My first MF camera - Rangefinder or SLR?

teh said:

I dont see the advantage of the SWC over a Mamiya 7. And like you said it is probably even more expensive.

Click to expand...

The Hassy Superwide has two advantages over the Mamiya 7 - it's wider (38mm vs 43mm), and it is probably the most distortion-free lens ever made by man. At the very edge of the field, you can place a completely straight object (a flagpole, for example) and enlarge it to 1.3 meters (4 feet) square, and have less than .5 mm curvature over the length of the flagpole in the print.

TheFlyingCamera said:

Jeff- you got a STEAL on your Superwide - If it is one of the ones with the C lens (chrome especially) they did make some major improvements to the lens (and not just in the shutter mechanics) from the C to the CF version. I had one of the CF lens versions and I paid around $1700 for it, only because there was a minor scratch on the rear element which had ZERO effect on the photos ( even when pointing the thing directly into the sun!). Otherwise it would have set me back somewhere north of $2500 at the time (and this was back in the 1999/2000 time frame).

Click to expand...

It does indeed have a C lens on it. It came with the back cover, lens cover, and a partially broken but usable finder. I eventually bought a replacement finder on KEH for $150, and sold the broken one on eBay (as broken and partially usable) and got around $80 for it. Of course I needed a film back as well, but I already had those.

I've seen one other for a very good price as well, came up on craigslist with a 500cm and a few lenses for $1500 total I believe. So, good deals are out there.

I have an old Rolleiflex Automat which I got for about what the RB67's go for, and its a great camera for lugging around. It is much smaller and lighter than Mamiya's TLR's, and much much smaller than the RB/RZ cameras (The first time I picked one of those things up, I thought I was holding a brick instead of a camera).

The only problem you'll probably have with a Rollei is the lack of interchangable lenses, and I don't think the wide angle Rollei's are exactly cheap. You could consider the Mamiya TLR's, but those are pretty big too.

muaddib said:

a viewfinder that doesn't show 100% of the scene, etc.

Click to expand...

As you will discover when you start printing, in order to have a sharp definition between the image and the white border you need to overlap the projected image on the easel blades. So you will always be missing something that you saw in the viewfinder if your viewfinder shows 100%.

teh said:

I dont see the advantage of the SWC over a Mamiya 7. And like you said it is probably even more expensive.

Click to expand...

Please send whatever your are taking or smoking!

The SWC is a rectilinear lens; the Mamiya is not.

See the examples below. The Mamiya cannot take wide angle shots like this. Scanned directly from the negative. No corrections made.

Steve

#3 above is the bridge the apes came over in the second Planet of the Apes movie

More below:

Mamiya 43 is wider and just as sharp if not sharper than SWC

43mm is on 6x7, which is wider than 38mm on 6x6.

The 43 is perfectly rectilinear, and the sharpest wide-angle lens made, basically. Better than the SWC from what I have read and seen. Empirical testing (by others, I don't have a SWC) bears this out.

FWIW
-Ed

I would like to see some comparisons of the two lenses.

here's a start

http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/MF_testing.html

There's some comparisons here. the 43mm mamiya is higher res than the 50mm that he tested (which is no slouch, of course).

Ed- I don't know about sharpness - that's actually never been a huge concern of mine as I've never enlarged anything to the point that resolving power intrudes into image quality. What I specifically mentioned was optical correction for distortion. I probably shouldn't have even mentioned it because I see it's started another "my gear is better/sharper/more rectilinear than yours". In reality, nobody sells photographs of lens resolution test charts, so the only people who are actually impressed by this data are other photographers, which really means this is just another penis-comparison contest.

43 is well corrected

I haven't put it to extreme tests but all the architectural shots I've done with the 43mm and 50mm and other Mamiya 7 lenses show that they are quite well corrected for geometry. Which would only make sense, as the 43, 50, and 65 are biogon-derived (improved?) designs, known for exceptionally good correction. They are what makes the 7 system so good, IMHO. A comparison vs. Biogon SWC would be interesting, as far as geometry goes. I suspect the Mamiya would more than hold it's own.

TheFlyingCamera said:

... I probably shouldn't have even mentioned it because I see it's started another "my gear is better/sharper/more rectilinear than yours". In reality, nobody sells photographs of lens resolution test charts, so the only people who are actually impressed by this data are other photographers, which really means this is just another penis-comparison contest.

Click to expand...

Remember, it's not how rectilinear your gear is, it's how you use it!

(Sayeth the man whose gear ain't all that rectilinear )

I'd go for a 645 SLR with exchangeable magazines (such as Mamiya M645 Pro), or a Mamiya C series twin lens reflex as a first medium format camera to be used primarily for landscapes in the under-$500 range. C220s are probably the best value in the C system. Lenses are cheap and excellent.

If you have plenty of money to invest, just go for a Hassy off the bat, and be sure to get a few extra backs. They come in handy in landscape shooting, IME.

I like the RB or RZ too. It is what I use most for landscapes. Before I got it, I mostly used 4x5 and a Mamiya Press 6x9. I switched to the RZ because I view quick TTL composing as the most important feature for landscapes (and most other shooting, for that matter).

I like the P67 for hand held stuff, because it is pretty comfortable to use. It's a good medium format camera for those who are in love with the feel of 35mm SLRs. I don't like it much on a tripod (especially in studio) or with flash. I prefer a more "component-oriented" system for shots when I can take my time a bit. Maybe this is just because I used to always use 4x5 for this sort of stuff before entering into the medium format world.

IMHO, you won't find a lens bad enough to warrant a second look in any quality medium format system. Hassy, Bronica, Mamiya, Pentax, etc. They're all better lenses than most people are photographers, so I don't feel that they are very often the limiting factor in making a good picture.