamiya m645 pro for its modularity and an afd for when speed is the need) Comparing the three, lens quality is a very near draw. Comparing body design and feel, well then the contax wins, the pentax second, the mamiya 3rd... in my opinion. But the modularity is a huge issue for travel, that's why I favour the m645 pro.

Some may (and probably should) argue for a hassie instead of 645. It all comes down to your own needs and wants.

 

[pentaxuser]

No interchangeable backs for the Pentax. If you were into N N-1 and N+1 system then 3 backs might be handy or if you see a shot that cries out for B&W and its colour neg in the camera

On the other hand I suspect that such needs may be overrated and if worse comes to worse and on the occasion of a shot that cannot be repeated at a later date in colour/B&W then you simply waste the remainder of the roll and insert the new one.

pentaxuser

 

[keithwms]

On the other hand I suspect that such needs may be overrated and if worse comes to worse and on the occasion of a shot that cannot be repeated at a later date in colour/B&W then you simply waste the remainder of the roll and insert the new one.

Or snip the roll.

You can use an uncut reference roll so that you know where to cut. You will almost certainly ruin part of one frame, but usually only one, so if you know roughly where the cut will be, you just make duplicate exposures there. If you do zone/btzs then you will probably want to make brackets and duplicates anyway.

 

[pentaxuser]

Or snip the roll.

You can use an uncut reference roll so that you know where to cut. You will almost certainly ruin part of one frame, but usually only one, so if you know roughly where the cut will be, you just make duplicate exposures there. If you do zone/btzs then you will probably want to make brackets and duplicates anyway.

Can you expand on this I haven't been able to follow in my head how you do this without risking light onto the filmand having sniped if this means cutting the film at that point, what use can be made of the reamining short piece of film? It may be that I have misconstrued the word "snip"

I should say that I am not a P645 user so it may be that what you are saying with reference to the P645 back and sniping is obvious to P645 users but it's not to me.

It sounds like a good idea but I'd like to understand it better.

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[keithwms]

Oh okay. What you do is shoot a full roll of cheap film. Take care to note how you advance it (i.e. where you place the arrow) when you load the film. Expose all the frames with something that you don't care about, and develop the roll normally.

Once it's developed, mark the edges of each frame with tape. You want to fold the tape to make little tabs that stick out from the side of the film so that you can easily find those edges in the dark. This will be your reference roll. Set it aside.

Next time you expose a roll, you can unwind it from the takeup spool, place it next to the reference roll (in the dark of course), and use the tabs on the reference roll to judge where you will cut the roll to be developed. Then cut it up as you wish. Each separate piece will be developed separately.

Once you've snipped up the roll, you can load the pieces and develop them as differently as you wish.

This "trick" is not for p645 users in particular... you can do it with any roll film, 35mm too. It'll work well as long as you do a good job loading your film the same way each time. And you need a reference roll for each camera, they can have quite different frame spacings.

Note: of course, you do need to be careful to line up the right ends of the two rolls of film. You'll probably want to use the trailing end of the film (near the last frame). And it's nice to have a clip hanger to hold them together firmly while you snip.

The trick came to me while I was cursing, in the dark, having a hard time getting a whole roll of film on a developing reel. So I decided to cut off the leftover foot or so, in the dark. But then I thought to myself, what if the last frames matter? How will I know where to cut? Hence the idea.

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks Keith. I see how this gets me to the end of the exposed part of the roll(say frame 5 on a 15 frame) and leaves me with two thirds of a film left. However the unexposed part of the roll needs fixing to the backing paper and re-rolled up onto the fresh spool with the excess backing paper as if it were the start of the roll and then the roll run through the camera until frame 6 is shown. Then the remainder of the film is exposed on the next occasion you place the shortened film into the camera.

Have I got this correct or am I complicating things unnecessarily? It seems to require quite a lot of dexterity to do all this in a darkroom.

I had wondered if it would be possible to simply run off the remainder of the film to the end and then in the dark attempt to roll it back onto the spool until it was respooled as if it was a fresh film. Then wound forward to the last exposed frame and maybe one more to avoid any overlap and then finished?

pentaxuser

 

[wclark5179]

"really love it."

I'd recommend keeping the Mamiya if it works for you.

I had a Mamiya 645 pro that an associate photographer who works with me bought and she likes it. I sold it because I already had enough Mamiya products and I was gradually crossing over to the dark side, the one with zeros and ones!

 

[keithwms]

Thanks Keith. I see how this gets me to the end of the exposed part of the roll(say frame 5 on a 15 frame) and leaves me with two thirds of a film left. However the unexposed part of the roll needs fixing to the backing paper and re-rolled up onto the fresh spool with the excess backing paper as if it were the start of the roll and then the roll run through the camera until frame 6 is shown. Then the remainder of the film is exposed on the next occasion you place the shortened film into the camera.

Have I got this correct or am I complicating things unnecessarily? It seems to require quite a lot of dexterity to do all this in a darkroom.

I had wondered if it would be possible to simply run off the remainder of the film to the end and then in the dark attempt to roll it back onto the spool until it was respooled as if it was a fresh film. Then wound forward to the last exposed frame and maybe one more to avoid any overlap and then finished?

pentaxuser

Oh, when I described the cut-up strategy, I had in mind that the whole roll had already been exposed. So suppose you had a scene you like and you want to do separate development on differently exposed versions. Then you just shoot brackets and multiples and take good notes of your exposures (if the data isn't imprinted on the neg). And cut the roll up for as many different kinds of development you want.

Alternative: you could just buy bulk 120 film and make short rolls for yourself and label them for separate development... N-1, N, N+1, whatever. I've made some 6 shot short rolls that were quite nice, as long as I had the time to unload and reload.

But to make a long story short, yep, it's nice to have interchangeable backs I use multiple backs not so much for zone system approach but rather for entirely different kinds of film and processing, e.g. negs and slide.

 

[polyglot]

Where does one get this bulk 120 film?! I have never seen such a beast.

 

[keithwms]

Polyglot, I haven't gotten any lately but there is still the 5" aerial film that can (and sometimes is) cut down for 120. It's a pretty nice cut, 5"= 127mm, and the 5" film typically has perfs that you'd like to avoid anyway. If somebody wants to join me in a bulk cut of panatomic x or any of the other aerials...

Also there is 70mm bulk, typically in 100' lengths. As far as I know the only routinely available bulk 70mm films are colour (Kodak portra) but now and then I see some others. (But of course you'd need a 70mm back for it)

And of course you can simply make yourself some short rolls from 120/220. It's nice for experiments on exposure and development.

 

[Ektagraphic]

Can't help you with the Pentax but I LOVE the M645!! Awesome system!

 

[Rolleijoe]

Before purchasing the Mamiya M645Pro system, I checked out the pros/cons of each system, and the Mamiya won out on a few issues: easy to load backs, pre-loadable inserts for fast changing, and even a small detail like built in box-lid insert on the rear of the backs.

The lenses on the other hand, are by no means a match for Zeiss, and it's taken over a year to find a film to make up for the (not so sharpness as compared to Zeiss) the lens quality (JMHO).

 

[keithwms]

Rolleijoe, I know that your comment about lenses is "just your honest opinion" yet I find it hard to read without replying. What you say is not what impartial third-party data show:

http://www.mamiya.com/assets/pdfs/645AFD/645AFLensesChart.pdf

(N.b. I have two of the mamiya lenses in their comparison and they aren't even the best, in my experience. The 50 AF is better than the 45, and the 80 macro is better than the 80/2.8 AF, and the 200 apo kicks the butt of the 210/4.)

I don't think 'sharpness' is an issue at all. Would you please specify which lenses you are speaking about? And what is inferior in your opinion... sharpness? Contrast? Colour rendition? Bokeh? Feel in the hands?

I also don't understand what you mean about finding a film to make up for sharpness. Do you mean developing for higher contrast... is it the contrast that you find inferior?

And might you have any examples to show?