Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/03/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Austin: Some FYI's... >What 645 were you using? It must have been a real dog if your results are as you say.< Pentax 645 (non af) and Mamiya 645 Pro AE. Neither knocked my socks off. The Pentax's meter was only accurate to about 1/2 stop, but the lenses were very good. The Mamiya's lenses were just okay, but the meter was great. I can load my Leica M faster than I could load either of them. They both were slower to focus, were heavier, slower to use, and in the end the results just weren't that much beter than my high-end 35's at 11X. >What's this obsession with tripods? You complain about the trouble carrying a MF camera around, but you'd LUG a useless tripod around? Tripods are for studios and "camera guys" ;-)< Here I was referring primarily to the use of my RZ 67, which is essentially tripod-bound due to its size and weight. But for most of the others including my Mamiya M7, the lenses were so slow that a tripod was necessary in low light situations. All of the reflex bodies had tremendous mirror flop, so the use of a mirror up & cable release was also required if you expected really sharp images -- (And, if I was going to go through all that bother, why not just use the LF system?) Other bits and pieces: My hasselblad and I just did not get along functionally or ergonomically; and my Mamiya Universal/Press system was too big, and we did not get along very well ergonomically either; however both had great, albeit slow, optics. My M7 was very light, had a decent meter, great lenses, but a terrible RF system; slow to use and poor frameline accuracy. The RZ was okay to load, the M7 easy. Of the lot, the RZ is the one I miss the most, and would buy again if I ever have the need for an MF system -- superb optics and superb meter in the AE finder. Cheers, Jack _____________