Mamiya 645 Pro TL vs 645 AFD image quality

[tobykeller]

Hello,

Apart from the well known differences (Autofocus, flash sync of 1/125, an extra stop etc), I wanted to know if Mamiya 645 AFD gave better quality images (in terms of sharpness, grain, optics etc) compared to 645 Pro TL. I'm new on Medium Format, so I would appreciate if anyone brought some more light on this.

Thank you in advance !

 

[Sirius Glass]

in terms of sharpness, grain, optics etc
Optic depend on the lens. Sharpness depend on the optics [lens] and the film. Grain is a function of film and development.
In general look for sharpness across each lens including the corners and field of view [a function of focal length] of each lens.
Feel free to ask questions.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

The camera isn’t going to make a difference. It’s the lenses you should be asking about.

 

[MattKing]

Welcome to Photrio.
Differences would be extremely small - based on the cameras.
You could find a 40 year old manual focus lens that would work on both cameras, that might be slightly less advanced than the much more recent lens that will only work on the auto-focus Mamiya 645 models. Comparing those lenses would reveal a difference, but whether that difference matters in respect to the results is debatable. It may be advantageous to have the newer lenses, if you need service.
If you are seeking the option of a digital back, there are some legacy options available on the used market for the AFD. I'm not sure about new options.

 

[spijker]

I upgraded several years ago from a 645 Pro to a 645AFD3. With the Pro, I mainly used the 45mm f/2.8 and the 80mm f/2.8 lenses. Now with the AFD3, I use the AF-D versions of the 45mm, 80mm and the 75-150mm. The AF-D lenses are a step up from the AF (non-D) lenses wrt build quality as they all have a metal barrel instead of polycarbonate for some of the AF lenses. The manual focus N lenses, I used with the Pro, are also metal. But I believe the optical design of the 45mm and 80mm f/2.8 is the same for the N (manual focus), AF and AF-D versions. The coatings were supposedly improved for the AF-D lenses. If I look at my prints, I can't see much difference in image quality. But I've never done any comparison shots of test charts or brick walls. I only shoot BW negative film with the Mamiya. My standard print is a 25 x 33.5 cm image on 11x14 inch FB paper and occasionally a 40 x 50 cm print. I'm happy with the image quality I get from the Mamiya lenses.

For the OP; it comes down to whether you want the extra features of the AF system or save a bit of money with the MF system. I appreciate the autofocus, the higher shutter speeds, the exif print on the film edge and the 75-150mm zoom with the AFD3. A little warning; the Mamiya/Phase-One/Schneider-Kreuznach AF LS leaf shutter lenses do not work on the AF/AFD bodies. The manual focus 645 lenses can be used on the AF bodies but only with manual aperture. I use the 50mm shift lens on the AFD3.

You can find lots of Mamiya (and other) camera manuals, brochures and reviews here. Digital back compatibly here.

 

[Huss]

I found the 645 Pro TL a bit hard to focus wide open, and switched to the Hasselblad H1 which not only has AF, but the mf is easier to use.
Out of the two Mams, I'd get the AF one and the #1 thing to a sharp image is correct focus!

 

[tobykeller]

Thank you everyone for this useful information !

 

[MAubrey]

Most of the AF-D lenses are identical to their manual focus counter parts. You can see the optical designs of both in the brochures here and compare.

http://ianbfoto.com/downloads.php