I ended my previous article on film photography with a reflection on my expectations and initial impressions of the Mamiya 6:
Back to my analogue expectations. What am I looking for by shooting film? For one, I will enjoy the process. It really is different from shooting digital. From the way my Mamiya light meter works compared to those of modern digital cameras to the fact that composing in a square format will push me through a hard learning curve, I am enjoying the newness of it all. And I think I already know this is not just chasing novelty. I am seriously falling in love with this kind of photography, and the Mamiya 6 is living up to what I was hoping for.
Erwin Hartenberg
I mentioned enjoying the different shooting process and embracing the learning curve to shake up my photography as two themes that pulled me towards shooting film. It certainly has been, and continues to be, a steep learning curve. Gear matters to me, and finding the right film camera was not a hole-in-one. The Hasselblad 500-like Bronica ETRSi didn’t work for me. I was attracted to the waist level viewfinder setup but I know now this is wasted on me. Composing felt incredibly awkward and I just couldn’t get used to it. The Bronica has found a new owner and I moved on to the Mamiya 6. Everything related to film photography is new to me, I am happy to at least have the familiar experience of a rangefinder camera.
The Mamiya 6 – a plastic beast
The Mamiya 6 feels indestructible. It is made of plastic, but somehow feels as if it comes from a different plastic compared to cameras today. It is hefty yet light, and although I haven’t tried it, I don’t think I need to worry too much if I accidentally drop it. You truly are holding a significant chunk of gear in your hands. And yet, it is also small and light in its own way. When you use the collapsible construction to tuck the lens in, the side profile of the camera is quite thin. This makes packing the camera in a bag effortless. With the standard 75mm lens attached, it weighs about 1,100g. Not light, but also not too heavy.
The camera was released at the end of the 80s. My version is slightly younger and is the MF edition, which has other film format overlays in the rangefinder. I have yet to try this, but having the option of loading 35mm film in the special holder and taking panoramic shots is something I would be interested in trying. The rangefinder is large and bright, and I find it straightforward to focus, perhaps even easier than on my Leica M10.
The joy of rangefinding
Rangefinders in general are such a joy to use. This one has a lot of room around the frame lines, which is wonderful for composition and anticipation. Operating the Mamiya is easy. You lift the shutter speed dial to set the ISO (more on that later), put it in aperture priority mode or pick your shutter speed and off you go. You also have an exposure compensation dial. The aperture is set on the lens and that is just about it. The light meter is pretty decent, and good enough for me not to carry an external light meter. One of the significant differences with shooting digital is, of course, the shutter speed limitation. The Mamiya 6 goes to only 1/500s, which makes the choice of film crucial.
The collapsible lens design makes a difference
Loading film is not too difficult once you’ve done it a few times. Simply tuck in the film to the empty spool and turn the lever until the arrows line up. Close the cover and wind it a few more times, and you are good to go. The Mamiya has a screen that you can close, so no dust can come into the back of the lens while you load the film. This mechanism also allows you to change lenses mid-roll.
Finding my film preference for the Mamiya 6
This is very much a work in progress. I’ve shot with some black & white Lomography Potsdam Kino 100 but decided to focus on colour first and then learn monochromatic film. So far, I think Kodak Portra 160 seems to best fit my shooting style with the Mamiya. I like scenes with lots of light and I noticed that when shooting Portra 400, I didn’t expose the scene well and that gave oversaturated colours. The other problem I had was keeping the shadows in the clean. When you lose the shadows on film, it is hard to bring anything back. I also tried Cinestill 50D and I do like the look of that film, but Portra 160 gives me just a little more flexibility when the light is starting to fade.
I read about the need to really get to know a film stock and understand how it behaves under different conditions. I can see from my mixed results that this is 100% true. Occasionally, the result that came out was pretty close to what I had in mind, but often I messed up, mostly in targeting the right spot for the light meter to do its job. One of the downsides of shooting film is that the camera doesn’t record any settings, and I am not disciplined enough to make notes while taking photos. I will have to rely on memory to go through the feedback cycle and get better. There are ‘newer’ cameras that print shooting info on the negatives, like the Pentax 645 cameras. I might look into that.
Two bodies are better than one
Another reason to think about carrying two film bodies is, of course, the film speed limitation. This is standard knowledge for those that grew up on film. I did not, and I am learning this all over again. I can’t simply use my Mamiya during the day with Portra 160 or Cinestill 50D and then bring it in the evening and expect to be able to shoot everything like I would on a digital camera with flexible ISO settings. Not only that, but I would need to shoot through my film before it gets dark, and switch to something with higher ISO, or take a second body with higher ISO film for situations with dim lighting.
When I get things right, more or less, I can see the appeal of the outcome of the shooting with film. I described in my previous post about how I enjoy the difference in the process of shooting, but none of that matters if the output is mediocre. While I want to stay away from direct comparisons with digital, it is good to acknowledge that what comes out of a film camera is a different image. The difference between cars with an internal combustion engine and electric cars comes to mind as an analogy. Both look the same, both serve the same purpose, but the way they do it is entirely different.
Film versus digital
Below is a photo that I took with the Mamiya which I really like. I added a second photo that I took with the small Ricoh GR iiix. These cameras are incomparable, but it is good to see just how different the same scene is captured via chemicals vs a digital sensor. One is not better than the other, they are just…different. There is a place for both and people will choose what suits them best. I will use both, depending on mood, occasion, or both.
The colours and the ‘soft sharpness’ of the film image are immediately visible versus the crisp and detailed rendering of the digital file. The other obvious difference is the framing. I am starting to become familiar with the square format. I do still shift how I hold the camera from landscape to portrait at times, which of course makes no sense at all with a square frame, but I guess old habits are very sticky.
Learning curveball
I am enjoying the learning curve. The margins for error are much tighter in film photography than in modern digital cameras, and I enjoy this limitation. I think it helps me understand the basics better. The delayed feedback cycle makes it a bit hard, but I can already tell over the last few months that I am ‘getting it’ more and more.
In my next article, I will discuss my experience with the post process of film photography. I don’t think I will ever develop my own negatives, but this is the only part of the workflow I want to outsource. Letting your negatives be scanned by a film lab is perfectly fine, but I enjoy having a bit more control. I tried DSLR scanning with a light-bed and scanning with a scanning. Both were giving me giant headaches, though, and I will explain why in my next post… Meanwhile, here are a few more shots from the Mamiya.
Read more from Erwin Hartenberg
Want to contribute an article to Macfilos? It’s easy. Just click the “Write for Us” button. We’ll help with the writing and guide you through the process.
I find new comment organization unnatural by the way but I am getting long in the tooth and would not feel comfortable using my iphone 14 pro max for serious photography or almost any photography so I guess I am over the hill.
The new comment organisation (newest at the top) is open for discussion. I can see the disadvantages and that is probably why newest last is the default WordPress option. We tried this a few years ago but eventually changed back. Comments appreciated.
I find it easier to follow a discussion when printed in chronological order, which seems to me to be newest comments below.
The big improvement we have made is to move the comments box to the top of the section, so that it comes immediately below the article. And we have shuffled off the social icons which took up space between article and comments. I don’t think anyone will miss them. With the comments box at the bottom the the section (the WordPress default) it was sometimes difficult for readers to find out how to comment, especially if there are many comments. So I think that is something that will stay. But I tend to agree with you, Kevin, that latest at the bottom probably makes more sense. It also makes threaded comments more understandable. We will revisit this one.
I’m also one who prefers most recent comments last. For example, what happens when someone replies to a comment but doesn’t use the “Reply” option? Wouldn’t that then break the comment sequence?
I always lusted over the Mamiya 6 and 7. It was the wrong timeframe of my life. It was a perfect camera at the time. The modern equivalent for me is the Hasselblad X1d/2d.
Thanks for this very nice article.
It brought back memories of my Mamiya 6, bought secondhand in 2001 and used with pleasure for a decade until I finally switched to digital (an Epson RD1- the most film-like digital camera I could find!). If I had to return to film I’d seek out a Mamiya 6. It was by some distance the most impressive and best-handling film camera I ever had. The viewfinder is big and clear, and as Erwin notes, for a large camera the Mamiya 6 feels pretty compact and easy to pack away and carry.
Much as I’ve sometimes wished for a digital Mamiya 6, I know the cost would be insane. I too have a GRIIIx and it has to be admitted that the Ricoh surpasses the output from film in many ways. There is a look to 6×6 film images from the Mamiya that can’t be reproduced in digital, but the fact is that digital is superior in so many ways that there is no going back.
Pound for pound, there is a clear winner in digital, I agree. This may also be a phase on my side, but I do enjoy the process of discovering and (trying) to master shooting on film with it’s own nuances and quirks!
” (an Epson RD1- the most film-like digital camera I could find!)”.
With that comment, I had to look it up. I have always considered the Nikon Df the most film-like digital camera. In fact, just last Christmas I visited my brother, who lives on Daufuskie Island, apparently never to leave it again. He has a Nikon D600, but had never seen a Df. He kept saying “that sure looks like a film camera!”.
Anyway, the RD-1 has it over the Df (in film-camera style) with that functional wind lever that cocks the shutter. It obviously extends battery life. But with1400 shots per charge on the Df, I am not complaining.
Too bad Epson never saw fit to update it with a higher-res FF sensor.
Erwin, a great article. I am intending, but have not yet, started shooting film again.
My experience was the opposite of yours, having shot 35mm for 46 years, then switched to digital for the last 9 years.
My first foray into digital was via Fujifilm mirrorless. Although the Fujis have traditional controls, for some reason I found myself usually shooting in full auto mode.
Then two years ago I purchased a Nikon Df, and began to use old manual focus AiS lenses. Wow, what a difference! I find myself shooting like I did in the film days, only not quite as miserly with the number of shots.
Ah… the Df… one of my favorite cameras of all time. I still want to buy one again. Together with the M10, there isn’t any other digital camera that has given me so much ‘connection’ as the Df.
Well presented! It is nice to see film cameras in action, especially medium format!
Thanks Bill! I am currently shooting on vacation on the American South West and will do another post on how the colors in this part the world seems to really enjoy being captured on film… stay tuned.