Mamiya C220 or C330?

[snegron]

I am curious to know what the difference is between the 220 and the 330. I have seen them for sale recently and I am not familiar with TLR's in general, other than the top lens is the viewing lens and the bottom lens is the "taking" lens. They look pretty cool though.

 

[David Brown]

The 330 cocks the shutters on the lenses when the film is advanced. On the 220, the shutter has to be cocked separately. Also, the 330 has a large crank for film advance, the 220 has a knob, with a small fold out crank. The 220 is lighter in weight. The 220 does not take interchangeble viewing screens, the 330 does. there are other less significant differences (IMHO). I have the 220. They take all the same lenses.


See: Dead Link Removed

 

[MattKing]

I have both cameras, and echo David Brown's comments, with one addition.

The C330 has two shutter releases. One of those releases interfaces directly with a Mamiya grip which has a trigger release on it. The combination of the camera and grip makes handling perfect (IMHO) for someone like me who is very left handed.

I have had my C330 for almost 30 years and shot all sorts of things with it, including weddings.

My C220 is a more recent purchase, bought used, so that I have a backup. I find I use it most often when I want to carry around something lighter than the C330. The photograph of the ropes in my gallery was shot using the C220.

Both are great.

Matt

 

[snegron]

Thanks for the feedback! Is the C330 an updated version of the C220?

 

[Lopaka]

Not really, they are parallel series. The C330 is updated from an earlier C3xx something and the C220 is updated from an earlier C2xx something. I don't know what all the versions were. I have an old C2 (my first MF camera bought used) and an old C3 bought new in the 1960's. That became my main workhorse for weddings with the C2 as a backup. After a few hundred or so weddings, these guys are on the 'retirement' shelf. Very sturdy, though. Cameras take a lot of wear and tear on weddings every weekend and these held up great. They still work too.

Bob

 

[grahamp]

The Mamiyaflex C, C2, C3, C22, C220, and C220f are probably the direct feature line. The C33, C330, C330f, and C330s added the auto shutter cocking and the parallax/exposure compensation arm in the finder. With the possible exception of the 220-only backs on the C33 and C22, and a couple of lens incompatibilities, pretty much any permutation of body, lens, or finder will work. A true system camera.

[edit - punctuation]

 

[snegron]

I have heard mixed reviews about the lenses for the Mamiya TLR series. Are they as sharp as the 645 N or RB67C series?

 

[Dave Miller]

As sharp as you will ever need.

 

[FrankB]

As sharp as you will ever need.

Amen.

I have a 55, 80 & 180 (black versions). All are as sharp as a tack.

 

[narsuitus]

Once I used the 55mm, 80mm and 180mm lenses on the Mamiya twin lens reflex for shooting weddings. I personally preferred the manual Mamiya 22 and 220 because I felt the less automation there was, the less chance there was of something breaking.

 

[Mark Fisher]

Simple answer - c220 is lighter, c330 is more automated (auto cocking, paralax, added shutter release). To me, lighter was better so I went with a C220. Neither are better, just different.

 

[kb244]

The C2, C22, C220, are the amature line of the Mamiya TLR
The C3, C33, C330 are the professional line.

Though between the C220 and C330 there is not a whole lot of differences, the earlier pairs had more differences. I've owned the C33(sold), and the C3, and use the 65mm, and 105mm lens with it.

 

[narsuitus]

The C2, C22, C220, are the amature line of the Mamiya TLR
The C3, C33, C330 are the professional line.

Not correct!

The C220 was labeled “professional” by Mamiya. They placed the label on the front of the camera. The C22, C2, C330, C33, and C3 may have also had the same “professional” label.

 

[kb244]

Not correct!

The C220 was labeled “professional” by Mamiya. They placed the label on the front of the camera. The C22, C2, C330, C33, and C3 may have also had the same “professional” label.

if you read the sentence underneath you'd see that I said the C220 and C330 had hardly anything different between them. The Mamiyaflex, C2, did not have the "Professional" stamp on the bottom of the TLR. Some C22 had the stamp, some did not, but its just like how canon considers the 20D/30D an advanced amature camera, and not a professional, just because the stamp is there doesnt make it such. The C2* was more of a budget body up til the 220/330.

 

[narsuitus]

The only point I was trying to make was that the C2, C22, and C220 could not be considered an amateur line if the manufacturer labeled the C220 and some of the C22 cameras as “professional.” To me, this indicates that the manufacturer was trying to appeal to the professional market; not the amateur market.

 

[bonk]

Can anything be said about the image quality differences between the C220 and C330 ? Do both of them have the same lenses with the same coating and same specs?

 

[Paul Howell]

Both use the same lens, what might matter is that that there are several versions of each lens over the years.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

They use the same lenses and shutters, and have almost the same film path within the bodies! The rack and pinion focus system is almost the same. The internet is your 5 minute friend and will answer questions like this.

https://emulsive.org/reviews/camera...-mamiya-c220-professional-tlr-by-ian-bartlett

 

[NB23]

Most excellent system!
The C220 needs you to recock the shutter each and every time. Once you’re used to it it becomes second nature.

 

[MattKing]

My C330 with its auto-cocking and lever winding was much better suited to weddings than my backup C220.
And I made good use of the automatic parallax and exposure correction guide on the C330 when I used it for moderate close-up use without a paramender.
But the biggest advantage of the C330 was that it functions perfectly with the left hand trigger grip - an accessory that makes the C330 excellent for handheld photography.
I also made use of the interchangeable focus screens on my C330 - I like a grid screen - and I'm not sure that is an option with the C220.
But the basic quality will be the same.

 

[mrosenlof]

the 220 does not have interchangeable screens. The 330 is a bit more convenient, but the basic quality is the same as Matt said. I really like the feel of the film advance on the 220f, not sure if the "plain" 220 feels as nice, but I think not driving that cocking lever makes the film wind feel nicer. YMMV.

 

[mcrokkorx]

Two digit models like the C33 are really huge and heavy for TLRs: they can be used handheld (Diane Arbus certainly did fine with them), but they're really a bit much. I quickly traded my C33 for the C330f, which is a more practical usable size/weight and includes nice features like user-interchangeable focus screens and updated parallax/distance readouts for the newer lenses. If you want the auto shutter cocking and parallax correction features at a lower price, consider the original C330 instead of later C330f: they are almost identical aside from a focus locking lever added to the C330f.

I agree the fixed body-mounted secondary shutter release is the most unsung advantage of the 330 over the 220: it really comes in handy with lenses that require maximum bellows extension at portrait distances (where the standard lens mount shutter release can end up in awkward positions), and couples to a very nice side grip that also works with the RB67 and M645.

As others have mentioned, the dedicated winding crank on the 330 models is fast to use but doesn't feel as smooth in operation as the basic knob on the 220 models. The 220 models are a bit smaller/lighter and in some ways faster to use: the "gotcha" with the added parallax and distance scales of the 330 is you need to remember to change them to match the lens whenever you change lenses, and the moving parallax indicator in the finder can be distracting.

The 220 retains design cues from earlier Mamiya TLRs: the 220 is the "prettiest" of the rather utilitarian Mamiya TLR designs. Lots of chrome, almost no plastic, and nifty rubber "leatherette" embossed with the letter M as a grippy pattern. Probably the most mechanically reliable Mamiya TLR body overall, and very simple to repair if it does ever need service. Its only real drawback is lack of user-changeable focus screen (although this can be addressed with an aftermarket Britescreen kit from Rick Oleson). The simplified fixed parallax indicator in the 220 finder gives a good idea of the framing area with most of the lenses when used at most typical distances unless you go in super close (at which point you should be using a tripod and the nifty Mamiya "paramender" accessory anyway).

As Old Gregg noted, the final models 330s and 220f are highly desirable for their very bright, contrasty, upgraded focus screens: the best medium format screens I've ever used. The 330s officially supports user-exchangeable screens, the 220f unofficially supports the same choice of screens as the 330s. Neither can use the older screens from the earlier 330 or 330f models. Until recently I owned both 330s and 220f, plus an older backup 220. But I discovered over time I much preferred the smoother winding, simplified operation and lower weight of the 220f, so sold the 330s. I think the final 220f is the most usable fun Mamiya TLR body, but its a nondescript black lump of a camera prioritizing functionality over form.

Mamiya significantly improved the waist level finder for these cameras in later years: it is well worth waiting for or paying extra for a camera with the later version that self-erects and is fully light tight. The older version WLF with manual flap folds has a big open gap between the magnifier and the folding sides: this allows lots of light and distracting reflections to reach the focusing screen.

Re lens quality: condition is everything. Forget the lore about the newest "blue dot lenses" - worn examples can be as bad or worse than poor examples of older versions. Mamiya TLR lenses are very prone to hazing (which is fortunately easy to clean off), and people tended to swap the viewing and taking glass when one or the other got scratched (which can sometimes lead to softness). Good clean glass and properly running shutters will result in fine quality from most of the lenses, even ancient silver barrel versions, as long as they haven't been overly tampered with.

A couple of the lenses are standouts, with the 180mm Super being incredibly sharp for a medium format tele. Both versions of the 105mm are interesting (older a Tessar formula, newer is a Heliar derivative). The 135mm is a nice compact portrait lens, but handling is clumsy due to the bellows racking all the way out to focus it (leading to mixed reviews of sharpness handheld). The 65mm had the widest range of sample variation: they can be extremely good or mediocre. The 55mm is controversial, with some photographers finding its rendering rather harsh (newer examples with high serial numbers over 9xxx seem a bit better).

 

[grahamp]

You can (sort of) fake a grid overlay with any of the TLR finders. There is a recess in the base designed for the 55/65mm parallax plate, but you can insert any suitably sized secondary screen there. You can't focus on it (it sits above the focus plane), but if you want a custom grid, like an 8x10 cropping guide, that's a good way to do it.

If I use a left side grip with the C220 I find I reach under the camera to cock the shutter.

My (venerable) Mamiya TLR pages are still at http://grahamp.dotinthelandscape.org/mfaq/index.html

 

[flavio81]

My C330 with its auto-cocking and lever winding was much better suited to weddings than my backup C220.
And I made good use of the automatic parallax and exposure correction guide on the C330 when I used it for moderate close-up use without a paramender.
But the biggest advantage of the C330 was that it functions perfectly with the left hand trigger grip - an accessory that makes the C330 excellent for handheld photography.
I also made use of the interchangeable focus screens on my C330 - I like a grid screen - and I'm not sure that is an option with the C220.
But the basic quality will be the same.

Exactly my thoughts. I owned both too.

The C220 i really liked because of its lower weight. But the C330 is more ergonomic for the reasons stated above, and because of the dual shutter buttons. I didn't like that the C220 had only the slide-down trigger. The C330 has the "other" shutter button at the front and you can grip both at the same time (one with your thumb, the other with your index) and fire them at the same time for an even smoother trigger, with added stability. And of course the automatic parallax is useful.

The left hand grip, even the one without the shutter button, is excellent for stabilizing the camera. I even had some usable shots at 1/4 of a second...

I think both cameras have their advantages.

 

[markjwyatt]

Exactly my thoughts. I owned both too.

The C220 i really liked because of its lower weight. But the C330 is more ergonomic for the reasons stated above, and because of the dual shutter buttons. I didn't like that the C220 had only the slide-down trigger. The C330 has the "other" shutter button at the front and you can grip both at the same time (one with your thumb, the other with your index) and fire them at the same time for an even smoother trigger, with added stability. And of course the automatic parallax is useful.

The left hand grip, even the one without the shutter button, is excellent for stabilizing the camera. I even had some usable shots at 1/4 of a second...

I think both cameras have their advantages.

I used a C330f and a C220f for weddings (many moons ago). I always used the main lens (80mm f2.8) on the C330f, and a different lens (usually the 55mm f4.5) on the C220f. I also used the two cam,eras as a strategy to not run out of film; though sometimes I had to change a lens.