Which Square Camera Should I Keep, Mamiya-Six, or Rolleicord, C330?

[GregY]

Well the new Mamiya 6 w 3 lenses fits in the same

A really tasty sandwich at that.
To those who are used to interchangeable lens medium format gear, try it, you may be surprised. It certainly is smaller than my Mamiya 645 2 lens kit and it was substantially smaller than the RB67 with two lenses.
I happen to currently be using the small bag I often employ with my C330 stuff for other purposes, so I can't easily demonstrate it with a photo.

Well my Mamiya 6 with all 3 lenses fit in the same Slow Tools Bag (roughly the size of the Domke F10) that i use for my Leica M kit.... there's no way to fit just the C330 in it....

 

[GregY]

Are you sure about that? The line was 'just about the smallest bag possible for a two lens kit'. Not 'absolute' smallest.

A GF670's rough dimensions fit in about 1.2L compared to the 2.3L for a C330 with an 80mm lens, which sounds like a promising lead till you add that nearly 3L box around a GF670W's dimensions for your second lens, and compare that to the 0.3L for a spare Mamiya TLR lens.

A pair of Makina look like they come in as actually smaller, but that's barely half a litre, and for lugging a whole lot more weight.

You can save a bit of total volume out of things if you're comparing 'perfect' bags and minimizing space in the lens/cover bumps with perfect positioning, but once you account for padding, space for things like a bulb blower, filters, spare film, and space to actually reach in the bag to pull the stuff out,... Well, that doesn't really sound like all that much of a meaningful difference.

My point was that the Mamiya 6 & 7 as well as the Plaubels are much smaller than the C330. I've owned them all and the C330 weighs roughly 1800grams.. If you suggest that the Rolleiflex is svelte, I'll agree. But the C330 is IMO a bulky beast.

 

[MattKing]

Well the new Mamiya 6 w 3 lenses fits in the same


Well my Mamiya 6 with all 3 lenses fit in the same Slow Tools Bag (roughly the size of the Domke F10) that i use for my Leica M kit.... there's no way to fit just the C330 in it....

And that is why the comparison of the Mamiya 6 with the C330 is interesting. Of course, the Mamiya 6 isn't one of the choices that are the subject of this thread.
The shape of the bag that works best with the small C330 kit is important.
And the phrases used by me when describing the C330 2 lens kit and associated bag were "remarkably compact" and "just about the smallest", not "smallest ever".

 

[GregY]

And that is why the comparison of the Mamiya 6 with the C330 is interesting. Of course, the Mamiya 6 isn't one of the choices that are the subject of this thread.
The shape of the bag that works best with the small C330 kit is important.
And the phrases used by me when describing the C330 2 lens kit and associated bag were "remarkably compact" and "just about the smallest", not "smallest ever".

You're right the Mamiya 6 isn't one of Andrews cameras under discussion. But when you say
"a body and two lenses fits in just about the smallest bag possible for a two lens medium format kit." you're opening up for comparisons.... & clearly the bag on the ground next to Andrew isn't a small example. You may prefer the C330, but that doesn't make it either small nor light.

 

[MattKing]

You're right the Mamiya 6 isn't one of Andrews cameras under discussion. But when you say
"a body and two lenses fits in just about the smallest bag possible for a two lens medium format kit." you're opening up for comparisons.... & clearly the bag on the ground next to Andrew isn't a small example. You may prefer the C330, but that doesn't make it either small nor light.

Whereas a C330 two lens and body kit is relatively small - thus the observation.
Did you think that photo was of Andrew with his C330 kit?
That is Andrew with his 8x10 (IIRC), and it is taken by my C330 which came out of its small, 2 lens kit bag.

 

[Luckless]

Well the new Mamiya 6 w 3 lenses fits in the same


Well my Mamiya 6 with all 3 lenses fit in the same Slow Tools Bag (roughly the size of the Domke F10) that i use for my Leica M kit.... there's no way to fit just the C330 in it....

How big to you think a C330 is?

The Domke F10's dimensions are 29.21 x 22.86 x 15.24 cm, a C330 is about 12 x 17 x 11 cm... You really don't think you can find a comparable sized bag with a suitable layout on the market for it and an extra two lenses?

Cause one of my bags, a 12"x6.5"x7" outer dimension bag [which is smaller than your quoted 11.5"x9"x6" outer diameter bag...] Currently has a C330 with 80mm, 135mm, 180mm, 250mm lenses, AND a spare 80mm lens... [Because I don't know which box my other Mamiya lenses ended up in currently, but the smaller lenses are all about the same size.]

Plus a hard cover note book, a small tablet, a light meter, film, a few filters, and I could still put my kobo on top if I wanted... In short, Mamiya TLR lenses are small and pack efficiently. And you can pack the camera with two lens options in a very small and efficient space if you want to take the time to find a bag with a suitable fit.

 

[GregY]

How big to you think a C330 is?

The Domke F10's dimensions are 29.21 x 22.86 x 15.24 cm, a C330 is about 12 x 17 x 11 cm... You really don't think you can find a comparable sized bag with a suitable layout on the market for it and an extra two lenses?

Cause one of my bags, a 12"x6.5"x7" outer dimension bag [which is smaller than your quoted 11.5"x9"x6" outer diameter bag...] Currently has a C330 with 80mm, 135mm, 180mm, 250mm lenses, AND a spare 80mm lens... [Because I don't know which box my other Mamiya lenses ended up in currently, but the smaller lenses are all about the same size.]

Plus a hard cover note book, a small tablet, a light meter, film, a few filters, and I could still put my kobo on top if I wanted... In short, Mamiya TLR lenses are small and pack efficiently. And you can pack the camera with two lens options in a very small and efficient space if you want to take the time to find a bag with a suitable fit.

We clearly have a difference of opinion on the definition of "small" ... i'll leave it at that.

 

[MattKing]

Greg - it is the two lens + body medium format kit that is small, compared to other two lens + body medium format kits.
And that is due to the relatively small size of many of the lenses.
The size advantage increases if you go to 3 or 4 lens kits, but the total size of the bags for those ceases being what I call "compact".

 

[guangong]

Instead of just keeping one camera, I would keep them all. Each camera handles differently, so it’s not a question of which is objectively the best, but which camera do you feel most comfortable using. If you like them all, keep them all.

 

[Romanko]

Instead of just keeping one camera, I would keep them all.

.. and buy a few more. It will be easier to decide which you like most.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Being a known Rollei fanboy, I'd opt to keep the Rollei. But the argument to be made for the C330 I haven't seen made particularly strongly is IF you do (or want to do) a fair bit of close-up work, it's the best TLR for that task because of the bellows focusing. But like Sanders, I think there's something about the simplicity of the Rollei with its single focal length and just smart ergonomics/industrial design that makes it just get out of your way when taking pictures and lets you concentrate on the important part - composition. The technical, fiddly bits fall neatly to hand where they need to be so you can adjust them intuitively without taking your eye off the composition on the ground glass.

 

[mrosenlof]

I've been a user of the C330 since 1982, so I might have some bias. But I agree 100% that the size of the Rolleiflex is *nice*. I tend to mostly use the 330 on a tripod. (hassy also) so the camera size difference becomes less significant when I'm hauling around the tripod also.

 

[grahamp]

Just for comparison, I weighed some of the cameras I had access to, because I was curious about the weight breakdown some years ago.

Yashicamat (rough equivalent to the Rolleicord?) 1105 g (fixed lens, obviously)

New Mamiya 6 with 50, 75, 150mm 1955 g

C330 with 55, 80, 180mm Super 2830 g

My Zeiss Ikonta is around 500g (estimate).

The Mamiya C330 body is heavy, but the lenses are generally as light or lighter than comparable medium format SLR lenses, because they tend to be slower.


The Mamiya 6 folder is probably the hardest to repair. There will probably be Rolleicord repairs available for quite a while, if only because of the stature of the marque. The C330 does separate the body and lens, so some sort of parts swap is possible as a repair alternative.

Too many cameras and they do not get used. Too few, and you may be without your camera for quite a while due to limited repairers. It is nice to have the luxury of having this conundrum, though.

 

[GregY]

How big to you think a C330 is?

The Domke F10's dimensions are 29.21 x 22.86 x 15.24 cm, a C330 is about 12 x 17 x 11 cm... You really don't think you can find a comparable sized bag with a suitable layout on the market for it and an extra two lenses?

Cause one of my bags, a 12"x6.5"x7" outer dimension bag [which is smaller than your quoted 11.5"x9"x6" outer diameter bag...] Currently has a C330 with 80mm, 135mm, 180mm, 250mm lenses, AND a spare 80mm lens... [Because I don't know which box my other Mamiya lenses ended up in currently, but the smaller lenses are all about the same size.]

Plus a hard cover note book, a small tablet, a light meter, film, a few filters, and I could still put my kobo on top if I wanted... In short, Mamiya TLR lenses are small and pack efficiently. And you can pack the camera with two lens options in a very small and efficient space if you want to take the time to find a bag with a suitable fit.

The interior dimensions of the Domke F10 are 9"x7"x3".....there's no way to shoehorn a C330 into a bag that size....but a Mamiya 6 MF does.

 

[Luckless]

Greg - it is the two lens + body medium format kit that is small, compared to other two lens + body medium format kits.
And that is due to the relatively small size of many of the lenses.
The size advantage increases if you go to 3 or 4 lens kits, but the total size of the bags for those ceases being what I call "compact".

Exactly. If you only want something in the 75 or 80mm range, then a C330 is one of the larger options. Possibly the largest of the common 6x6s? I can't think of anything off the top of my head that is noticeably bigger and not a 6x7 rig.

But if you start looking at multiple focal lengths and macro options... Options that are notably smaller and lighter drop off rather quickly. Like my Canon 24-105 is a good chunk of the total space of my C330, as are a lot of my RB67 lenses.

The interior dimensions of the Domke F10 are 9"x7"x3".....there's no way to shoehorn a C330 into a bag that size....but a Mamiya 6 MF does.

Of the main pocket... The Domke F10 has a large chunk of its total space devoted to a secondary storage pocket. Outer dimensions of a bag are kind of important to 'the size of the bag' - I have a C330 here on my desk, a spare lens, and two rolls of film. It fits into a space that would only need about 8.75"x5.5"x5. Are you really going to argue that is a vastly larger space than your F10 actually takes up?

 

[GregY]

Exactly. If you only want something in the 75 or 80mm range, then a C330 is one of the larger options. Possibly the largest of the common 6x6s? I can't think of anything off the top of my head that is noticeably bigger and not a 6x7 rig.

But if you start looking at multiple focal lengths and macro options... Options that are notably smaller and lighter drop off rather quickly. Like my Canon 24-105 is a good chunk of the total space of my C330, as are a lot of my RB67 lenses.


Of the main pocket... The Domke F10 has a large chunk of its total space devoted to a secondary storage pocket. Outer dimensions of a bag are kind of important to 'the size of the bag' - I have a C330 here on my desk, a spare lens, and two rolls of film. It fits into a space that would only need about 8.75"x5.5"x5. Are you really going to argue that is a vastly larger space than your F10 actually takes up?

You guys are a tough crowd. I surrender.... but you'll never convince me that the C330 isn't a beast. A Mamiya 6 MF with 3 lenses is a smaller package. Not only is the camera smaller & handles better....but the kit w 3 lenses weighs a kilo less than a 3 lens C330 kit.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Instead of just keeping one camera, I would keep them all. Each camera handles differently, so it’s not a question of which is objectively the best, but which camera do you feel most comfortable using. If you like them all, keep them all.

This is what happens when you want to keep them all. This is just my little "man cave" PC room at the cottage. I have many more down-state at my home. Yes, at 74yrs. old it's time to cull the herd, but where the heck does one start? Cameras are like your children, some are your favorites, but they are all precious. My wife always says to me, "when was the last time you used that one”. I usually fib, but she's right, I should only keep what I use most. I'll start with the 35mm ones, since I hardly use 35mm anymore. Compared to me, Andy has it easy. Good luck Andy!

 

[Rolleiflexible]

How many people in this thread find the need to change focal lengths when shooting 6x6? I got a Hasselblad ages ago thinking this would be a great draw. But I never took the 80 off the camera.

 

[GregY]

How many people in this thread find the need to change focal lengths when shooting 6x6? I got a Hasselblad ages ago thinking this would be a great draw. But I never took the 80 off the camera.

Entirely with you Sanders.

 

[John Wiegerink]

How many people in this thread find the need to change focal lengths when shooting 6x6? I got a Hasselblad ages ago thinking this would be a great draw. But I never took the 80 off the camera.

You are right, many of us stick to a standard or slightly wider than standard lens. The 80mm is pretty much stuck on my 500C, but it is nice to have the option to change focal lengths if you need it. I usually can do everything I want when I just have my 500C w/80mm and my SuperWide. It all fits in a fairly small carry bag. I'll carry the 500C around my neck in its flip-opens ever-ready case and the SuperWide in the small bag over the shoulder, but that's just me.

 

[MattKing]

How many people in this thread find the need to change focal lengths when shooting 6x6? I got a Hasselblad ages ago thinking this would be a great draw. But I never took the 80 off the camera.

I do so regularly, but then I've been doing so for nearly 50 years!
At one time I had 4 lenses and 2 bodies, and used them for weddings.
I'm now down to the 65mm + 135mm pair and one body, and that suits me very well. When I need more lenses, the Mamiya 645 Pro comes out - 2 wider lenses, a macro lens, and a longer lens (which is rarely employed).
The bag for the 645 Pro is a lot bigger and definitely heavier than the C330 bag, even when there are just two lenses and a body in it. Unless I decide to use a bigger bag and more of the C330 accessories, in which case they are similar.
When it comes to compactness, Greg's Mamiya 6 is an excellent alternative to the C330 and would most likely suit me almost as well as the C330 - but my C330 was a store demonstrator that I bought from my then employer ~1976 - and I'm kinda attached to it. Square format and a waist level finder suits me.

 

[Luckless]

How many people in this thread find the need to change focal lengths when shooting 6x6? I got a Hasselblad ages ago thinking this would be a great draw. But I never took the 80 off the camera.

Probably obvious from my previous posts, but I'm also one to switch lenses. I generally reach for the longer lenses - 250mm and 180mm - even if the 80mm makes up the bulk of my 6x6 work.

The C330 is notably heavy and clunky compared to options like my Rolleicord, but my Rolleicord is older, dimmer, and far less flexible. If I had started with the Rolleicord then I might not have bothered with trying the C330, and might never have picked up on the flexibility, but the bellows extension alone makes me grab and load the C330 more often than the lighter and more compact Rolleicord even if I'm heading out with only the 80mm at the time.

[Really I should probably get a C220 at some point, but I have an Anti-GAS rule of only buying from local stores unless a purchase fills a specific project goal/need.]

But the 80mm on it is a truly lovely lens, and even with the added bulk it is a hard camera choice to sneeze at. Rock solid, and the most likely part to have a problem is readily replaced - Just swap the lens. Even if you're going from an 80mm to another 80mm to 'fix' a broken shutter, it makes for a quick and handy feature.

Not to mention the shutter lock + internal darkslide/panel/cover - I have a handful of other 80/75mm 6x6 options, but on all of them I rather miss the confident, secure, and obvious 'lock' functionality of the C330.

Ironically the RB67 steals a lot of my attention for stuff that I used to pick up the C330 for. I added one to my collection "specifically" to use longer lens options than the C330 had available for some wildlife photo projects, and 'extra lenses' wandered into the collection as bonus items that came in with a few kits I picked up for specific bits. I ended up with a spread of lenses from the 50mm to the 500mm for it, and then broke the shutter on my TLR's 180mm. But that makes a BIG kit that makes me really miss the 'compactness' of the C330's setup.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

How many people in this thread find the need to change focal lengths when shooting 6x6? I got a Hasselblad ages ago thinking this would be a great draw. But I never took the 80 off the camera.

I only ever had three lenses for my Hassy - a 50, an 80, and a 120 Macro. So I did change lenses periodically, because I was using it when travelling. And then there was also the Superwide. Based on that experience, I was very concerned about taking just my Rolleiflex with me on a trip to Paris - would I find that it was limiting and I missed shots? Well, there were I'm sure a few images I didn't take because they would have required a wider field of view, but 99%+ of my shots were just fine with the 80. I think it actually helped me become a much better photographer by making me concentrate on just composing and being one with the camera, rather than constantly switching gear in and out. I often make that a practice now with whatever I'm shooting - just take ONE camera with me with ONE lens and shoot everything through that perspective, whether it's the Rollei, the Chevron, my Lomo LCA-120 with its super-wide lens, or the Lomo Belair with its moderate-wide panoramic aspect ratio. Helps focus the mind on making better images!

 

[Rolleiflexible]

I only ever had three lenses for my Hassy - a 50, an 80, and a 120 Macro. So I did change lenses periodically, because I was using it when travelling. And then there was also the Superwide. Based on that experience, I was very concerned about taking just my Rolleiflex with me on a trip to Paris - would I find that it was limiting and I missed shots? Well, there were I'm sure a few images I didn't take because they would have required a wider field of view, but 99%+ of my shots were just fine with the 80. I think it actually helped me become a much better photographer by making me concentrate on just composing and being one with the camera, rather than constantly switching gear in and out. I often make that a practice now with whatever I'm shooting - just take ONE camera with me with ONE lens and shoot everything through that perspective, whether it's the Rollei, the Chevron, my Lomo LCA-120 with its super-wide lens, or the Lomo Belair with its moderate-wide panoramic aspect ratio. Helps focus the mind on making better images!

Those are fair observations. Over the years, I've come to conclude that changing a lens doesn't often give me a better shot. If I'm shooting landscapes, then I tend mostly to reach for a 24x36 with a wideangle lens -- typically these days a Sony A7 with a 20mm Nikkor. The 6x6 format rarely works for those kinds of shots. I could shoot it wide -- I have a Mutar that converts the Rolleiflex to a wide-angle camera -- but it's often asking the camera to do something that doesn't work for a square. Of course one can crop the square, but then you're back in 35mm territory.

On the other hand, I shoot a lot of people, and for that I much prefer a square. Shooting people in squares, I feel no need of anything other than the 75mm lens on a standard Rolleiflex. I could stand away and use a longer lens, but that flattens my subjects and I don't like the loss of intimacy. Or I could use a wide lens and make their noses bulbous. The ordinary Rolleiflex focal length, to me, seems ideal for shooting people in squares.

I know there are a ton of other subjects that need something else. If I were shooting sports, then none of these cameras would do -- I'd be shooting digital with a big honking telephoto on front. But for me, the "flexibility" of interchangeable lenses has no benefits to me.

 

[lecarp]

Seems like this jumbo jet is landing in Cuba instead of Miami.

Just a little bit highjacked.