Mamiya 6 Rangefinder VS. Canon 40D

[erotavlas]

I currently own a Mamiya 6 rangefinder with 75mm lens. I've had it since 2003 and it has served me well. I've captured some nice photos with it while travelling. The lens is amazing. I also have a Canon point and shoot A720IS that I use a lot now (It has become my main camera since it has manual controls and it actually takes great photos and with the CHDK hack I use all these extra cool features like raw, motion detection, long exposures, etc)

My mamiya on the other hand has been left in the closet for over 2 years now (since I bought the Canon point and shoot). In fact it still has a roll of film in it that is half exposed. I just haven't had any inclination to finish it off. Plus its slide film and few labs are processing it these days. Although they still do negative.

So I was wondering if I should resurrect the Mamiya OR get a DSLR (theres a used canon 40D body on sale I was considering) - for $399. Not sure how much a lens would cost that would match the Mamiya lens. Probably at least $800?

I have a photo scanner that I use to scan my film myself so making the film exposures digital is not a problem, just time consuming.

Anyway I guess my main question is if the cost of buying the Canon 40D system is worth it in comparison to the Mamyia 6 system that I already own. (I'm not selling the Mamiya)

I'm not a professional photographer and it is a hobby for me. But I still like to have quality results.

Not looking for an exact answer, more of a discussion since there are a lot of things to consider. I was hoping someone might enighten me to some aspect I haven't considered yet.

Thanks

 

[Jakefreese]

I do not know about the Mamiya, but I have been very happy with my 40D low light high ISO is not the greatest, that has been my only complaint.

 

[djacobox372]

The 40d will never be able to match the resolution of the mamiya 6, and you'll need lenses about 1.5 stops faster to achieve as narrow dof. However digital is a lot more convenient, and the best camera is the one you actually use.

 

[erotavlas]

The 40d will never be able to match the resolution of the mamiya 6, and you'll need lenses about 1.5 stops faster to achieve as narrow dof. However digital is a lot more convenient, and the best camera is the one you actually use.

Ok, thanks. I guess convenience of digital outweighs most other factors for me, even if the Mamiya is better with repect to lens and resolution just the fact its in my closet unused kind of answers my question. Plus the Canon DSLR is useful for other types of photography like astrophotography which is extremely difficult with film.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

First things first:

Pros of the Mamiya:
Few DSLR's will be able to reach the resolution the Mamiya will be able to give you. (i've scanned 80MP out of a 645 neg)
Tons of places process transparency film. Off the top of my head, I can think of 4 places in Portland that do E-6 and actual B&W in house, (so that argument is invalid for anyone who lives in a big city, and it can be mailed out otherwise).
The Mamiya makes tangible photographs, not 1's and 0's. (when you grow old, will your children pass down hard drives?)
Depending on film, you'll have enormous exposure latitude compared to anything digital

Pros of Digital:
Digital is convenient (in most situations)
Digital is cheap (unless you're shooting single digit Canons or Nikons)
Digital is better for night photography (to an extent)


I just shot a wedding yesterday completely analog for the first time. I shot it on 35mm with my two F100's. I shot the whole thing on a combination of Kodak BW400CN, and Portra 400. I got the film processed today, and it's done. Ready to be delivered. The pictures look so beautiful and organic, I can't imagine shooting weddings digitally anymore unless it's just really too damn dark inside. This was just too liberating of an experience.