Mamiya 7 vs Pentax 67

Jay2654 · Jun 13, 2017

Hey y’all, this is my first post here on APUG. Excited to join the community.

I was wondering if any of you all could give me your opinions on the Pentax 67 vs Mamiya 7 for a medium format system. A few specifics about my situation/preferences:

I currently own a Mamiya RZ67 Pro II with a 110mm and 65mm and AE prism finder. The camera is amazing, one of the best camera systems I’ve ever used and the images are amazing. I love the 6x7 format. I’ve been shooting a lot more lately, however, and have come to discover that my preferences as a photographer are much more inclined to documentary/handheld styles, and RZ systems, as great as they are, do not lend themselves well to hat sort of aesthetic.

I’ve been doing quite a bit of research on other MF systems that are more suited for documentary/travel/street style photography, and I think I’ve narrowed things down to the Mamiya 7 or the Pentax 67 (haven’t settled on a model version for either one yet). Here’s my current list of pros and cons for each:

Mamiya 7

PROS
• Glass (Mamiya glass is probably my favorite glass in the world)
• Quiet rangefinder shutter
• No mirror shake
• Easy 35mm Panorama capabilities
• Extremely well-built
• Portable
• Brand (I’m pretty loyal to the Mamiya brand name, I know that’s very minor, but it still goes in the pros for me)

CONS
• $$$ (Body and glass are both MUCH more expensive than the Pentax system)
• Battery dependant
• No spot metering (Spot is by far my preferred metering)

Pentax 67

PROS
• $$$. This is kind of a big deal. I could probably sell my Mamiya kit and get a Pentax kit for very little net cost to me. I definitely can’t say that for the Mamiya.
• Also has great glass, for much cheaper
• Mechanical, non battery dependent (i know this applies to older, non-metered models, does anyone know if the newer models are battery dependent, other than the meter of course?)
• Spot metering prism
• Also very well-built and portable

CONS
• Louder Shutter
• Notorious Mirror Shake

With all of that in mind, does anyone have any advice or personal anecdotes about these two cameras? What are your preferences? Does anyone have any recommendations on which generation of these cameras is better than others, or any totally different systems I may not have thought of? Thanks everyone!

RattyMouse · Jun 13, 2017

I've never heard the Mamiya 7 described as extremely well built. In fact, I've read the opposite, in that it feels fragile and somewhat cheap.

That said, I'd take a 7 over a Pentax any day of the week.

hashtagquack · Jun 13, 2017

All P67s are battery dependent.... Still prefer the Pentax. Hard to beat that 105mm f2.4

Alan Gales · Jun 13, 2017

I used to shoot an RZ so I understand your complaints. Mine was a tripod queen. A very good friend of mine owned a Pentax 6x7. It felt like a bulky overgrown 35mm camera to me. He always used it on a tripod. Now the newer Pentax 67 is probably lighter in weight and maybe less bulky? I'd want to handle one before I bought it.

The Mamiya 7 was designed to be shot handheld and used as a travel camera. If you are fine shooting a rangefinder then I think you would be most happy with it.

moto-uno · Jun 13, 2017

^ Referring to the Mamiya 7 as fragile comes from someone who's not owned one . The plastic covering is over
a metal frame (like pretty well every medium format camera , Holga excluded). The "best glass" on earth would
be wasted if it was on some "cheap,fragile" frame that couldn't keep the film and glass aligned. The Pentax is not
without it's share of problems ( a quick check on Pentax problems bears that out ). That's my rant for the morning !
Mr Gates ^ pretty well sums it up . Cheers, Peter

jspillane · Jun 13, 2017

You might want to handle a Pentax 67. It's smaller than the RZ, but it's still a pretty bulky and heavy camera, and many of the lens are less than petite. But very rugged and the Takumar's are beautiful both optically and mechanically. It's a field camera for sure, not a studio darling, but I still think it works best on a tripod.

I've handled but not shot with a Mamiya 7. I know they are supposed to have some of the most refined optics for any MF system, partially due to being designed much later than others, partially because they do not need to contest with a design that incorporates a mirror.

I went with 6x6 (Hasselblad) for leaf shutters, smaller size and interchangable backs. It's somewhat costly (but really not much more these days) but I do think that the Hasselblad is the best 'do-all' MF SLR in that it can comfortably be used in the field or the studio. But I suspect you want 6x7
Personally, I would not want a Rangefinder as my sole system but I know others would disagree.

In my opinion:
Price/Flexibility: Pentax
Size/Optics: Mamiya 7

Although, I might argue you should just stick with the RZ and pick up a TLR for portability.

dpurdy · Jun 13, 2017

The problem with online research is that it is all opinions and nothing hands on. Personally I would buy the cheaper Pentax 67 and try it out. If it isn't for you, you can re sell it for about the same money you invested. Then do the same thing with the Mamiya 7. A lot of what makes you like one camera and not another isn't exactly logical... it is a matter of feel. I am a Pentax 67 user but have always been impressed with a good friend's Mamiya 7 work, so twice I have borrowed it to see if I can get used to the range finder and both times it took me about an hour to know it isn't for me. The Mamiya lenses seem to me contrastier and for that reason seemingly sharper but the Pentax lenses render things so nicely... and you get to look through them when you use the SLR.

Sirius Glass · Jun 13, 2017

jspillane said:
You might want to handle a Pentax 67. It's smaller than the RZ, but it's still a pretty bulky and heavy camera, and many of the lens are less than petite. But very rugged and the Takumar's are beautiful both optically and mechanically. It's a field camera for sure, not a studio darling, but I still think it works best on a tripod.

I've handled but not shot with a Mamiya 7. I know they are supposed to have some of the most refined optics for any MF system, partially due to being designed much later than others, partially because they do not need to contest with a design that incorporates a mirror.

I went with 6x6 (Hasselblad) for leaf shutters, smaller size and interchangable backs. It's somewhat costly (but really not much more these days) but I do think that the Hasselblad is the best 'do-all' MF SLR in that it can comfortably be used in the field or the studio. But I suspect you want 6x7
Personally, I would not want a Rangefinder as my sole system but I know others would disagree.

In my opinion:
Price/Flexibility: Pentax
Size/Optics: Mamiya 7

Although, I might argue you should just stick with the RZ and pick up a TLR for portability.

I agree that the Hasselblad is a better way to go. The costs are no longer that much higher. In fact I can afford to have two of them. But it is really important to personally handle each of the cameras, none of us can answer for how they feel to you.

Alan9940 · Jun 13, 2017

As others have said, the P67 is not a lightweight camera! Therefore, IMO it's not a handheld device. I own both a somewhat older P67 and the newer P67 II. The newer one is not much lighter than the old one so I wouldn't even consider that factor when choosing between old/new. However, the P67 II has a much brighter viewfinder which makes focusing easier and, with the AE prism, you get matrix style metering. The older style metering prism is average metering. Both are battery dependent and I've read of LCD or other issues with the P67 II; though I've never had a single hiccup with mine. If you decide on a P67, then the only one I'd personally avoid is the original Pentax 6x7 non-mirror lockup model. If you decide on the model just prior to the II and do want to handhold it, there's a guy who makes a wooden right-hand grip which is very helpful when handholding this beast.

Good luck! Can't go wrong with Hasselblad either, but that's a whole different mindset for me--square vs not.

Lachlan Young · Jun 13, 2017

Use a P67 routinely, have printed/ scanned etc from Mamiya 6 & 7 negs regularly too.

Handling wise, the Mamiya is much lighter. Both are great handheld cameras. The Pentax's mass offers a degree of stabilisation & most of the noise comes after the shot. Shutter bounce is more of an issue with the Pentax than mirror slap I feel.

All the Mamiya glass is truly world class & a lot of the Pentax glass is too, however the Pentax focuses in general much closer. If you're prepared to use a separate meter, the Pentax used with the magnifier or waist level finders (both horizontal only unless you you a tripod) is 100% view.

The Mamiya has something much closer to poorly directed spot metering than anything else...

The Pentax has a full system, but is heavy; the Mamiya is light but a much smaller system.

I've found the Pentax easier to use on the street - nicer helicals & bigger barrel lenses seem to make it faster to react. The noise only happens once the shot is in the camera. It is considerably heftier however & a really good neoprene neckstrap or similar is essential.

If you're OK with a fixed lens, don't dismiss the Fuji GW670III or (if you've got a decent chunk of change to burn) a Fuji GF670/GF670W or Voigtlander 667/667w or a Plaubel Makina 67/670/670w.

Michael W · Jun 13, 2017

I was going to write a full reply but then read Lachlan's above and pretty much agree with him. I also agree with dpurdy that you don't know until you've tried them. I've used, for a week or so, a Mamiya 7. Thought I was going to love it, but didn't. I've owned a Pentax 67 for years and really like using it, although it is a heavy thing to carry around all day. The big selling point for me for the Pentax over Mamiya is the bigger lens range, lower prices, and ability to close focus.

Patrick Robert James · Jun 13, 2017

I owned a Pentax 67 for years. I wouldn't call it a camera that was easily handheld with both the weight and the mirror slap issue. Even on a tripod the middle shutter speeds were to be avoided. Great lenses though.

On the other hand, the Mamiya is a phenomenal camera. The only issue with it is the lack of close focusing. Otherwise, hands down a better camera to carry around. No question. The lenses could be the best ever designed for medium format. They are that good.

Hope that helps you.

aparat · Jun 13, 2017

I think it depends what kind of photography you do. I love my Mamiya 7, but it's not ideal for traditional portraits, close-up work, or work that requires very precise composition. The Pentax seems like it's the total opposite kind of camera, almost in every way. Since you already have a RZ67 Pro II, the Pentax is not going to be very different, and you may find yourself only using one of them. The M7, on the other hand, gives you a very different tool, forces you to think, compose differently.

Woozzle · Jun 14, 2017

I've owned the Pentax 67 and now the Pentax 67ii. I have never shot the Mamiya but have handled it at a store.

One thing I like about the Pentax over the Mamiya is the faster shutter speed and as well as faster lenses. And since I tend to work slower with the medium format, I also preferred seeing through the lens to get exactly what I'm after.

If comparing the Mamiya to the first gen Pentax, I would recommend the Mamiya as well because the Pentax without it's proper right hand grip is just not a nice thing to hold. It's quite slippery. The wooden handle helps but it's on the opposite side.

Now that I have the second gen, I am taking it to outings more often because, with the handle, it behaves much like any DSLR. It is not considerably lighter, but you do feel it if you're coming from the first gen Pentax (that thing is heavy). The 67ii also has a brighter viewfinder, so much so that I wondered how I ever got on with the original.

I get the Mamiya 7ii is quieter and would be great for street and all, but at just 10 shots a roll, I'll stick to my Leica for street work.

ruilourosa · Jun 14, 2017

all good but consider others, specially price wise... i would check bronica gs, all the common lenses (50, 65, 100 ,110, 150, 200, 250) a spare body, wlf, prism, spare back and a few other things costed me less than a Mamiya 7

blockend · Jun 14, 2017

The desirability of each camera in 2017 is reflected in their relative values. Unless your photography is restricted to studio/tripod work the Mamiya is the one to go for.

RattyMouse · Jun 14, 2017

moto-uno said:
^ Referring to the Mamiya 7 as fragile comes from someone who's not owned one .

I was not giving *my* opinion, I was relating that of others who have owned and used the Mamiya 7. One of my good friends form years past used a Mamiya 7. He loved it while noting it was his least durable camera that he owned. Ken Rockwell also owns or owned a Mamiya 7 and loved it very much but had this to say about it's construction:

"
First rate construction is what you get on Linhof, pro Nikon, Hasselblad, Contax, Leica and similar cameras. They are built tough, and seem as if they were created in Heaven by God himself. It seems as if no human has ever touched them.

Consumer point-and-shoots and cheaper model Nikons, Canon, Minolta and other SLRs use a lot of plastic and cheaper materials. I call these second rate. Even though the materials are lighter, they still appear to be made by Angels and work absolutely perfectly, in spite of the fears of old-timers who equate mass with class.

Third rate cameras are those like this Mamiya. The plastic top and bottom covers are molded with a lot of slop and visible mold lines. Screws and screw heads are obviously used in holding the camera together. In cold weather the lube inside the lenses make them hard to focus. The rangefinder is always going out of adjustment. The rubber eyecup is help on with glue and fell off. The focus ring on one lens fell off while I was in Peru and I needed to screw it back on. There is little sealing against the elements so sometimes a little grit will get in the exposure compensation control and it can stick a little.

Get used to it. You have to pay a little more for the Mamiya 7 in the USA than a Hasselblad, and yes the Mamiya is cheaply made. If you want light weight and great results get the Mamiya, if you want build quality get the Hasselblad.

The Mamiya 7 wins on results and portability. Once you see the quality of the results after you've been won over by the portability, you'll never complain about the construction quality again."

moto-uno · Jun 14, 2017

^ I think you made my point , others opinions . It's been with me on so many motorcycle
trips in saddlebags and on shoulder straps and continues to work flawlessly . I don't tend to
use it in the rain , nor do I drop it to check for it's resistance to impact . That it's outward
construction appearance doesn't meet others desired standards I won't continue to contest .
The rangefinders limited lens selection may be it's real shortcoming . Kens' diatribe concerning
construction might well have been aggravated by the overpricing that he saw by Mamiya USA.
Remember Ferrari's use screws to hold them together also . And thanks for keeping this discussion
going . Cheers from a Mamiya fan (obviously) Peter

ignatiu5 · Jun 14, 2017

dpurdy said:
The problem with online research is that it is all opinions and nothing hands on. Personally I would buy the cheaper Pentax 67 and try it out. If it isn't for you, you can re sell it for about the same money you invested. Then do the same thing with the Mamiya 7. A lot of what makes you like one camera and not another isn't exactly logical... it is a matter of feel. I am a Pentax 67 user but have always been impressed with a good friend's Mamiya 7 work, so twice I have borrowed it to see if I can get used to the range finder and both times it took me about an hour to know it isn't for me. The Mamiya lenses seem to me contrastier and for that reason seemingly sharper but the Pentax lenses render things so nicely... and you get to look through them when you use the SLR.

I have to agree wholeheartedly with the buy-and-try advice. As dpurdy suggests, MF prices are fairly stable; you'd be hard-pressed not to be able to get back what you paid, minus the shipping (which I always just consider to be a rental cost).
This method is how I figured out that despite its solid reputation, an RB67 wasn't a good 6x7 for me. I sold it at a slight profit, and got a Pentax 6x7 shortly after, which remains my favourite camera. None of the brands or models listed in this thread are poor camera systems. A good way to figure out which, if any, is truly right for you is for you to shoot your style with your film in your travel locations.

voceumana · Jun 14, 2017

If you opt for the Pentax, go for the 67II--improved mirror dampening and other technical improvements. It's not what I would consider good for handheld use, as it's very heavy, and you need to use mirror lockup for the sharpest images. It requires a battery for use. Supposedly hold film flatter than any other 6x7, and use for astronomical & other technical photos for that reason alone.

The Mamiya is probably better for handheld use, but I've not held or used one. If you must stick with 6x7, there's also the Bronica GS-1 if you like horizontal composition; if you can go for 6x6 the Hasselblad and Bronica SQ-Ai are obvious choices.

Jim Andrada · Jun 15, 2017

I have an RB67 and a Mamiya 7 (and a Mamiya 645 as well.) The RB/RZ's are fabulous but heavy - very heavy. And when you carry them they seem to gain weight faster than I do. The 7 is an outstanding camera - absolutely not fragile in any way. Optically superb, quiet, easy to handle. I really love it. One shortcoming is that there aren't very many lenses available for them. On the other hand considering the prices that people still pay for them, you wouldn't want to buy many lenses.

In the end, the MF camera I use the most turns out to be the M645 with a 150mm f/2.8 lens. Camera and lenses (and there are a zillion lenses) are dirt cheap since so many were made.

Soeren · Jun 15, 2017

How about the fuji GW670?

mshchem · Jun 15, 2017

I have a RZ 67 II , backs, winder, lenses. Great camera. Wonderful camera. I wouldn't sell it.

However 80% OT the time I shoot Fuji GW and GSW 690 III cameras. No battery, incredible lenses, cheap, rugged. No freaking electronic anything. You can get nice examples for under 500 usd. Get one, they come 6x7, 6x8, and 6x9.

tomfrh · Jun 15, 2017

I've owned both.

My comments:

M7 pros:
-Light and relatively compact
-Excellent lenses
-Leaf shutter meaning slower shutter possible
-quiet
-coolness factor

M7 cons:
-Slow lenses
-Poor minimum focus distance (head shots are impossible)
-Rangefinder composition

P67 pros:
-fast cheap good lenses
-good minimum focus
-versatile
-thru the lens composition

P67 cons:
-heavier
-noisy
-mirror/shutter vibration (not as bad as is made out, especially with shorter lenses,l)

I recommend buying second hand and trying out.

mrosenlof · Jun 15, 2017

Soeren said:
How about the fuji GW670?

I went through a similar process in the mid 90s. I had been shooting with a Mamiya TLR for over 10 years, but it wasn't the best tool to chase my kids with. I rented a P67 for a weekend, looked at the RZ and GS-1 in the store, but ended up with the Fuji GW690. I think it's a great choice for a street/docu type camera.

Mamiya 7 vs Pentax 67

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency