Mamiya 645 v. Hassy H series for Real World Landscape work

[photographist]

I'm looking at either a Mamiya 645 AFD I or II, or a Hassy H1/H2 for use as my primary landscape body.   Being in the upper Midwest and traveling extensively, the conditions I'll encounter include temps from 120F to -10F, and weather that includes sun, snow and rain.   I'm aware that neither body is weather resistant (ala Canon 1ds or Pentax 645D), but have no issue with protecting the body as needed.

If those of you who have been in the field with either or both of these beasties can share some of your experiences and feelings, I'd really appreciate it.

Thanks!

Jeffrey

[Doug Peterson]

Since you're saying it's specifically for landscape work: If you haven't seen them before you should also throw a dedicated tech camera into the race.

http://www.captureintegration.com/tech-cameras/digital-view-camera/

The quality of the wide angle lenses, the ability to do perspective correction (e.g. rising to place the horizon in the lower rule of thirds), the ability to stitch within a continuous image circle (without moving the lens), the leaf shutter lens (no mirror bounce or shutter recoil vibration) and the complete lack of electronics (good for field use - no batteries, less things to break), and the slow zen-encouraging tactile nature of the camera all make it a great option.

Of course it's highly personal and very much up to individual priorities/likes/dislikes. So maybe you could tell the forum more about what sorts of landscapes you shoot, what you find important in a camera, what you've used in the past (along with what you've liked/disliked about that equipment) and what your end goals are.

By the way, I'm originally from NE Ohio - where are you?

P.S. note my signature: I try very hard to give real world practical and honest advice but I must be considered biased given my position as a medium format dealer.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More

National: 877.217.9870  |  Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One 6 at 10% off

[photographist]

Hey Doug!

  Thank you for the quick response and the great comments.   I must confess, that when I read the words "...technical camera ..." a smile came across my face.  I spend many years lugging 8x20, 8x10 (old magnesium Calumet yet) and 4x5 field and technical cameras around with me.    I left the chem. dark room when I became somewhat sensitive to the chemistry I was working with [sigh].   I do still miss the smell of the stop bath  !

  A field camera was not something I'd thought about, but I will do so now.  As for the type of work that I do, I tend to shoot early in the morning and primarily love the winter and fall seasons.   Many of my pieces are large canvas based (read multiple panel) and are frequently captured as panoramas or matrices.   I live in the Chicagoland area but get around the world frequently.    I also enjoy birding and wildlife photography along with some architectural, but will be keeping my Canon rig for the first two.   My website is: www.jvdkphoto.com (Dancing with Light Photography) if you want to take a look.

   Thank you again and I look forward to any additional thoughts you may have!

Jeffrey

[Doug Peterson]

You didn't mention if you planned on using these for film or digital. In the case of both platforms this makes a big difference as far as future expandability.

I would think after years with 4x5 and 8x10 and the movements and resolution (especially the later) could provide I'd think a tech camera would be a natural match for you. Especially as you like producing unusually wide aspect ratio images (e.g. panos and super-panos) and print very large.

Here are some images I made along the same general vein (I claim no mastery but am always eager to share):
http://www.captureintegration.com/2010/02/09/oregon-panoramics/#more-3795

The ability to stitch vertical left-center-right images (3 images in one horizontal line) very closely mirrors several of the images on your website.

When shooting with a panoramic output in mind it's very nice to be able to use image-circle stitching rather than pan-stitching (e.g. rotating the camera around the nodal point - thereby moving the lens), because you do not need to warp the images back together or crop the corners after such warping - meaning your composition in the field is (essentially) identical to your composition once it's all put together.

The sheer resolution possible is also pretty stunning. Let's assume you have a 40 megapixel digital back. A single image with an H2, cropped to 3:1 (from 4:3) would give you 18 megapixels (and a small image on the screen to compose a 3:1 image within. In comparison a 3-capture stitch with an RL3D (left/center/right of horizontal frames) would yield an 80mp 3:1 crop (with 50% frame overlap for super easy stitching). Of course such extreme stitching could only be done with large image-circle lenses. See the below chart for a visualization with various lenses.



Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More

National: 877.217.9870  |  Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One 6 at 10% off

[Doug Peterson]

To be fair to the thread title here are some quick thoughts:
- AFD2 and should be generally less expensive than H1/H2
- With AFD2 You can use Mamiya AF lenses (non-D) which are very affordable as well as the newer/better (and more expensive) D series lenses, as well as any Hassy V-series lens with an adapter
- H1/H2 use leaf shutter lenses which produce less vibration (mostly an issue 1/8th to 1/30th sec)
- H1/H2 has a lot more custom functions/features than does the AFD2
- I'd put the autofocus of the H2/H1 a good step ahead of the AFD2 (maybe not so important in landscape)

[photographist]

Evening, Doug ...

  In answer to your question, digital.   The three larger pieces were captured with either a Canon 5d or 1ds mkIII.    The number of actual captures that go into a final piece vary from 5 on the small end to 96 on the higher end.    I'm looking closely at the AFd II at the moment.   Auto focus accuracy but not speed is important to me, but not critical.   The focus circle data is very interesting, but will need to wait for actual application for the future.  My budget does limit me to a degree for now. 

  Thanks again!

Jeffrey

[ondebanks]

To be fair to the thread title here are some quick thoughts:
- AFD2 and should be generally less expensive than H1/H2
- With AFD2 You can use Mamiya AF lenses (non-D) which are very affordable as well as the newer/better (and more expensive) D series lenses, as well as any Hassy V-series lens with an adapter
- H1/H2 use leaf shutter lenses which produce less vibration (mostly an issue 1/8th to 1/30th sec)
- H1/H2 has a lot more custom functions/features than does the AFD2
- I'd put the autofocus of the H2/H1 a good step ahead of the AFD2 (maybe not so important in landscape)

 I wouldn't quibble any of Doug's points, but I would add to them.

- There are also the non-AF M645 lenses, which greatly extend the range into special lenses (e.g. fisheye, three different types of 500mm long telephoto, ...) and faster lenses (e.g 45/2.8, 80/1.9, 200/2.8, 300/2.8, ...). The H series has a couple of fast lenses but not nearly so many, and it lacks those special lenses I referred to. The M645 lenses are also incredibly affordable (you mention your budget limitation), and plentiful in the used market. You get focus confirmation when using these non-AF lenses on the 645AF* bodies. If you're willing to consider a tech camera, then manual focusing (with confirmation) should not be an issue!
- The 645AF* bodies go to 1/4000 sec shutter speed, much higher than the H1/H2 (1/800 sec). If you're going to be using some of these really fast lenses wide open, outdoors, for selective focus in landscapes, those higher shutter speeds come in handy - better than slapping on ND filters etc., and more shake resilient when handheld.

Here are a couple of examples where both these points come into play. Shot handheld with a 200/2.8 APO M645 lens on an M645AFD, at f2.8 and very high shutter speeds. (OK, the shot of my daughter at 1/3000 sec isn't what you'd call "landscape", but it is outdoors within a coastal landscape! So it illustrates the dof & shutter speed issues which can apply to landscape.)

Ray

[photographist]

Hello, Ron ...

  Thank you for your comments and your examples.  Both images are helpfull and your daughter's image is quite on point.   When you say non AF lenses, am I correct in assuming you mean Mamiya M645 or 645 manual focus lenses?   If so am I correct in assuming that the lens mount is the same or at least compatible between the two types?

  Thank you again!

Jeffrey

[ondebanks]

Hi Jeffrey,

Yes, that's right - by non-AF, I mean the lenses that were used on all the Mamiya 645 models before the 645AF appeared. They can be called MF (manual focus) lenses, but MF also means "medium format" so I avoided that!

The lens bayonet is the same and the flange-to-focal plane registration distance is the same. But the aperture mechanism is different. The AF lenses, like Canon EOS or Nikon G, have electronic contacts to transmit the stop selected by the wheel on the body, and then stop down the lens when the shot is taken or DOF preview pressed. The MF lenses have conventional mechanical aperture rings, a Nikon AI-style notch to relay the selected aperture offset to the metering system, a lever inside the mount to stop down the lens when the shot is taken or DOF previewed (on some bodies), and an "A-M" switch on the barrel -"A" is used for normal automatic open-aperture metering, "M" is used for DOF preview or for permanently stopped down usage.

What all this means is that an MF lens works fully on an AF body, except it needs to be manually stopped down for metering/AE. Shooting at f5.6 or faster, I just set the lens switch to "M" and work normally - the image is bright, and the focus confirm system works. When the shot needs smaller than f5.6, I normally use a wider aperture for focus/composition, and then turn the aperture down just before taking the shot.

Whereas, an AF lens can only be used in manual focus mode and wide open on an MF body (since the body can't set any other aperture) - so limiting that I bet no-one ever bothers to do this.

Cheers,
Ray

[c_soars]

As a former Mamiya AFD owner, I thought I'd add this in.

The AFD II moves the mirror-lock up from the side of the body to the collar around the shutter.  On the original AFD, it was on the side which made using it with an L-Plate difficult.  Not only was it nearly impossible to activate (even with a kirk l-plate that had cut-outs to for that purpose), you would have to remove it from the tripod head after composing through the viewfinder.  If shooting verticals with the original AFD, flop the camera over off axis and use a strong tripod.  If primarily shooting landscapes I'd strongly save extra for an AFD II+ body for this reason.

I thought I'd use the 1/4000 shutter speed more than I actually did.  Meter was very accurate with little need for using EV comp (has an average/spot mode setting that does well with backlit subjects and AE-L).

I found the autofocus to be very accurate, although slow with longer lenses.  However, the single/continuous/manual switch is easily knocked and you can be in AF-C with the lens hunting about like crazy at the worst times.  I had the AF 55mm 2.8 and 150mm 3.5 and found them very sharp with nice transitions between focus zones.  Six-blade apertures make for 'simple' sunstars and points of light for stopped-down night photography though.


These are just some points that I've learnt from actually owning and shooting the camera, so I hope they might be of help to you, they may not be obvious from the spec sheets etc.


-Craig

[photographist]

Hi Ray and Craig ...

  Thank you both for your input!

  Ray, I really appreciate your input and information on the lenses and the uses thereof.  I'm very weak on the Mamiya line (knowledge wise), so I feel like a real big babe in the woods !

  Craig, Great info on the body.  Man the AFD sounds like a real pain on the mirror lock so that is great advice for me.  I am a bit confused though (and yes, my ignorence is again showing  ), but you refer to the AFD II+.  Is there an AFDII and a different AFDII+?

  Thanks again!

Jeffrey

[Doug Peterson]

I assume he means the AFDII and the models thereafter. That would include the AFDIII (aka Phase One AF) and DF bodies.

[ondebanks]

I can see the problem with the 645AFD M-Up switch position interfering with an L-bracket.

But whatever about positioning, I actually prefer mechanical lever M-Up switches like the AFD's, over the electronic type that the AFDII and later have. Mechanical ones keep the mirror up as long as you want them to, which is great for consecutive, intervalometer type shooting. AFAIK the AFDII electronic type has to be separately activated before each and every exposure? And you can always "cancel" the mechanical type at any time, whether or not you shoot a frame. I don't know whether the AFDII+ M-Up can be cancelled without shooting a frame, or turning off the body perhaps, but I do know that on certain other cameras (like my old Rollei) once you activate electronic M-Up, the mirror's not coming down again until you fire off a photo!

Ray