You have 12 hours to talk me out of a Mamiya 645 and 150mm f3.5

[j-dogg]

Unfortunately, no. The 1000s does not use interchangable backs, so you can't get more backs and change mid-roll either. You CAN get additional inserts and pre-load them for quick film loads. Same with the Polaroid - you need to move up to the Pro or Pro-TL (but not the AF model - I got my Polaroid back free from someone who bought it not realizing it wouldn't work on his 645AF.)

I've been finding the Polaroid back fun, and it's useful for proofing, but the lack of one isn't a big thing. Bear in mind how small the image is. The print area is the size of a contact print from your negatives. It wastes a lot of the 3.25x4.25 Fuji film area.

I'd stick with the 1000s for now and build a system around some lenses and get some inserts. If mid roll film changes are really important, you can then add a Pro or Pro-TL body and some inserts, prism and winder too if you want, for not much money at all, and use both bodies with all your lenses.

Guess I'll keep what I got, and find a Polaroid that will shoot Fuji FP. Really loving this and I even found a 45 f2.8 with a hood and caps locally for 150.

I put one of my EOS lenses up to it and it doesn't vignette in the viewfinder, will it still vignette on the neg?

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

j-dogg... I posted earlier that 6x4.5 is one of those "in-between" formats but the truth is, it definitely is a leap beyond 135. Long ago I had an ETR-S kit that I loved until I was spoiled by bigger film. If I was to buy another "portable SLR kit" it would be based on 6x4.5 because it's about as large as one can get while retaining speed and ease-of-use similar to 135.

 

[lxdude]

Guess I'll keep what I got, and find a Polaroid that will shoot Fuji FP. Really loving this and I even found a 45 f2.8 with a hood and caps locally for 150.

I put one of my EOS lenses up to it and it doesn't vignette in the viewfinder, will it still vignette on the neg?

It won't focus to infinity, as the 645's flange distance is greater. When a lens is farther from the image plane, as on an extension tube, the image circle is larger. So you might not have any vignetting, at the expense of only having close focus.

I've been having some fun recently putting my 135 format 55mm macro in front of my 645 Bronica. No problem with coverage or vignetting.

 

[lxdude]

j-dogg... I posted earlier that 6x4.5 is one of those "in-between" formats but the truth is, it definitely is a leap beyond 135.

About 2 and 3/4 times larger in area. Enough to be worth it for me, though to some it's not. 6x7 is about 4 times larger.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

lxdude... Yeah, years ago I settled on 135, 6x7cm and 4x5. It seemed the best combination for my needs at the time. Today I'd not bother with 135 but that's just my preference. These days I've settled on 6x12cm and 4x5 (stitched 4x8 images). I may change my mind again. Who knows? After all I'm just now getting back into "serious" photography. In any event, I have no need nor desire for any type of SLR. Again though... that's just my preference.

ETA: I intended to state that, if I did need a SLR kit, I might opt for a 6x4.5cm to mate with a 4x5in kit.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I use 35mm, 6x6cmm, and 4"x5".

 

[j-dogg]

I wanted to use the EOS stuff for close ups.

Did a few more with it today, I absolutely love this thing...im sold......might give up 135 altogether. If I sold all of my 135 equipment I could have almost every Mamiya 645 lens made......even the 500 5.6

I'll keep the EOS 35mm stuff of course, but the only 135 manual focus camera I see staying in my stable is my Yashica Lynx 14e rangefinder.

 

[Roger Cole]

Humm, interesting perspective. I expected the 645 to mostly supplant 35mm but it hasn't. Too big and too heavy for that (and, to be fair, right now I only have the one lens where in 35mm I have two excellent Series 1 zooms covering 28-105 and 70-210, a fast 50mm prime, and a couple of cheap slow 35-70 or so zooms in 35mm.) I do like it, and we'll see how I feel when I pick up a couple more lenses, but right now given that I'm limited to 80mm in either case I'm more likely to reach for my Yashicamat when I want to shoot medium format, even though it does mean I also carry my Luna Pro, unless I need to shoot faster or to do rapid film changes, mid roll if needed. Even if I didn't have the interchangeable backs I still find loading film into the Yashica a fiddly PITA. Loading the 645 inserts is much easier.

 

[Bill Burk]

Good for you j-dogg!

Hey you get 16 shots per roll, you don't need additional inserts. Take your time. Use a tripod (at least with the Kodak Panatomic-X). They don't call it slow film for nothing. It really takes longer to shoot. (At least that's been my experience).

The exposure should be exactly the same... But bokeh changes, you don't need f/1.4 to get the selective-focus look.

 

[dreamingartemis]

If you haven't bought it yet, here is my attempt at talking you out of it. Ask the missus XD

 

[MattKing]

Good for you j-dogg!

Hey you get 16 shots per roll, you don't need additional inserts.

Just a heads up - the Mamiya 645 gives 15 shots per roll, rather than 16.

Or 30 shots, if you shoot 220 (and have the inserts for it).

And a further heads up - 6 x 4.5 slides look great when you have a projector for them :devil:

 

[j-dogg]

Humm, interesting perspective. I expected the 645 to mostly supplant 35mm but it hasn't. Too big and too heavy for that (and, to be fair, right now I only have the one lens where in 35mm I have two excellent Series 1 zooms covering 28-105 and 70-210, a fast 50mm prime, and a couple of cheap slow 35-70 or so zooms in 35mm.) I do like it, and we'll see how I feel when I pick up a couple more lenses, but right now given that I'm limited to 80mm in either case I'm more likely to reach for my Yashicamat when I want to shoot medium format, even though it does mean I also carry my Luna Pro, unless I need to shoot faster or to do rapid film changes, mid roll if needed. Even if I didn't have the interchangeable backs I still find loading film into the Yashica a fiddly PITA. Loading the 645 inserts is much easier.

Yeah the 70-210 series 1 is dope.......got one for my Nikon the 28-105 is top notch too.

as much as I like it, the 645 has me sold as my 35mm upgrade.......when i finish my last roll in the nikon I'll put it up here in the Classifieds. It's got 2 or 3 shots left before the roll is done. If I'm going to shoot film and go through the trouble of developing it and manually calculating exposure I may as well do it with something bigger than 35mm, hell I could see myself doing wet plates or large format at this point.

35mm is the gateway drug, that leads to much harder formats. Lol

 

[Roger Cole]

Well I DO shoot large format. So maybe that's part of my reasoning. If I want to go big, and I have time and energy to carry a fair amount of gear, out comes the Linhof and tripod.

I also like to project 35mm slides, and don't have a medium format projector - yet. If I want one I should get it soon while I can still shoot the film.

 

[MajorDad]

Matt: My 645 AFDIII gives me 16 images. All the time. I enjoyed reading this discussion since I am a newbe to MF.

 

[M.A.Longmore]

Matt: My 645 AFDIII gives me 16 images. All the time. I enjoyed reading this discussion since I am a newbe to MF.

.
Welcome To APUG Dad !

Enjoy The Weekend !

Ron
.

 

[Greg Heath]

Yeah I love this, I've already taken 4 shots with it and plan on finishing the roll this week.

Since this is my first time with MF, couple things. F$&%#$& it's heavy, it weighs about as much as my Nikkormat FTn with a Vivitar Series 1 70-210 f3.5 on it. It's HUGE. Makes my Canon 5D with battery grip look like a toy.

The left grip takes some time getting used to. I've shot SLR's in 135 for a long time and the business end is on the right side. Though it's MF I have a rough idea of their 35mm equivalents, the 150 I believe is close to about 90-93mm 35mm-equivalent.

How wide does the 35mm come out to be? I want to get a decent wide, the 80 1.9 (which is the 50mm equivalent) and maybe something with more reach like the 210 or 300. Not ruling out A glass, which seems to be their equivalent of Canon L glass (of which I own a few) the 150 2.8 looks like that could be great for portraits.

Also how accurate is the light meter? It seems to be close to my 5D which is dead-nuts on. And my noob MF question for the day....are the exposures supposed to be the same as 35mm? I find at 400 ISO a shot that should be a 1/60th is like 1/100 or 1/125 on my digital. I'll have to check it again, I know my digital Rebel has a smaller sensor and it's always running a higher shutter speed than my 5D which would make sense on the 120 if true.

I cracked up when you said it was heavy. I know exactly how you feel. I use the RB67 as my main camera, and have since purchased a Fuji GS645s. I LOVE that Fuji. A bit plasticky, but that lens is sharp !.

congrats on your acquisition. Medium Format is fun. I love the large negative.

Greg

 

[Pumalite]

http://spacecoast.craigslist.org/pho/3014903947.html

and go

That's a steal!!

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

That's a steal!!

And a L-O-N-G 12 hours.

 

[MattKing]

Matt: My 645 AFDIII gives me 16 images. All the time. I enjoyed reading this discussion since I am a newbe to MF.

Point taken - please replace my statement with "Just a heads up - the Mamiya 645 manual focus bodies all give 5 shots per roll, rather than 16."

Otherwise I'd say - welcome to APUG MajorDad!

 

[cepwin]

Hummm....not surprised the MF cameras are heavy.....I'm glad I lift as I don't think MF cameras were designed for little people I've only seen a big camera that I can remember once...a few weeks ago I went to an art fair and one of the fine art photographers brought his camera for people to see. I'm not sure what it is but I got an image of it that I included below.