Hallo, I would like to know if anybody compare the Mamiya 645 with Contax 645 lenses.
I have a P25 with contax.
For my last art-work after one year that I use only the digital back, I used my old Mamyia RZ 67 proII with film... Becouse I tested my back end I was not convinced, above all with color tone gradations.
I make portrais and I like the pastel tone with normal contrast.
I use normally Portra 160 NC.
Is not only the P25, is a digital problem Leaf too I tested.
I think that the films have more color gradations...
I used the P45 proflie with P25 and it's better.
Someone told me that I have to Upgrade to P45, and I thought to change my contax with mamiya. Like this I can use the P45 with RZ too.
RZ is perfect above all for the rotation back;It's a really medium format camera.
Contax and Mamiya 645 are ibrid camera half 35mm and half medium format...
Anybody can give me advice.
Thank you.
Fabrizio
My Webpage

I don't know much about the contax 645 lenses, but I fell in love with the Mamiya 645 system. I do have most all of their manual and AF lenses. They are cheap and sharp. I got all the lenses at ebay.
I never own any Mamiya 645, until I got a 645 AFD with the P25. I always shoot Hass with film. Now I have the Mamiya 645 AFD and the Mamiya 645 AFD II with the P45 back. For my type of work, I like the 645 AFD better.
All I could say is, Mamiya lenses are cheaper, the Contax lenses is more expensive, so is the cost different make them that muich sharper?

good reason the costs!!.
Me too I bougth my contax sistem on e-bay. I choose contax for the level finder that with mamiya RZ I use, but with 645 i difficoult, above all when I have tot do vertical pictures. I don' like a lot prism...

http://www.mamiya.com/reports.asp?id=5&id2=131&id3=136
Hi
Take a look a these reviews and also Mamiya is coming out with a 28 & 75-150 mm. There is another review that compares the 150, 80 & 45 (Mamiya & Contax ). Mamiya had the edge in this test. If you are happy with Contax stay with it. Mamiya is in a interesting position now and could be doing some sort of deal with Phase? But both Phase & Mamiya have been quiet in the past few months about the talks they had 4 months ago.
I like Mamiya because I have a full of lenses and did not break the bank!!! I used to own a Hasselblad 501cm and the best thing I ever did was sell it!
Thanks Denis

On average, the Contax lenses are rated higher than the Mamiya 645 lenses. The 35mm lens is a far superior design, and Contax's 120mm makro can't be touched. The standard 80mm lens is a full stop faster than Mamiya's. Generally speaking, the Contax 645 lenses are built better, have better, richer color, better bokeh, better resistance to flare and ghosting, less chromatic abberation, etc. The Mamiya lenses are less expensive, but you get what you pay for. If you've got the Contax already, keep it. You'll regret giving it up.

I have to disagree. Mamiya know how to make lenses; don't mistake price for quality. The Mamiya 120 Macro lens is a superbly engineered tool (and yes I have used Zeiss MF lenses). You could argue the Mamiya 35mm is its "weak" link, but its still a great lens. The new Mamiya 28mm is a brand new design.

The only thing you'll miss by using Mamiya over Zeiss is the hole in your bank balance.

Quentin

PS I would add that, sadly, Contax is a discontinued brand, whereas Mamiya, despite some upheavals, are still going strong and releasing new products like the new 28mm lens.

I didn't say that Mamiya don't know how to make lenses. They clearly do. I said nothing about their capabilities, for which I have a great deal of respect. I think the Mamiya 7 lenses I have are exceptional. However, in 645 lenses, the Zeiss/Contax lenses are better overall, and are clearly better built -- Mamiya and COntax positioned themselves and different price points in the market and built their products to meet those price points. Certainly you pay for the additional quality available at the higher price point -- more goes into making the product. While the relationship between price and quality isn't linear, there is a pretty clear relationship between the two. Quality comes at a cost, no doubt about it. The Mamiya lenses might be a better value -- depending how much you appreciate the quality differences -- but most definitely you get what you pay for. The quality difference between the Mamiya 645 lenses and the Contax 645 lenses was obvious to me when I compared the 2 side by side a number of years ago. I considered the additional quality offered by the Contax lenses to be worth the additional cost. You may not feel the additional quality is worth the additional cost -- that is your decision to make most likely based on how much that additional quality is worth to you. That's why both products succeeded in the market place.

as a Zeiss owner, I sadly also disagree.

Mamiya lenses have been independently tested as out-resolving their Zeiss equivalents in the many formats, including 645.
I know 'name' and 'reputation' is what it is, however ...

shame for me, as I use Contax 645. but facts are facts.

MF lenses in general were tested by many great smart people like Kerry Thalman, and Mamiya turned out to be the ultimate Medium Format lens in nearly every case, beating all other legendary lenses - zeiss/rollei/hasselblad etc, etc.

see: http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/MF_testing.html
and see: http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/test/fourcameras.html for their shoot out results, from which I can quote the conclusion:
"While Mamiya has made consistantly fine camera equipment, I somehow believed that the Hasselblad was a sharper, more constrasty solution. In this test, the Mamiya 7 is the hands down winner on all accounts. On this day, there was none better."

contax 645 lenses were built down to a price, not a low price to be sure, but not the same as building up to a true Zeiss level.

PopPhoto (I think) did a test of contax 645 vs Mamiya 645 lenses, and Mamiya won. damn it.
the 80mm may be faster but its unusable at that speed. dreadful flare and no resolution. I know, I've tried.
the rare exceptions is the macro lens (one of the few made by Zeiss in Germany)

As a former Mamiya owner (many years ago), I'll add that I had no complaints with the sharpness or resolution of Mamiya 645 lenses. Sharpness isn't the end of the story, however. I now own my second Contax 645 system (this time with digital rather than film) and find that the lenses have a "look" that I like and find unique among all the camera systems that I have owned. I assume that mathematical lens tests will only tell one about objective "sharpness," but it's doubtful they can tell you whether the lens in question has the "look" you're after. In short, I found the Mamiya 645 lenses to be incredibly sharp, but also too "clinical" for my taste. BTW, I found the same to be true of most of the Schneider lenses I used to own for my Rollei 6008, except for the manual focus 40mm and 180mm, which really do have a special look as well.

It should also be noted that while it's true that Contax 645 lenses were once much more expensive than their mamiya equivalents, they can be had used VERY cheaply these days. I paid $800 for the 35mm lens, $800 for the 140mm lens, and $700 for the 210mm lens. The only lens that remains very high priced used is the 120mm Makro (BTW, if anyone has a lead on where I could purchase one, I'd appreciate it).

Just to be clear: I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, just offering my thoughts.

Attached is a recent portrait shot with the Contax 645 140mm lens (which many argue is one of the "less impressive" Contax lenses, although it's my most used for portraits, since I can't find a freakin' 120mm Makro!) and the Phase One P30 back.

of course the look of the lenses is important, but i feel that o lot of what is called the "the look" can now be created in C1, so i like to get the cleanest, freshest, most balanced starting point (file) to add and take away later...good contrast and clean color is very important to me....it is nice to not have to sharpen in software...in the end it all comes down to how oyu work and how you get your point across...i will give my personal experience and opinion...

i went from a P20 on rollei to a P30 on mamiya...i looked long and hard at the contax as well but decided for the mamiya for a couple of reasons: i like the lens range better, better options for me, all tests i read placed the mamiya over the contax lenses, mamiya is a considerably cheaper system...both have the *%$#@** 1/125 sync speed, the contax has faster lenses (which i never utilize), contax has the grip (only real advantage in my opinion)...i also already had a 645AF body (which i sold to get the AFDII anyway)....both can accept all kinds of lenses with adapters (as far as i know)

about the lenses (other then the tests, my personal opinion): mamiya lenses are great...the 645 lenses are very good to great, all RZ lenses i have owned are great......almost all zeiss lenses i owned with hasselblad were disapointing especially for the price(funny to me that the 120macro keeps coming up...maybe i had a lemon, my canon macro was far superior, the zeiss was unusable f16-f32 on DMF backs)...i had the same situation with zeiss lenses on the rollei...but there one has the option to shoot schneider lenses.....ahhhhh they are the best, there is no comparison and with the rollei one can compare between zeiss and schneider lenses on the same system...not even close.....i guess for the last 50 year everybody always said the zeiss lenses are the best and at one point it just stuck....they are of course good lenses, but compared to others (and again especially for the money) the seem to be behind....maybe they stopped actually putting money into development about 15 years ago?

fuji's lenses on the 680 and 690 series are in the same league as the schneider lenses for the rollei, everything else is a step below (and some zeiss glass even below that)...the mamiya 645 lenses beat every price/value comparison, the most expensive ones on ebay are the 35mm and the 120...the 35mm is a bit of a let-down, but again i bought mine for 800....for a 35MF lens! yes it has CR when shooting into the light...which WA lens does not?

for me the mamiya is a phantastic system, cheap, handles great, great lenses....i am superhappy, but i am waiting for the Hy6 to come out..the schneider lenses are simply the best.....

This is interesting: Its back to those good old days debating the merits of different lenses. Takes me back a few years. Makes a change from the endless emphasis on sensors

I remember reading something somewhere on why Mamiya lenses cost less than some others like Zeiss. I think I recall Mamiya saying they focused (no pun intended) on the optics, and used composites etc more often in some parts of the construction, plus the lenses were "dumb" with all the electronics being in the camera body. I remember my Zeiss lenses for Rollei 6008 being very sturdy, maybe over-engineered, but a tad less sharp than my current Mamiya lenses.

But let's assume more or less equivalence in performance between Contax and Mamiya so far as lenses are concerned. The problem with Contax is the system is unfortunately now obsolete. Going forward, it makes more sense to invest in a brand that is still current. Having said that, I hope Contax revives.

Quentin

I'm glad this is being discussed here. I want everybody to know how bad the Contax 645 system really is! these lens are terrible and the body feels very plastic like in my hands. So if everybody will kindly send me their Contax equipment and i will make sure it is disposed of properly!!!

Here's to hoping this thread makes the Contax prices drop!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Cheers,

Ben Edmonson
www.benedmonson.com

P.S. Owned the Mamiya 645 AF for years and made lots of great images with it on film. I now own the Contax system and have committed to it for the P30 back. I'm done swithcing systems and am now going to get to know my system inside and out, no more excuses....... Just shooting everyday!

First, the test links you provide are test the Mamiya 7 lenses and no 645 lenses at all. I agree, and have already stated how good I feel the Mamiya 7 lenses are. It will be a long time before some one will be able to pry my Mamiya 7 out of my hands. No doubt about it, the lenses are great. But they are quite a different type of lens than the Mamiya 645 lenses. We are talking about the 645 lenses and they are not the same quality, and not comparable.

Second, Pop Photo is NO authority on anything. A laughable excuse for a magazine. The allegations that test results are dictated by advertising revenue is seemingly not without merit. They are sorely lacking a reputation for a reason. You need to find a more reputable source.

Third, I don't get "dreadful flare from my 80mm f2.0 Zeiss lens. Flare is actually quite well controlled in my example, and resolution is a high as any other 80mm MF SLR lens out there. It is a bit soft wide open. but not unuably so, and not more so than other 80mm lenses wide open that are a full stop slower. And the Zeiss makro for the Contax 645 isd made in Japan, not Germany (and never has been made in Germany). Let's not confuse it with the German-made Zeiss 120mm Makro for Hassy -- the Contax 645 Makro is actually better.


That's because the 140 f2.8 Sonnar was designed specifically for portraits. It combines a super smooth and creamy bokeh with optimal sharpness and contrast for portraits. It does the job it was designed for exceptionally well. This is part of the issue here. This lens was not designed for ultimate resolution or sharpness so judging it on that basis alone like so many of these so-called "tests" is sad. But in it's designed use as a portrait lens it is exceptional, as William (and the many others enamoured with it) quite clearly sees.

I am very happy with my Contax 645 with Phase One P45, close to a year now, upgraded from P25. I think the body design is well balanced, works smartly, Mamiya felt a lot cheaper in build and ergonomic. Contax lens quality and its build is classic and manual focus is a pleasure to use. Lens quality can be quite subjective, just the testing chart may not decide the true value of a lens which is why field test is important. I am not against quality of Mamiya lenses but having owned all the 9 lense and seen consistant result from all of the lenses, I would disagree that the Contax 645 system is 2nd to anything in the market of the same format.

I've got a demo 120 Makro in mint condition for sale. Give me a call at 1-888-365-1777, extension 3322 if you're interested.

Cheers,
Ron

I think that the lenses are important for the quality, for the films and the digital back.
I need a System that I can use for Waist level finder, I thougth that Mamiya 645 cold be have an adapter for RZ that Contax don't have.
The new Mamiya 645 lenses, 28mm and zoom, could be interesting, above all when C1P 4 will optimize them. (I know the ufficial joint-venture PO Mamiya)
Contax have a great lens, the 80 mm f2 is great with the film. Waist level Finder for work is great! The prism not so much.
with my back I have some little color cast problem with 120 too, I don't know if is the P25 problem or the lenses, I can see the light down in the side too.
My last art work I used RZ with film, and I love this camera.
Why Mamiya don't make a camera like this but more little, or make an adapter for the contax mount?
Fabrizio

Hi
This is the lens test I have been looking for.
Thanks DenisClick to view attachmentClick to view attachmentClick to view attachmentClick to view attachment

Ahh, that's where I read that Mamiya had kept down the cost of their lenses by placing the autofocus motor in the camera body...

I think that puts a lid on any further debate about Mamiya lens quality, except of course to say how good they are.

Quentin

you can buy a adapter for rz lenses for the contax from zoerkendorfer.

Hard to imagine an RZ to Contax 645 adapter, unless a helicoid is built-in for focusing.

maybe i am wrong, but i think he told me something about using the rz or rb lenses......
i don know the rb/rz system myself.

I took a quick look at the Zork site, and as suspected there doesn't seem to be an "RB/RZ-lens to AnyOtherCamera" adapter since those lenses require the built-in bellows focusing of the RB/RZ camera bodies.

How about a Contax lens to Mamiya AFD adapter, I've found it hard to locate one on the web?

Its a good time to grab Contax glass if there really is some benefit to be had...

What are peoples favorite Contax lenses? Seems like the 35 is meant to be better than Mamiyas.

and you, sir, in the light of the above tests, need to be a little more careful what you band around as fact.

their lenses are excellent. period.

to repeat: I own Contax, but would be happier using a Mamiya 80mm on my 645 body than the Zeiss one. Yes I dont like the feel of the Mamiya, and or all that plastic, but, they are great optics.

[quote=free1000,Jan 26 2007, 07:19 PM]
How about a Contax lens to Mamiya AFD adapter, I've found it hard to locate one on the web?

Its a good time to grab Contax glass if there really is some benefit to be had...

What are peoples favorite Contax lenses? Seems like the 35 is meant to be better than Mamiyas.

35 mm Contax have a big cromatic aberration with architctural light where there are metal gate or big different light Hight and Low. Look the attachment I made it with P25, Contax 35mm 1/60 f 9,5.
Leaf have little more less in the gate more in the wall, but with the same problem.
The problem is the lens. It's perfect with the film but with digital...
I know that Phase One will make a particular correction in C1P4 for Mamya Lenses, Anibody know if it is for all the lenses? Contax Too?

this is the first time i have heard about that...where did you get this from....

My dealer told me that Phase One start a joint venture with Mamiya, and above all study to optimize the new Mamiya Lenses 28 and zoom.
Now I ask him if C1p4 could be optimize for all brand lenses

phase and mamiya do have a deal, but as far as i know development and research is not part of that at all....i would be more then happy if this was true, but i would assume we would have heard something about this....considering that this is the ONE thing hasselblad has up on everybody else....i am sure phase would love to announce something like this....i guess we will wait and see....

Me too. I've to decide to upgrade my back becouse I have a 30% free finacing... I don't know what can I do with this lenses problem. I'll regret to change all my contax system, probally only hy6... With film was more easy...

yes because nobody had any lens correction....

the picture that you can see I made with film too... and it doesn't have the aberration problem. I made the test with aptus 65, p25 and film...I know, i'm crazy!!! film is another support different than digital...