Will 645 give me "that medium format pop"?

[Atracksler]

I'm looking at the mamiya 645. Will the 645 negative give me that medium format pop? That heavenly 3d look?

Thanks in advance. Any illustrations are welcomed.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

It will be better than 35mm, but I think the "medium format look" really starts at uncropped 6x6 or 6x7.

 

[pentaxuser]

Can you describe what you mean by that "medium format pop? That heavenly 3d look. It might help those who will venture an opinion.

pentaxuser

 

[480sparky]

Perhaps '3d look' = bokeh of long focal length of MF glass.

 

[pentaxuser]

Perhaps '3d look' = bokeh of long focal length of MF glass.

You might be right but the OP seems to think that the MF pop and heavenly 3D look is related to size. If we can get to the bottom of what defines such phrases then we might be able to help the OP more.

pentaxuser

 

[frank]

Yes it does! I often crop 6x6 to a rectangle.

There is a crispness, clarity, and smooth/rich tonality compared to 135.

 

[brian steinberger]

6x4.5 is a great format! My favorite rectangular format. It will give you a nice advantage over 35mm and the Mamiya 645 is a great camera as well. However, If you're looking for grainless rather large enlargements (16x20) then I'd look to 6x7 and up. But I prefer some grain in my photos and at my prints sizes (11x14 and 16x20) 6x4.5 gives a great balance of detail, grain, and sharpness.

 

[Atracksler]

I should have been more descriptive. here are some examples of images I think have "that medium format pop"

Dead Link Removed

and yes, I am realizing that most of the images I'm showing are 6x6...

 

[MattKing]

This is from a Mamiya 645:



Don't know how well it will survive the resizing and digitization.

 

[eng1er]

I should have been more descriptive. here are some examples of images I think have "that medium format pop"

Looks like it is attractive models that give it the "MF pop."

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Maybe it's the limited DoF you're referring to? Sharp main subject and blurry background which accentuates the feeling of depth?

 

[piu58]

> the limited DoF

You can reach that with 35 mm too. Simply shot at f/2.8.

 

[pagonzales]

The mamiya 645 can probably give that pop especially if you have the 80mm 1.9 You'll have to shoot wide open and a little close to your subject however. The main benefit of the Mamiya 645 system is the unique 80mm 1.9, the cheap bodies and lenses, and when used with the proper grip, easier to shoot handheld than the bigger systems.

 

[Brian Legge]

Narrow DoF, smoother gradients due to the large film size would be the bigger wins for a larger format based on the images you show. The first could also be accomplished with a longer/wider aperture 35mm lens. A fine grain film like Acros can also help... though mediam format Acros is amazing.

A major commonality in the image you posted though has nothing to do with the format. The lighting looked designed to pleasantly show shape. I'd wager these photos - at least viewed web sized - could replicated with the right lens in 35mm.

 

[LMNOP]

I'm looking at the mamiya 645. Will the 645 negative give me that medium format pop? That heavenly 3d look?

Thanks in advance. Any illustrations are welcomed.

Allow me to submit a few portraits and you tell me if they have that 'pop.' - shot with a Mamiya 645AF - great camera for MF starters.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/patrickjmccormack/14417730706/in/set-72157646294197096

https://www.flickr.com/photos/patrickjmccormack/14176507799/in/set-72157646294197096

https://www.flickr.com/photos/patrickjmccormack/14223963872/in/set-72157646294197096

 

[Ian Grant]

Yes 645 will give you what you're after. It's a size I've used for over 30 years.

Ian

 

[frank]

Allow me to submit a few portraits and you tell me if they have that 'pop.' - shot with a Mamiya 645AF - great camera for MF starters.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/patrickjmccormack/14417730706/in/set-72157646294197096

https://www.flickr.com/photos/patrickjmccormack/14176507799/in/set-72157646294197096

https://www.flickr.com/photos/patrickjmccormack/14223963872/in/set-72157646294197096

Viewed on my ipad, these images could just as easily be from 135 format.

Here's a portrait that has MF clarity, detail, and tonality in the print. How it translates on a computer monitor, one can't say.

 

[LMNOP]

Viewed on my ipad, these images could just as easily be from 135 format.

Here's a portrait that has MF clarity, detail, and tonality in the print. How it translates on a computer monitor, one can't say.

On a retina display, this could easily be a digital image, maybe its the compression in uploading.

 

[mweintraub]

Something like this?

https://www.flickr.com/photos/mrdat/5495678719

 

[benjiboy]

Compared to 35mm 645 will give you that "medium format pop".

 

[Pioneer]

I'm looking at the mamiya 645. Will the 645 negative give me that medium format pop? That heavenly 3d look?

Thanks in advance. Any illustrations are welcomed.

Yes...and no.

645 is a great format.

It was an awesome wedding format and most brides want their wedding photographs to "pop".

Of course 35mm will "pop" as well if you do your job with a good lens.

And you can also take terrible photographs with 8x10 as well.

I don't think format is what makes photos "pop."

Sorry, no magic bullets.

 

[leicarfcam]

Yes...and no.

645 is a great format.

It was an awesome wedding format and most brides want their wedding photographs to "pop".

Of course 35mm will "pop" as well if you do your job with a good lens.

And you can also take terrible photographs with 8x10 as well.

I don't think format is what makes photos "pop."

Sorry, no magic bullets.

You just "POPPED" his bubble!!

 

[mweintraub]

Yes...and no.

645 is a great format.

It was an awesome wedding format and most brides want their wedding photographs to "pop".

Of course 35mm will "pop" as well if you do your job with a good lens.

And you can also take terrible photographs with 8x10 as well.

I don't think format is what makes photos "pop."

Sorry, no magic bullets.

After receiving a Nikon 50mm f/1.2, I can agree completely!

 

[M Carter]

Maybe we're getting into subjective & esoteric territory here...

But across ten years or so of doing work for catalog fashion, editorial fashion, apparel manufacturer clients, in the film era… yeah, a properly done MF shot (Mamiya 6x7 in my case) often really had an edge over a well executed 35 shot (nikon for me). Not just on the light box but in the final media (and many projects, I not only shot, but designed the print pieces or books, oversaw color seps, went to final press checks, etc. - so my familiarity with the images across the chain was pretty extensive).

I certainly shot things in MF that could have been done in 35 and vice versa… but overall, I pretty much knew which projects I should use MF for. A biggie was patterns and knits - I did a lot of work for Joan Vass, which as the time was an upscale brand known for knits and textures. MF was a real joy for that stuff, the detail was extraordinary & tactile, and held up through the whole chain.

I really prefer MF unless I want to really see the character of the film (primarily grain, but there's something evocative to me about the compression of tones in 35, if that's even the right description).

And I'd wager that some percentage of the "no difference" crowd don't actually own any MF gear?

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I'm looking at the mamiya 645. Will the 645 negative give me that medium format pop? That heavenly 3d look?

Thanks in advance. Any illustrations are welcomed.

645 gives you a major improvement over 35mm in image quality but 6x9 will be even betterand you'll find plenty 6x6 2nd hand for<$$