Does anybody have experience with either camera for 6x9 use only. The prices are certainly cheaper than the Fuji. Is the 100mm f2.8 much better than the 100mm f3.5?
Mamiya Universal vs Super 23
-
A
- Thread starter campy51
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Sekonic Auto-Leader L-188 Light Meter
- Started by Jon Shiu
-
Want to Buy [WTB] Alistair Inglis Masking Kit for Saunders 4500ii
- Started by Grayjohn900
-
For Sale FS: Sinar Norma 4x5 Camera
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale FS: Cambo SC1 6x9 Monorail Camera
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale FS: Horseman Woodman 4x5 Camera
- Started by B.S.Kumar
Forum statistics
I have a Universal and a Press, a set of lens, 55 to 150. The 100 3.5 is a sharp lens, the 2.8 a bit faster and may be shaper wide than the 3.5, I've never considered getting a 2.8 as I shoot landscapes usually at F 16 or 22, when I used it for events I used a flash set up and shot stopped down as well. The wide's are excellent, do you need a external viewfinder for each, the Universal has built in frames for the 100, 150 and 250, the 250 can be expensive, there were 2 versions, a rangefinder coupled and non coupled. In addition there are lens for the polaroid version of the universal that need external viewfinders as well. It is a heavy camera, need a sturdy tripod, with the hand grip can be handheld. The only issue is finding filters for the wide angels takes odd sizes, I converted a set of Series V filters that I taped the edges so it will push in, not ideal but it works.
If you think that you will only need the 100 then you might want to consider a 2 1/4 by 3 1/4 Speed or Bushman with a roll back.
If you think that you will only need the 100 then you might want to consider a 2 1/4 by 3 1/4 Speed or Bushman with a roll back.
I have one of each. As Paul stated the 100 3.5 (a tessar clone) is very good. I have a Graflex xl with the 100mm 2.8 planar and stopped down to 5.6 you can't tell the difference. Filter sizes: 40.5mm, 43mm, 55mm, 72mm and 105mm. The super has some back movements that you can use with the 100mm because it has 2 positions to mount it. Fully out (rangefinder use) or retracted for rear movement use. Confusing? The Universal can use Polaroid backs. Of course Polaroid peel apart is gone. Every lens I have used has been very good. I have no complaints.
I have both but my favorite is the Super 23. I usually carry a 50mm f6.3, 100mm f2.8 and the 250mm f5. The 50mm is equal to about a 21mm lens on 35mm and is a excellent lens as well as the 100mm f2.8. Both lens are incredibly sharp. I also have the 75mm f/5.6 and it is also an excellent lens. I shoot only 6x9 format and have three or four film backs for that format. The Mamiya roll film backs have a reputation for holding the film flat so you will have sharp negatives. The camera is definitely not light but with the grip it can be used easily for hand held shooting even with the big 250mm lens. For the smaller filters I use step down rings and use my set of Pentax 49mm filters. There are a lot of accessories out there for a good price right now that will allow you to put together a pretty nice system.
- Joined
- May 28, 2005
- Messages
- 525
- Format
- 4x5 Format
I've had multiples of each, and I ditched the Super 23's and kept a nice example of the Universal.
There are some differences. The Super 23's back extends back and in a way that makes it's angle adjustable. This can be helpful for product work and for some architecture. In contrast, an attachment is available that enables one to extend the back on the Universal, but the angle isn't adjustable.
Both the Super 23 and the Universal have frame lines for 100mm, 150mm, and 250mm lenses.
The biggest difference is that one can attach different back adapters for Polaroid, a special M adapter for standard Mamiya Press film holders, and another G adapter for standard Graflex type roll film holders. (Including Mamiya RB film holders.) That said, there was a version of the Super 23 make that accepted Graflex type roll-film holders, instead of Mamiya Press film tolders.
I wanted the ability to use Mamiya RB film holders, so I kept the Universal. My view cameras also accepts RB film holders, so I only need one set of roll-film holders. I also wanted the ability to use Ground Glass viewers that fit on the M adapter, so I both this and the G adapter. If I need adjustable angles, I have an MF view camera that gives me any angular configuration that I can imagine. So, no reason to keep a Super 23.
A negative of the G adapters, is that Graflex holders extend back far enough, it becomes a chore to get one's eye close enough to the view finder. Mamiya sold a screw-on view finder extension that works really well to solve this problem, but they're as rare as hens' teeth to find. I have one, and in years and years, I've seen only two others listed on EBay.
I don't want to preclude portraiture, so I sprung for the f2.8 100mm lens. I also have a blue-dot version of the 150mm, which I believe to be sharper.
I really like having my Mamiya Universal Press system. It's so adaptable, and it can be effectively hand held. It's also a range finder camera, which had advantages. One can use the range finder, or one can do critical focusing with the ground attachments that are available used.
I also had a complete RB system with accessories, and I sold all of it in favor of keeping my Universal System.
There are some differences. The Super 23's back extends back and in a way that makes it's angle adjustable. This can be helpful for product work and for some architecture. In contrast, an attachment is available that enables one to extend the back on the Universal, but the angle isn't adjustable.
Both the Super 23 and the Universal have frame lines for 100mm, 150mm, and 250mm lenses.
The biggest difference is that one can attach different back adapters for Polaroid, a special M adapter for standard Mamiya Press film holders, and another G adapter for standard Graflex type roll film holders. (Including Mamiya RB film holders.) That said, there was a version of the Super 23 make that accepted Graflex type roll-film holders, instead of Mamiya Press film tolders.
I wanted the ability to use Mamiya RB film holders, so I kept the Universal. My view cameras also accepts RB film holders, so I only need one set of roll-film holders. I also wanted the ability to use Ground Glass viewers that fit on the M adapter, so I both this and the G adapter. If I need adjustable angles, I have an MF view camera that gives me any angular configuration that I can imagine. So, no reason to keep a Super 23.
A negative of the G adapters, is that Graflex holders extend back far enough, it becomes a chore to get one's eye close enough to the view finder. Mamiya sold a screw-on view finder extension that works really well to solve this problem, but they're as rare as hens' teeth to find. I have one, and in years and years, I've seen only two others listed on EBay.
I don't want to preclude portraiture, so I sprung for the f2.8 100mm lens. I also have a blue-dot version of the 150mm, which I believe to be sharper.
I really like having my Mamiya Universal Press system. It's so adaptable, and it can be effectively hand held. It's also a range finder camera, which had advantages. One can use the range finder, or one can do critical focusing with the ground attachments that are available used.
I also had a complete RB system with accessories, and I sold all of it in favor of keeping my Universal System.
I'm following this thread with interest. I just bought a Super 23 from Robert's Camera and want to get all the info I can about it. Is the 100mm f3.5 the only lens that can be used with the back movements? Many years ago, I bought a Polaroid 600SE from a Montgomery Wards store for a very small price. It only had the Polaroid film pack back w/ 127mm lens and hood, and more back adapters were supposed to come later. I waited, and waited, but no back adapters came, so I sold the whole outfit since instant pictures were not my thing. I'm thinking the Super 23 will be a fun camera to play with. Plus, those 6X9 negatives are nice to work with. I'm going to get the 50mm f6.3, 100mm 2.8 or 3.5 and the 250mm f5. I already have a Mamiya Standard Press with a 6X9 back and 90mm lens, but must admit I have never used it.
The 2 will make a nice pair. I have a press and Universal, when traveling I put fast film in one and a slow B&W or color in the other. I don't have the 250, the 150 has always seemed long enough for my use, on the other hand the 50 and 65 fit my needs for landscapes.
If you want some more information, have a look at my page(s) https://www.oddcameras.com/mamiya/mamiya_universal.htm
The retractable 100mm is the only one which could be used at infinity and via the rangefinder with the back retracted. But the other lenses could well be used via focussing on the ground glass for closer distances.
If I remember correctly the "E" was introduced for the universal and lacked the 2 position barrel. Since the universal lacked the back movements it was not necessary. It also kept you from forgetting to extend it out and missing focus in a big way.
That’s what I’m thinking too. I think I read somewhere that the E lens was later for the Press Universal cameras. We’re the earliest chrome 100mmf3.5 chrome lenses as good as the newer black versions?
I don't think that there is any difference. Chrome lenses were 40.5mm filters and the black ones were 55mm. I would base it upon condition above anything else.
Ok, that's what I'll do. Chrome or black doesn't matter to me. The 100mm f2.8 is in a non-collapsible mount am I right?
Here is some information about the later black lenses:
www.photrio.com
Nice system! Now I'd like one, but can I resist the GAS?
Mamiya Press Universal brochure from 1982
Hi Everyone, I found a 1982 brochure for the Mamiya Press Universal camera system. I wish I had bought one with several lenses and backs back in the day. Every user I ever met said the lenses were excellent. Here are the pages from the brochure. Possibly these will be helpful if you try to...
www.photrio.com
Nice system! Now I'd like one, but can I resist the GAS?
Last edited:
Thanks Bob! Narrows my search to just a nice 100mm f3.5 non-E. I love a good Tessar anyway.
Wish I had bought a tripod adaptor and quick shoe tripod release, been looking not any for sale in a long time.
And this is a good one, closed to f8 or more it is very sharp. Just be sure that the rangefinder is properly calibrated, there is little room for focusing errors in 6x9. With this lens should be easy because I think it is the only one that uses no cam. Just camera calibration is needed.
The entire system is calibrated off the 100mm lens.
The 90mm f3.5 on my press is also retractable (I wish I knew before the first roll I shot). I do not know whether it allows to focus at infinity with the back retracted though - I think it should.
This lens has a marking that says "NORMAL" to signify you can extend it, close to the time selector in the shutter.
Yes, so sorry, I forgot the 90mm although I have one. And yes, it focusses to infinity in retracted position with the back retracted. As with the 100mm there is little room for movements with 6x9, but stopped down there is no problem. BTW: the 100mm 2.8 has a smaller image circle. On some there is a hint of shaded edges with 6x9 wide open.
They made the 90/3.5 and probably the 100/3.5 in both retractable and non-retractable mounts. The lens should be the same, just the mount is different. Retractable ones should have a marking with "Normal" and an arrow.
To retract a lens, you turn the lens and inner mount (including the surround around the shutter) to unlock the mount and push back, then turn it again to lock. I have one that doesn't lock into position and have never taken the mount apart enough to figure out how the locking could have stopped working (it must be a fairly simple mechanism).
To retract a lens, you turn the lens and inner mount (including the surround around the shutter) to unlock the mount and push back, then turn it again to lock. I have one that doesn't lock into position and have never taken the mount apart enough to figure out how the locking could have stopped working (it must be a fairly simple mechanism).
Thanks! That explains why there is no "normal" printed on my 90mm. Going to start shopping for a clean collapsible 100mm f3.5.
The original Mamiya Press 23 - the gray/green one with the tapered top housing - came in a version with the extendable back, and a "Standard" version without the extendable back. I assume the non-retractable 90/3.5 was the normal lens for the Standard non-extendable version.
The Super 23 and Universal came later, in chrome or black, with a squarer rectangular body. The Super 23 has the extendable back, and the Universal doesn't (but the Universal has interchangable back adapters for Mamiya rollfilm, Graflex/RB67 rollfilm, and Polaroid packfilm, so it was in demand when Polaroid was important). The 100/3.5 was the normal lens for the Super 23.
The lenses are all compatible with both the early and late bodies, with some minor exceptions (I think there is a huge telephoto that might be too heavy for the Press mount, and the Super 23 lens mount is incompatible with the Polaroid 600 SE lens mount).
The Super 23 and Universal came later, in chrome or black, with a squarer rectangular body. The Super 23 has the extendable back, and the Universal doesn't (but the Universal has interchangable back adapters for Mamiya rollfilm, Graflex/RB67 rollfilm, and Polaroid packfilm, so it was in demand when Polaroid was important). The 100/3.5 was the normal lens for the Super 23.
The lenses are all compatible with both the early and late bodies, with some minor exceptions (I think there is a huge telephoto that might be too heavy for the Press mount, and the Super 23 lens mount is incompatible with the Polaroid 600 SE lens mount).
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |