Advice on buying my first medium format film camera

[logan2z]

Mine is a 500 C/M.

I'm wondering if the 501CM is worth the premium. Seems like the only real differences are the gliding mirror (which is only useful for long lenses that I may never use) and the Acute Matte screen that I can add later.

 

[logan2z]

I realize I'm kind of rambling a bit here but thought that perhaps others familiar with these cameras could weigh in on the pros/cons and help steer me in the right direction.

Why not 'think' of a 4x5 camera and then 'invest' in a roll film back that will 'fit' that model of large format camera...

Ken[/QUOTE]
I'd prefer something more compact than a 4x5. I'm used to walking around with a fairly small 35mm camera.

 

[anthonym3]

Mamiya C-330... outstanding system/lenses... relatively cheap.

but heavy as an anchor

 

[Kodachromeguy]

I'm wondering if the 501CM is worth the premium. Seems like the only real differences are the gliding mirror (which is only useful for long lenses that I may never use) and the Acute Matte screen that I can add later.

Logan, think this through. A 501CM may be ready to use as is. An older 500 C/M, assume $300 for cleaning and overhaul, let alone your time and aggravation. Acute matte screen, they are $300 now. You are already up to $600. If you are ready for a Hasselblad, go high end and don't try to cheap out ( unless you can find one from a source you absolutely trust).

 

[logan2z]

Logan, think this through. A 501CM may be ready to use as is. An older 500 C/M, assume $300 for cleaning and overhaul, let alone your time and aggravation. Acute matte screen, they are $300 now. You are already up to $600. If you are ready for a Hasselblad, go high end and don't try to cheap out ( unless you can find one from a source you absolutely trust).

Good points, I'm not typically the type to cheap out, just ask my wife

 

[tomkatf]

but heavy as an anchor

Practically the same as a Hasselblad 500 series. Both with 80mm lens and no prism...
1.7 vs 1.55 kg...

 

[Ariston]

Someone already said it (maybe on this thread, but I couldn't find it): The great thing about medium format film cameras right now is that, for the most part, you can buy any camera to try. And if you don't like it after awhile, you can sell it, for the same price or more, and get all your money back.

Just go with your gut.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Logan, think this through. A 501CM may be ready to use as is. An older 500 C/M, assume $300 for cleaning and overhaul, let alone your time and aggravation. Acute matte screen, they are $300 now. You are already up to $600. If you are ready for a Hasselblad, go high end and don't try to cheap out ( unless you can find one from a source you absolutely trust).

I'm not saying everyone will be as lucky as me, but I bought my Hasselblad 500C from Roberts Camera (Used Photo Pro) for $150 about a year ago and it's been working great ever since. I think it would be smart to get something from somewhere that offers a 6 month warranty (Keh, Used Photo Pro, National Camera Exchange). Alternatively, there's a 500CM up for sale at Igor's Camera Exchange for $300 right now including the finder which is a screaming deal. 80mm lenses can be had for $250 (if you're willing to go chrome) or $400 for a decent condition CF. Slap a $50 A24 back on there and you're in business for $600. Though I would still counsel anyone to get a 60 instead of an 80. The only thing is if you get a Hasselblad you may end up like me and break open the piggy bank for a 50mm FLE, a 60mm, a 150mm, a few backs, a new screen some prisms and so on and so forth until you've spent thousands.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

Someone already said it (maybe on this thread, but I couldn't find it): The great thing about medium format film cameras right now is that, for the most part, you can buy any camera to try. And if you don't like it after awhile, you can sell it, for the same price or more, and get all your money back.

Just go with your gut.

That is an excellent point. Millions (hundreds of millions) of 35mm cameras were made in the 20th century. Millions are still floating around in cabinets and homes. But medium format cameras had a more limited market, and none are being produced today (with the exception of a couple of super high price specialty items). And many may have been worn out by professionals. So there is a restricted stock left. Buy one, try it, and sell it you do not like it.

 

[Sirius Glass]

If you want horizontal landscapes which may or may not require cropping consider 6x9 folders. Many are equipped with excellent lenses albeit possibly un coated however you get that look and glow that many modern lenses cannot achieve,think ANSEL ADAMS who used many formats not just 4x5 and 8x10. and who produced beautiful images with all formats.

Towards the end of Ansel Adams life, he used Hasselblads. Full moon over Half Dome was taken with a Hasselblad.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I'm wondering if the 501CM is worth the premium. Seems like the only real differences are the gliding mirror (which is only useful for long lenses that I may never use) and the Acute Matte screen that I can add later.

The gliding mirror is not that important. I have a 503 CX which does not have the gliding mirror and I do not even notice the line at the top of the view finder. I have and use the 150mm, 250mm and 500mm lenses. The line is only in the view finder and not on the negative nor slide.

 

[Ste_S]

I'd prefer something more compact than a 4x5. I'm used to walking around with a fairly small 35mm camera.

Just to throw something else into the mix if you're considering square and shoot rangefinders - Mamiya 6 if you can live with the limited (three) lens selection.
Fuji also do a bunch medium format rangefinders in varying ratios.

 

[norm123]

I'm used to Fuji GW690 and GSW690. You will love it if you decide to get one of them or both. I'm a landscape guy and I love them. For the II and III version, I don't like the hood system who mask speed and aperture but the negative/positive are amazing.

 

[logan2z]

I'm used to Fuji GW690 and GSW690. You will love it if you decide to get one of them or both. I'm a landscape guy and I love them. For the II and III version, I don't like the hood system who mask speed and aperture but the negative/positive are amazing.

Do you typically shoot landscapes handheld with the Fuji or do you always use a tripod?

 

[Sirius Glass]

I shoot landscapes with my Hasselblad handheld. Most of the time I don't need no stinkin' tripod.

 

[logan2z]

I shoot landscapes with my Hasselblad handheld. Most of the time I don't need no stinkin' tripod.

Glad to hear it. I don't relish dragging a tripod around, but forum opinion seems to be that a tripod is a necessity for shooting landscapes with a MF camera.

 

[Pieter12]

Shooting with a tripod will greatly increase the sharpness of your photos unless you're at a high shutter speed. That expensive lens is going to waste otherwise.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Glad to hear it. I don't relish dragging a tripod around, but forum opinion seems to be that a tripod is a necessity for shooting landscapes with a MF camera.

No, only is one wants to use slow or very slow films or carries around groin breakers like the RB 67.

 

[logan2z]

Shooting with a tripod will greatly increase the sharpness of your photos unless you're at a high shutter speed. That expensive lens is going to waste otherwise.

Understood. I typically don't use a shutter speed much less than 250ms. California, lots of sunlight

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I'm used to Fuji GW690 and GSW690. You will love it if you decide to get one of them or both. I'm a landscape guy and I love them. For the II and III version, I don't like the hood system who mask speed and aperture but the negative/positive are amazing.

I don't understand. Could you clarify your post?

 

[Kodachromeguy]

Do you typically shoot landscapes handheld with the Fuji or do you always use a tripod?

I cannot tell where some of the other response are going with this topic. Clearly your use of tripod depends on shutter speed. Medium or high speed film in bright light, and you can probably hand-hold. If you are photographing in poor light (such as dusk), you may need a tripod even with a 400 film like Tri-X. Consider that you lose 1 or more stops with filters. With medium speed film (ISO 100) or slower, you may need a tripod in all conditions. With my Fuji GW690II, I sometimes hand-hold with Tri-X, but I often use a tripod so that I can stop the lens down to f/16 or f/22. With Panatomic-X (EI=20), I always use a tripod.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I use Tri-X 400 at 400 which gives a large of range of f/stops and shutter speeds even with filters. I use replenished XTOL or Pyrocat HD in Glycol for fine grain and good tonality. I only use a tripod when the shutter speed gets too low for the depth of field I want.

 

[logan2z]

250ms is 1/4 of a second, or "4" on the shutter speed dial. If you meant "250" (1/250), that's just 4 msec.

Yes, I meant 1/250s. Brain cramp.

 

[MattKing]

A tripod always improves the result.
But when the light is bright, you can get good results hand-held.
So I do both.