Mamiya M645 1000s

Discussion in 'Medium and Large Format Cameras' started by MAubrey, Jun 20, 2015.

  1. MAubrey

    MAubrey FF Regular

    55
    May 19, 2015
    Mike Aubrey
    • Like Like x 3
  2. jai

    jai FF Regular

    68
    Apr 8, 2015
    I really like that 2nd shot, awesome.

    How are you finding the Mamiya M645? I haven't shot medium format yet, but was looking at this system as a way to try it out.
     
  3. MAubrey

    MAubrey FF Regular

    55
    May 19, 2015
    Mike Aubrey
    I like it a lot. It's smaller than most modular systems, but still fairly large. But it also has the claim to fame of having the fastest MF lens ever made, the 80mm f/1.9. That's what grabbed my attention. Not sharp wide open, but stopped down to f/2.8 or f/4 and it's spectacular.

    If you do go with this one, I would recommend getting the M645 1000s model over the original M645, since it gives you a 1/1000 max shutter speed over against 1/500 of the M645.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. jai

    jai FF Regular

    68
    Apr 8, 2015
    I like the aspect ratio, feels right.

    Sad to say, but I get put off by the idea of 6x6 negatives because the photos are too reminiscent of instagram.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  5. MAubrey

    MAubrey FF Regular

    55
    May 19, 2015
    Mike Aubrey
    I hear you. I'd like to give 6x7 a try, as well as 6x9--the latter for the appeal of its size especially (.43x crop factor).
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. MAubrey

    MAubrey FF Regular

    55
    May 19, 2015
    Mike Aubrey
    • Like Like x 1
  7. pdh

    pdh FF Regular

    31
    Mar 25, 2015
    UK
    This doesn't make any sense.
    "Crop factor" is generally used to refer to the ratio of sensors smaller than the nominal "full frame" (24x36mm) to the nominal "full frame"

    In the case of a 6x9 camera, the nominal size is 60x90mm, which means that in terms of area of sensitive material, it is a little over 6x the nominal area of a 35mm negative.

    Where does .43 come into it?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. MAubrey

    MAubrey FF Regular

    55
    May 19, 2015
    Mike Aubrey
    The nominal size of 6x9 is actually 56mm x 84mm, roughly. The full 60mm and 90mm aren't used.

    And the crop factor does make sense in the same way as before--a ratio in compared to 35mm film/sensor size. If a 24x36mm sensor is 1, then the crop factor of micro four thirds is 1:2 because it's 1/4 the area. In the very same way 6x7 is 1:.5 (or better to turn it around 2:1) because it is 4 times the area (56×67mm; so technically 0.505x). Compare the diagonal of 35mm film (43.3mm) to the diagonal of 120 in 6x7 format (87): 87 x .5 = 43.5.

    And it's the same with 6x9. With a diagonal of 101mm, .43x is what you multiple that diagonal by to get the 35mm film's diagonal of 43.3mm (roughly) and can be expressed either as 1:0.43 or as 2.33:1.

    Other crop factors for medium and large formats:

    Fuji FP 100C has a crop factor of .31
    4x5: 0.29x
    5x7: 0.238x
    8x10: .143

    And so on.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format#Table_of_sensor_formats_and_sizes
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/120_film#Frame_sizes
     
  9. jai

    jai FF Regular

    68
    Apr 8, 2015
    I think it just feels strange because 35mm seems like a weird basis to compare medium format frames. I bet medium format photographers back in the day wouldn't have dreamed of doing that, 35mm was for amateurs!

    Also, crop factor becomes a bit limited and confusing when you are comparing frames that are different aspect ratios.

    If you look at 6x6 and 6x9 the ratio of their diagonals, or of their crop factors, is 0.785. But if you go from a 100mm lens on the 6x9 down to 78.5mm on a 6x6 you won't be able to replicate the full 6x9 frame, at least not horizontally.

    You get the same problem comparing micro four thirds to 35mm. The common crop factor is 2, but actually that factor of 2 is too small if you want to replicate the full frame horizontally. And the factor of 2 is too big if you aren't interested in the sides of the image, and were going to crop to 4:3 anyway!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. MAubrey

    MAubrey FF Regular

    55
    May 19, 2015
    Mike Aubrey
    As someone who also shoots micro four thirds with its 4:3 aspect ratio, I certainly don't disagree. The 2x crop only makes sense within a narrow set of parameters. If you crop 35mm to a 4:3 aspect ratio, it's less than 2x. For me, it is simply useful knowledge to have for quickly establishing:

    (1) What is a normal lens?
    (2) What is the comparative DOF?
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2015
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. Qppoiz

    Qppoiz FF Regular

    31
    Mar 24, 2015
    I have the M645 1000s. Love it more now that I got the WLF for it; it's much lighter now than with the metered prism (which meters but doesn't relay shutter speeds back to body, anyways).
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. MAubrey

    MAubrey FF Regular

    55
    May 19, 2015
    Mike Aubrey
    I had always thought the inability to rely SS back to the body was because my prism was simply broken. Glad to hear it isn't!

    The waste level finder is definitely on my list...
     
  13. pdh

    pdh FF Regular

    31
    Mar 25, 2015
    UK
    Yes, that is exactly what I said: the NOMINAL size is 60x90, however the ACTUAL size (as you point out) is ~56x~84mm, depending, of course, on the camera. The actual image dimensions will vary from model to model.

    You may wish to check a dictionary, a Fowler's or similar usage guide to ensure you fully understand how the word "nominal" is most appropriately and accurately used.


    I still think your use of the idea of a "crop factor" in the way you have used it is wrong-headed and misleading.
     
  14. MAubrey

    MAubrey FF Regular

    55
    May 19, 2015
    Mike Aubrey
    You are, of course, correct. I suppose I deserve just such a censure when I simply go about copying and pasting directly from your own post without taking the time to edit and write for myself. I accept the rebuke. Still, I wouldn't touch Fowler with a 10 foot pole. He clearly knew grammatical analysis, but there's more than a little eccentricity in there, particularly in the manner that goes about making his decisions.
    I'm regularly switching between four to five different formats. Personally, I find it useful to have a mathematical equation to helping me adjust to FL differences between them (What is a wide? What is a normal? What is a telephoto? What is the relative amount of DOF at f/5.6 in each for a given FL?). Eventually I anticipate not needing the maths--I have the equivalent focal lengths down for the most part. It's the relative DOF at a given aperture that I'm not yet fluent in for each of them.

    Now, if you have a better way of going about it, I'm all ears. I certainly don't like doing things that are wrong-headed and would appreciate any suggestion or alternative you might have.
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2015
  15. MAubrey

    MAubrey FF Regular

    55
    May 19, 2015
    Mike Aubrey
    Bringing out the film camera is fun when shooting weddings. I only did half a roll because there wasn't a lot of time for shooting this slow and deliberate.

    19246609865_64a66e5991_b.
    The Bride
    by Mike Aubrey, on Flickr
     
    • Like Like x 4
  16. MAubrey

    MAubrey FF Regular

    55
    May 19, 2015
    Mike Aubrey
    Here we go with some new shots...

    These are all with the Sekor C 210mm f/4 (more or less like a 135mm f/2.4) Bokeh is nice and smooth, but this version lacks contrast (which I then boosted in Lightroom after scanning). I would expect the 'N' version that replaced it is superior with its multi-coatings. Still, I like it. Focusing is really hard--you can see on the first picture (my wife) and I missed focus by a couple centimeters.
     

    Attached Files:

    • Like Like x 4
  17. tonyturley

    tonyturley FF Veteran

    212
    Mar 24, 2015
    Tony
    Bringing this thread back to life as I have another M645 1000S on the way, after selling mine last year and later wishing I hadn't. While I wait for mine to arrive on a slow boat from Japan, I went back through results from my first 1000S. First three are Portra 400, last is Ektar 100.

    93220007.JPG
    9000008.
    02470002.JPG
    30170007.JPG
     
    • Like Like x 4
  18. Jim

    Jim New to FF

    5
    Apr 2, 2017
    Newark, DE
    645b&w001. 645b&w002. I just bought a Mamiya 645 tl with 80 mm lens for $200! I put a roll of HP5 through it and got the following pics. Processed in Sprint standard at 1+9 dilution, 10 min @ 20C.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. MoonMind

    MoonMind FF Regular Subscribing Member

    199
    Mar 24, 2015
    Switzerland
    Matt
    Wonderful images - and one hell of a great price for a wonderful camera! Enjoy it!

    M.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
Mamiya C330 Medium and Large Format Cameras Apr 16, 2017
Mamiya Universal Press Medium and Large Format Cameras May 21, 2016
Mamiya 6 MF Medium and Large Format Cameras Jun 13, 2015
Mamiya RZ67 Medium and Large Format Cameras Mar 27, 2015