First I want to thank Lance for all his help and continued communication.
I had the chance to shoot the Mamiya AFDII with the old 80/2.8 , old 150/3.2?, and old 120/4 Macro in Puerto Rico, using a P25, P30+, & P45+. The files were fabulous once I got the depth of field and shutter speed differences needed into my head.
I am currently shooting a Hassy H3DII/39 with 80/2.8 and 120/4 Macro. This is with Sean from Camera West. It is also generating unbelievable files.
First I'm looking for a system approach that will just work and not get in the way. I think both of these options can meet that criteria.
Let's talk camera bodies and ease of use first. This one has to go to the Hassy. The battery lasts longer and is a single unit vs. one for the back and AA batteries for the camera. In an emergency, you can also use 3 "123" batteries in the Hassy. Viewfinders are similiar with a slight edge in brightness/contrast going to the Hassy. Weight is a mixed bag, the Hassy is heavier but built like a tank and seems to help me stabilizing while the Mamiya is lighter and less of a burden. Ergonomically, I prefer the Hassy body as the controls are just there. Menu wise, again I go with the Hassy with all the controls on buttons within reach on the camera body (very similiar to my Nikon D3). I really don't need to go into the menu system on the back. Mirror shake seems less on the Hassy, but may be equal with the new AFDIII body coming out. Build quality goes to the Hassy without any question as it is virtually all metal, including the covers or the card slots, etc... One pet peeve I had on the Phase back was the difficulty of extracting the card with my large fingers, since it did not pop out far enough. This is fine on the Hassy. LCD screen on the back of the digital back is also a complete world better on the Hassy. The Phase screen was improved on the plus backs vs. the original, but is still lacking compared to the Hassy. Basically, I have to give the nod to the Hassy as winning by a large margin in ergonomics and use of the camera body.
Focal vs. Leaf shutter. The Mamiya is a focal plane with leaf shutters to come. The Hassy is leaf shutter only. I set up strobes yesterday and did a lot of shooting in the late afternoon using my wife as a model and also did some shooting in the studio. I MUST have the faster flash sync of the leaf shutter system. That decision comes down to the option of Hassy now, or Mamiya with both in the future.
Lenses are slightly larger on the Hassy, but not to the extent which I expected. The files which I am seeing using the Hassy lenses are better than the older level of Mamiya glass. Will this be true, evened out, or reversed with the new Mamiya glass just being released? I don't know but that is a factor to consider. I have decided that a 120 Macro is not for me on either system. The depth of field is so narrow in the Macro range that the Nikon works better for what I shoot and the size it gets printed. In either system, my first two lenses based on focal length preference and size are going to be 80 & 150. The 80 seems to work out well for the way I see things in the world and also what I shoot for product. The 150 will work out for a mild telephoto and portraits.
Software is another mixed bag. For a lot of things, I like programs like Aperture and Lightroom. Aperture and preview read the Hassy files but not the Phase files. Lightroom reads the Phase files and not the Hassy files. Phocus and Capture One do not read their competitors files. My other cameras are the M8 and D3. I do want to restrict the number of convertors which I am using. My preference to date has been to abandon lightroom as I don't like how it renders color or detail when compared to Capture One or Aperture. Nikon Capture NX has also been abandoned as it only works on my Nikon files. To date with the M8 & D3, Aperture and Capture One have been the preference. This gives me experience with those over Phocus. Aperture is going to stay in the mix, which covers the M8/D3/Hassy but not Phase. That would be ok, as I will probably do the majority of conversion for the MFDB in its software be it Capture One or Phocus. Now between Capture One and Phocus, I have to say that I am probably biased to Capture One since I have used it for the last 1 1/2 years with the M8. On another thead about the Hassy firmware and software, I posted a few things which I really miss or don't get about Phocus. At this point in the game, I would say that Capture One wins hands down.
Financials also come into play. This is where Hassy would normally loose, but is actually the same as the Phase system due to discounts from both vendors and then the $4000 trade-in of my backup D300 body promotion with Hassy. For a classic to classic system, they are identical once you pull out what I can sell my D300 for from the $4000 trade-in value. My second lens of the 150 is also a few hundred dollars less in the Hassy system. I have decided to stay with a classic vs. value added/extended warranty system basically to just save some upfront money on the system. Both Lance and Sean offered to help out, if I am in a bind and need something during a repair.
So now, I have a few more days to play and figure these two different systems out in my head.
Best,
Ray
I had the chance to shoot the Mamiya AFDII with the old 80/2.8 , old 150/3.2?, and old 120/4 Macro in Puerto Rico, using a P25, P30+, & P45+. The files were fabulous once I got the depth of field and shutter speed differences needed into my head.
I am currently shooting a Hassy H3DII/39 with 80/2.8 and 120/4 Macro. This is with Sean from Camera West. It is also generating unbelievable files.
First I'm looking for a system approach that will just work and not get in the way. I think both of these options can meet that criteria.
Let's talk camera bodies and ease of use first. This one has to go to the Hassy. The battery lasts longer and is a single unit vs. one for the back and AA batteries for the camera. In an emergency, you can also use 3 "123" batteries in the Hassy. Viewfinders are similiar with a slight edge in brightness/contrast going to the Hassy. Weight is a mixed bag, the Hassy is heavier but built like a tank and seems to help me stabilizing while the Mamiya is lighter and less of a burden. Ergonomically, I prefer the Hassy body as the controls are just there. Menu wise, again I go with the Hassy with all the controls on buttons within reach on the camera body (very similiar to my Nikon D3). I really don't need to go into the menu system on the back. Mirror shake seems less on the Hassy, but may be equal with the new AFDIII body coming out. Build quality goes to the Hassy without any question as it is virtually all metal, including the covers or the card slots, etc... One pet peeve I had on the Phase back was the difficulty of extracting the card with my large fingers, since it did not pop out far enough. This is fine on the Hassy. LCD screen on the back of the digital back is also a complete world better on the Hassy. The Phase screen was improved on the plus backs vs. the original, but is still lacking compared to the Hassy. Basically, I have to give the nod to the Hassy as winning by a large margin in ergonomics and use of the camera body.
Focal vs. Leaf shutter. The Mamiya is a focal plane with leaf shutters to come. The Hassy is leaf shutter only. I set up strobes yesterday and did a lot of shooting in the late afternoon using my wife as a model and also did some shooting in the studio. I MUST have the faster flash sync of the leaf shutter system. That decision comes down to the option of Hassy now, or Mamiya with both in the future.
Lenses are slightly larger on the Hassy, but not to the extent which I expected. The files which I am seeing using the Hassy lenses are better than the older level of Mamiya glass. Will this be true, evened out, or reversed with the new Mamiya glass just being released? I don't know but that is a factor to consider. I have decided that a 120 Macro is not for me on either system. The depth of field is so narrow in the Macro range that the Nikon works better for what I shoot and the size it gets printed. In either system, my first two lenses based on focal length preference and size are going to be 80 & 150. The 80 seems to work out well for the way I see things in the world and also what I shoot for product. The 150 will work out for a mild telephoto and portraits.
Software is another mixed bag. For a lot of things, I like programs like Aperture and Lightroom. Aperture and preview read the Hassy files but not the Phase files. Lightroom reads the Phase files and not the Hassy files. Phocus and Capture One do not read their competitors files. My other cameras are the M8 and D3. I do want to restrict the number of convertors which I am using. My preference to date has been to abandon lightroom as I don't like how it renders color or detail when compared to Capture One or Aperture. Nikon Capture NX has also been abandoned as it only works on my Nikon files. To date with the M8 & D3, Aperture and Capture One have been the preference. This gives me experience with those over Phocus. Aperture is going to stay in the mix, which covers the M8/D3/Hassy but not Phase. That would be ok, as I will probably do the majority of conversion for the MFDB in its software be it Capture One or Phocus. Now between Capture One and Phocus, I have to say that I am probably biased to Capture One since I have used it for the last 1 1/2 years with the M8. On another thead about the Hassy firmware and software, I posted a few things which I really miss or don't get about Phocus. At this point in the game, I would say that Capture One wins hands down.
Financials also come into play. This is where Hassy would normally loose, but is actually the same as the Phase system due to discounts from both vendors and then the $4000 trade-in of my backup D300 body promotion with Hassy. For a classic to classic system, they are identical once you pull out what I can sell my D300 for from the $4000 trade-in value. My second lens of the 150 is also a few hundred dollars less in the Hassy system. I have decided to stay with a classic vs. value added/extended warranty system basically to just save some upfront money on the system. Both Lance and Sean offered to help out, if I am in a bind and need something during a repair.
So now, I have a few more days to play and figure these two different systems out in my head.
Best,
Ray
Ray, seems like you've given this some serious thought which a purchase of this magnitude warrants. What's your feeling about the images from these two contenders... does either of them get the nod on that score?? What about higher ISO images from each??
