120 camera that handles like a 35mm

[Someonenameddavid]

Has to be the later model Koni-Omega rapids... 100 or 200...
built like the proverbial tank with a nice pump-action wind-on... it will make you feel like taking photographs

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

The CZJ lenses for the Pentacon 6 are quite good, but the film transport is unreliable.

 

[Anscojohn]

Pentax 6x7 is merely a Spotmatic writ large. I loved the feel of it until arthritis started getting to me and making it "heavier." I still look at it lovingly, but tend to use a Ukrainian "Hasselbladski" when I want an slr mf.

 

[2F/2F]

When I want that, I use my Mamiya M645 or M645 1000S bodies with 220 film (only Tri-X is available in 220 for black and white film) and a motor drive. I used to use a metered prism that came with the kit, but have sold it in order to get a plain prism instead. I didn't like that the metering information got in the way of the composition in the viewfinder. This is very 35-esque as long as you have the motor drive. If you use only the Left Hand Grip, it will seem backwards from a 35mm SLR. Also of note is that your hand-holdable speeds are higher due to mirror shake.

I am sure Pentax, Bronica, Contax, etc. are just as good, if not better.

 

[white.elephant]

I have a wonderful Yashica Mat 124G that gets seldom use.I find the twin lens format a bit awkward for my style of photography.
Can someone recommend a single lens (God,not a Holga)medium format camera that would be cost effective (real inexpensive) and have pretty good optics.

Thanks

I picked up a 'hardly-used' Mamiya 645e used on e*** with three lenses for very cheap indeed. Now, I wouldn't say it 'handles' as well as an SLR, it's kinda clunky, but you use it just like an SLR and so your instincts are spot on.

If you like rangefinders, the Mamiya 7II handles very nicely, but I wouldn't describe it as cheap. I have that one in my radar at the moment.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Handles like a 35mm slr: Hasselblad CX, CXi, CW, C/M with a 45 degree prism and an 80mm CF lens. This is easy to handle but will cost around $1500US or 1000 euros.

 

[Larry Bullis]

There have been comments that one problem with the RF 120 cameras is that they are hard to focus. You can make a dof scale such as used to be found on REAL cameras (you know, those heavy 35's from the '70s) - and usually just glue it on to the mount. Then you have the miracle of zone focusing and focus is no longer an issue, or not much of one.

I'm using a graflex xlrf, but it isn't quite like a 35mm. I think the best for me would be the Fuji RF's, which are wonderful -- at least friends swear by them and I like the form (they are a lot like Leica RFs, which I use by preference). Trouble with all of this is the expense; they are NOT inexpensive. I think that the Pentax 6x7's have taken a beating on price though following the digital Sack of Rome, as have so many film cameras, so might now be more affordable. The optics are super, but as mentioned, the weight is a bit much. The suggestion of old folders (Medalist, Super Ikonta, etc.) is a good one, but if you want to work fast, maybe not for you.

 

[Ross Chambers]

I don't know a lot about 35mm cameras, but if "handling" implies auto focus, auto exposure, zoom (limited) and motor drive, with quality comparable to some 5x7 cameras and probably better than the Yashica (which I like too) the Fuji GA 645 ZI is hard to beat.

Regards - Ross

 

[2F/2F]

Pentax 6x7 is exactly like a 35mm camera in every way except the size. Why bother with 645 negatives when you can do 6x7?

Because:

1. You can hand hold 645s at significantly slower shutter speeds given the same angle of view.
2. Across the board, 645s have a better variety of faster lenses. Faster shutter speeds, better hand holdability, and ability to shoot in lower light. F/2.8 long lenses is a huge plus of a 645 system.
3. Many 645 SLRs have interchangeable backs. Those 6x7 SLRs that have interchangeable backs are a good deal larger and heavier than 645s.
4. You get 1.5x more shots per roll (1.6x more with a Contax or Fuji).
5. 6x7 image quality is overkill for much work that lends itself to being shot hand held.
6. 645s are less awkward to handle. They are lighter, smaller, and much more discreet than a Mamiya Press, RB/RZ, or a Pentax 6x7, etc.
7. 645s are cheaper
8. 6x7 SLR cameras are all significantly larger and WAY heavier than the TLR that the OP already thinks is "awkward".
9. 645 cameras have an aspect ratio of 1.33:1, while 6x7 cameras have an aspect ratio of 1.25:1. (35mm is 1.5:1.) Many feel that the 1.33:1 is a more active aspect ratio than 1.25:1, and may find it more suited to capturing things in motion; a much more likely subject matter when shooting hand held.
10. There are many leaf shutter lenses available for 645.
11. Focal plane shutter 645s generally have a higher flash synch speed than focal plane shutter 6x7s. You cannot likely get a sharp hand held daytime shot using flash with '30 as a maximum synch speed. '60 on the 645 is doable with 55mm and wider lenses, and not too hard with an 80mm (normal).
12. For a given angle of view, 645s give you more depth of field, which can be a huge benefit in hand held shooting.
13. 645s are significantly easier to focus, especially in low light.

Most of these points will apply to any comparison between a larger and a smaller format.

The main issues for me when shooting hand held would be camera shake and maximum apertures of lenses.

 

[keithwms]

I agree with all of 2F/2Fs points, I think. Respect to the 645 format, it is quite powerful! Let me suggest looking at the dantestella site.

[Aside: I think that too often we counsel people to go for the largest format they can physically bare, so that they can get the largest print with the least grain. Now why is that? We all know that 35mm prints can be effective at almost any reasonable enlargement... why place print size ahead of achievable content if we don't even know whether the advisee is going for professional contracts... I am just saying...]

One of the really big advantages of 645, as I see it, are the lens speeds. I have a 645 format 80/1.9 that is a lightweight little joy to use. Fastest thing I have in 6x7 format is 2.8... and that is actually unusually fast for 6x7, most 6x7 lenses are f/4 or so.

Bowzart, actually, I don't find the mamiya 120 RFs hard to focus at all. Whether focusing in the (big, bright!) VF or scale focusing. There is of course the issue that the patch is dead center when sometimes you'd like for it to be somewhere else in the frame, but these lenses aren't fast at all and so any minor error you make in scale focusing will probably not kill the shot.

Now, if you mean selective focusing is hard, then I agree for sure. By that I mean: if you want a foreground subject sharp and background blurred out, that is indeed harder to achieve with these 120 RFs. I use them primarily for shots for which I want back-to-front sharpness. And for that, scale focusing is very easy.

 

[Rolleijoe]

I have a wonderful Yashica Mat 124G that gets seldom use.I find the twin lens format a bit awkward for my style of photography.
Can someone recommend a single lens (God,not a Holga)medium format camera that would be cost effective (real inexpensive) and have pretty good optics.

Thanks

Although wanting a similar end result for other reasons than yourself, I went with the Mamiya M645Pro. It was less expensive than a Pentax, and I can use Zeiss glass with it.

It came with the speed grip, and AE prism, which together make it basically an overgrown 35mm. In fact, it was to replace 135 altogether that I made this purchase, and I've not been let down in the least.

Another reason I went with Mamiya over Pentax, was that the performance of Pentax MF lenses left me unimpressed. Having shot Mamiya for a year or so on Maui, I knew their performance 1st hand.

I purchased mine from KEH, and will be adding an ttl body next year to round things out.

Good luck with your choice.
Rolleijoe

 

[Larry Bullis]

Bowzart, actually, I don't find the mamiya 120 RFs hard to focus at all. ... And for that, scale focusing is very easy.

Well, I don't even have one, so I wouldn't know, although a friend recently acquired a Mamiya 6 and absolutely loves it. He shoots human activities, architectural subjects, and portraits; a generalist for sure. The camera sounds absolutely great to me. I probably ought to sell a bunch of stuff I don't use and get one.

Your way of working sounds very familiar to me. I spent a good chunk of my life shooting with 35mm working for a magazine that covered travel, garden, architecture - almost no images at all that didn't include human subjects within the context, so action was usually involved. This often required working rather quickly, because expressions are fleeting. Lots of film ran through the camera, so a good manual film transport was essential, as was a second body. I didn't, and still don't actually focus very often; it slows me down. Generally, I use the scale with the great dof brackets, unless I'm working fairly close up or in dim light - then, of course, I do focus so I know where my boundaries fall. I don't see how people cope in real life with the newer cameras that require focusing here, then there, so the camera can select the appropriate f/stop to include the entire range. NOT an improvement, like so many of the "advances" of recent years. Instead of technological miracles that do everything for us, why not just use that wonderful but so often overlooked piece of equipment -- the human brain?

If I were looking for a medium format camera I'd be trying for whatever comes closest to an enlarged Leica. The Mamiyas sound really great, from what I've heard (not having had one in hand), as do the Fuji RF designs.

 

[keithwms]

... why not just use that wonderful but so often overlooked piece of equipment -- the human brain?

OMG are you proposing that people think? Even before firing the shutter?

 

[Larry Bullis]

OMG are you proposing that people think? Even before firing the shutter?

Heaven Forbid!!

Automatic features are put there by an insidious conspiracy to reverse evolution.

Short circuiting the brain causes electrical damage, you know, like putting a big screwdriver across both terminals of a car battery.

 

[fatboy22]

Mike,

I have several medium format cameras that fit this bill. Most of them have been mentioned by members already. One that I have been using recently and has grown to be my favorite so far is the Norita 66. A very robust camera. This camera just feels solid in your hands like a Nikon F2 but a just a bit bigger. The cameras are getting harder to find but if you get a good one and have Ross Yerkes overhaul it in LA you will be very pleased. They do show up on Ebay quite a bit. I now have 3 bodys and have paid less than $200 for all of them with the 80mm lens included.
The Noritar lenses have great Bokeh! See my pictures in the Standard gallery.

Jamie

 

[gr82bart]

A Hasselblad 503CW with motor drive grip and prism handles very much like a 35mm SLR.

Regards, Art.

 

[ChrisPlatt]

Lots of suggestions, but everyone has missed the right answer: the Bronica RF645 is the medium format camera that handles most like a 35mm slr.

I agree wholeheartedly.

Chris

 

[frdrx]

Because:

1. You can hand hold 645s at significantly slower shutter speeds given the same angle of view.
2. Across the board, 645s have a better variety of faster lenses. Faster shutter speeds, better hand holdability, and ability to shoot in lower light. F/2.8 long lenses is a huge plus of a 645 system.
3. Many 645 SLRs have interchangeable backs. Those 6x7 SLRs that have interchangeable backs are a good deal larger and heavier than 645s.
4. You get 1.5x more shots per roll (1.6x more with a Contax or Fuji).
5. 6x7 image quality is overkill for much work that lends itself to being shot hand held.
6. 645s are less awkward to handle. They are lighter, smaller, and much more discreet than a Mamiya Press, RB/RZ, or a Pentax 6x7, etc.
7. 645s are cheaper
8. 6x7 SLR cameras are all significantly larger and WAY heavier than the TLR that the OP already thinks is "awkward".
9. 645 cameras have an aspect ratio of 1.33:1, while 6x7 cameras have an aspect ratio of 1.25:1. (35mm is 1.5:1.) Many feel that the 1.33:1 is a more active aspect ratio than 1.25:1, and may find it more suited to capturing things in motion; a much more likely subject matter when shooting hand held.
10. There are many leaf shutter lenses available for 645.
11. Focal plane shutter 645s generally have a higher flash synch speed than focal plane shutter 6x7s. You cannot likely get a sharp hand held daytime shot using flash with '30 as a maximum synch speed. '60 on the 645 is doable with 55mm and wider lenses, and not too hard with an 80mm (normal).
12. For a given angle of view, 645s give you more depth of field, which can be a huge benefit in hand held shooting.
13. 645s are significantly easier to focus, especially in low light.

Most of these points will apply to any comparison between a larger and a smaller format.

The main issues for me when shooting hand held would be camera shake and maximum apertures of lenses.

14. There's no practical and affordable way to project 6x7 slides.

 

[Richard Jepsen]

MF rangefinders have the smallest profile. My Bronica RF645 is similar in size to a Nikon F-100. The RF645's (3) lenses are smaller than a typical zoom. The RF645 has useful automated features without going over the top. It is a great camara.

 

[mtjade2007]

The only MF SLR that handles like a 35mm SLR is Pentax 67. Of course the latest Pentax 67II is the one that works exactly like a 35mm SLR. I use one. I set it to aperture priority AE and shoot with 220 rolls. I get 21 frames per roll. It works really exactly like my Contax RTS-II set to aperture priority Auto. Just crank the film, aim, focus and press the shutter button. Of course it is heavier. But it is actually a positive feature to be more stable on my hands. Despite speculations about mirror or shutter shake or vibration of this camera I don't get fuzzy images at all.