Sweetlou42
Allowing Ads
Mamiya 7ii !
-
Welcome to Photrio!Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.Click here to sign up
Advice on buying my first medium format film camera
-
A
- Thread starter logan2z
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
Sold SOLD! RW Vacuum Fidelity Elite 4x5 (5 units) & 8x10 (4 units) Film Holders
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale Cable Release Adapters for Leica, Nikon, Yashica, Rollei
- Started by Jon Shiu
-
Free Stoesser Pin Registration Punch
- Started by Roger Thoms
-
Want to Buy 4 x 5 Back for Agfa Ansco Universal View Camera
- Started by sharpnikkor
Forum statistics
Theo Sulphate
Allowing Ads
Very good summary.
We are lucky to have such variety in medium format today at a fraction of the original cost of these systems.
Vaughn
Allowing Ads
I like the square and for a light camera, my Rolliecord is wonderful -- a possibility -- buy one in working condition and have Dan Daniel go thru it for and get it up to 100% (he did mine for me). My Rolleicord is an older model (1953...a year older than me) and as long as I remember to wind the film right after each shot no problem (no double-exposure protection - which just means double and triple exposures are easy to do...even on purpose).
nakol
Allowing Ads
If you are going to take primarily landscapes and want compact size, you should also consider Hasselblad SWC
rayonline_nz
Allowing Ads
Look for a steal great deal and treat as a rental expense and try it out. You won't really know until you do. Trying at the shop might not be sufficient either. If you get a great deal you might be able to sell it for more than you bought it.
If 645 suits better well then you need a 645 back on the hassie and a mask for the viewfinder? I guess you can crop but the framing would be less precise? You might find that the boxy style isn't for you afterwards and you might prefer rangefinder or a SLR style. You won't know until you try. Or you might find you simply adapt to the 6x6 format.
If 645 suits better well then you need a 645 back on the hassie and a mask for the viewfinder? I guess you can crop but the framing would be less precise? You might find that the boxy style isn't for you afterwards and you might prefer rangefinder or a SLR style. You won't know until you try. Or you might find you simply adapt to the 6x6 format.
jerrybro
Allowing Ads
MF is the photographic equivalent of a gate way drug. I started with an old Rolleicord. I was immediately hooked upon seeing the first prints. As I got used to the square format and composing a reversed image, I also jumped in to doing my own processing. This eventually led me into 4x5. All of this helped me to rationalize building a Hasselblad 500CM system.
Ste_S
Allowing Ads
I have a Mamiya 645 and I certainly notice the difference to 35mm. I can shoot trad emulsions like HP5 and Tri-X in 6x4.5 and still have the results sharper, and with more detail, than t-grain emulsions shot in 35mm.
Your budget will also be a factor. I went with the Mamiya 645 as I can get a body with wide, standard and tele lenses for a fraction of the price of other systems.
If you want examples of 6x4.5 work Salgado shot it (with a Pentax 645) before moving to digital.
ME Super
Allowing Ads
I wanted square, for not a lot of dough, but not a toy/box camera. OK, my first medium format camera was a Herbert George brand Imperial Debonair. One shutter speed, one aperture, 6x6. And it needed 620 film. I've since upgraded (and believe me, this was an upgrade) from that to a Super Ricohflex. The Super Ricohflex I have has aperture settings ranging from f/3.5 to f/16, and shutter speeds ranging from 1/10 to 1/200 second, plus B. I've gotten some nice indoor photos on Portra 800 shot at 1600 and developed normally. It also handles Ektar 100 quite nicely, as well as HP5+.
The advantage to square is you can crop it either way; plus, I remember my parents shooting on their Kodak Instamatic, which took square pictures on 126 film. So it's a bit of a nostalgia trip for me, to have pictures printed that are square!
The advantage to square is you can crop it either way; plus, I remember my parents shooting on their Kodak Instamatic, which took square pictures on 126 film. So it's a bit of a nostalgia trip for me, to have pictures printed that are square!
logan2z
Allowing Ads
Vaughn
Allowing Ads
I started with MF, so I was doomed from the beginning...4x5 to 5x7 to 8x10 and 11x14...That's what I'm afraid of
Grim Tuesday
Allowing Ads
I have tried tons of medium format cameras. Here's my progression:
Yashica Mat LM - Fell in love with MF because of it, but felt lens was a little soft. Pretty sure it was a triplet from counting reflections, even though it was marked a Yashinon. My favorite lens of all the Yashicas.
Yashica LM - Got it for no reason other than it was cheap, shot a roll with it, liked it but ended up selling it.
Yashica D - Got it to resell, but tried it out for a month or so. Was disappointed with the Yashinon lens.
Koni Omega 200 - Decided to build up the cheapest system camera I could. Shot my first two rolls with it loaded backwards (backing paper out), then the third one with the line lined up to the wrong place because I followed the wrong manual on Butkus. Then found out the rangefinder was not calibrated properly for the fourth roll. And even after that I wasn't sure if I got it right or not because I was never very happy with the sharpness of anything. Ended up selling it and swearing off rangefinders. This is such a weird camera because it's a rangefinder but incredibly heavy. Some say it has superb lenses, I never saw evidence of that but it may have been rangefinder issues for me.
Hasselblad 500c - Found an old timer selling his 500EL with a back and WLF for $100 on Craigslist. Got it, sold the 500EL body and got a 500C body and a chrome 80mm lens. Got lots of light leaks in my first rolls, and the lens kept firing on a delay. Returned the lens and got an 80CF. I thought it was good, but not astoundingly good.
Minolta Autocord - Got this to have a lightweight companion to the Hasselblad with a nice lens. Loved this camera, wish I didn't sell it but it was going to need repairs and I found a guy locally willing to pay me full price for it with that knowledge.
Rolleiflex 3.5e Planar - Got this one to replace the Autocord, and it has turned out to be either the deal of the century or an expensive boondoggle, to be determined. I paid $300 for it(!) and it had some slight issues, so I sent it to Mark Hansen who ended up concluding the issues were actually intractable and the camera was essentially totaled when I got it but glued together. Westborn Camera on eBay is on my shit list for this reason. But, Mark glued it back together and only charged me $50 for all his time and somehow, six months later, the camera still works fine even though he said he wouldn't warranty it past a week. So three cheers for Mark!
In the meanwhile, I got a Rolleicord III. This is actually my favorite TLR of all of them. It is simple, extremely light weight and has an extraordinary lens (better than the Autocord or anything from Yashica)
I then built up my Hasselblad system with more lenses and found out what all the hype was about. I especially would recommend getting a 60mm and 150mm lens to a newcomer and skipping the 80. That was when I started to see a real advantage over a fixed lens TLR.
I have also spent some time with the Mamiya C330 which, if you can find a good deal is in my opinion the best value medium format camera right now. It has several advantages over the Hasselblad which are: No mirror slap, close focus, brighter screen and cheaper lenses. And shares several advantages of the Hasselblad over rangefinders and MF cameras, which is to say it gives you a picture on ground glass and interchangeable lenses. The only thing you don't get is changeable backs. You could get an entire system with a c220/c330 with a 65mm, 80mm, and 180mm for like $400. The same thing with a Hasselblad would cost you $2000 and the quality difference is maybe 20% different? If that? I get kind annoyed using the terrible coarse fresnel screen in my 500c 'blad over the really superb fine and bright focusing screen in my C330. I don't think I'm going to sell my 'blad kit but I might end up building my Mamiya TLR one a bit more and moving over there just because everything is a little bit less precious if god forbid you drop it or it gets stolen.
Yashica Mat LM - Fell in love with MF because of it, but felt lens was a little soft. Pretty sure it was a triplet from counting reflections, even though it was marked a Yashinon. My favorite lens of all the Yashicas.
Yashica LM - Got it for no reason other than it was cheap, shot a roll with it, liked it but ended up selling it.
Yashica D - Got it to resell, but tried it out for a month or so. Was disappointed with the Yashinon lens.
Koni Omega 200 - Decided to build up the cheapest system camera I could. Shot my first two rolls with it loaded backwards (backing paper out), then the third one with the line lined up to the wrong place because I followed the wrong manual on Butkus. Then found out the rangefinder was not calibrated properly for the fourth roll. And even after that I wasn't sure if I got it right or not because I was never very happy with the sharpness of anything. Ended up selling it and swearing off rangefinders. This is such a weird camera because it's a rangefinder but incredibly heavy. Some say it has superb lenses, I never saw evidence of that but it may have been rangefinder issues for me.
Hasselblad 500c - Found an old timer selling his 500EL with a back and WLF for $100 on Craigslist. Got it, sold the 500EL body and got a 500C body and a chrome 80mm lens. Got lots of light leaks in my first rolls, and the lens kept firing on a delay. Returned the lens and got an 80CF. I thought it was good, but not astoundingly good.
Minolta Autocord - Got this to have a lightweight companion to the Hasselblad with a nice lens. Loved this camera, wish I didn't sell it but it was going to need repairs and I found a guy locally willing to pay me full price for it with that knowledge.
Rolleiflex 3.5e Planar - Got this one to replace the Autocord, and it has turned out to be either the deal of the century or an expensive boondoggle, to be determined. I paid $300 for it(!) and it had some slight issues, so I sent it to Mark Hansen who ended up concluding the issues were actually intractable and the camera was essentially totaled when I got it but glued together. Westborn Camera on eBay is on my shit list for this reason. But, Mark glued it back together and only charged me $50 for all his time and somehow, six months later, the camera still works fine even though he said he wouldn't warranty it past a week. So three cheers for Mark!
In the meanwhile, I got a Rolleicord III. This is actually my favorite TLR of all of them. It is simple, extremely light weight and has an extraordinary lens (better than the Autocord or anything from Yashica)
I then built up my Hasselblad system with more lenses and found out what all the hype was about. I especially would recommend getting a 60mm and 150mm lens to a newcomer and skipping the 80. That was when I started to see a real advantage over a fixed lens TLR.
I have also spent some time with the Mamiya C330 which, if you can find a good deal is in my opinion the best value medium format camera right now. It has several advantages over the Hasselblad which are: No mirror slap, close focus, brighter screen and cheaper lenses. And shares several advantages of the Hasselblad over rangefinders and MF cameras, which is to say it gives you a picture on ground glass and interchangeable lenses. The only thing you don't get is changeable backs. You could get an entire system with a c220/c330 with a 65mm, 80mm, and 180mm for like $400. The same thing with a Hasselblad would cost you $2000 and the quality difference is maybe 20% different? If that? I get kind annoyed using the terrible coarse fresnel screen in my 500c 'blad over the really superb fine and bright focusing screen in my C330. I don't think I'm going to sell my 'blad kit but I might end up building my Mamiya TLR one a bit more and moving over there just because everything is a little bit less precious if god forbid you drop it or it gets stolen.
That's what I'm afraid of
Don't worry, you won't be in REAL trouble till you're haggling with your local window installer over the price of oversized glass sheets to use in your newly made camera/mobile darkroom cube van...
Unless you like tintypes, then you might be having the conversation with your local sheet metal dealer, and arguing about tiny pinprick dents...
Roll_Tide
Allowing Ads
I own a Koni Omega Rapid 6x7 and recently purchased a Fuji GA645Zi. I wanted something to walk around with; the Fuji fits the bill. It weighs less than my Nikon D500 with my 17-50 lens on it and I get to shoot medium format. I know the Fuji has issues with the strip disconnecting but I also read that if you don't lay the back all the way open it takes care of that. Mine is 20 years old and all the LCD screens light up. I like it so much I am already thinking in terms of getting a 2nd body.
logan2z
Allowing Ads
Thanks to everyone for the informative replies, much appreciated.
I'm leaning towards a Mamiya 645 as my first MF camera but one thing is giving me pause - although I will use this primarily as a landscape camera I do find myself shooting landscapes in portrait orientation fairly regularly.
I have to assume that shooting in portrait orientation with a WLF is going to be pretty impractical, especially handheld. Is it safe to assume that a prism finder will simplify this? It seems there are AE prism finders available for the camera but I prefer a fully-manual camera with no battery requirements. I searched around a bit but didn't see anything about a non-metered prism finder but perhaps I missed it.
I guess that portrait vs. landscape is one issue that I wouldn't have if I went for a 6x6...
I'm leaning towards a Mamiya 645 as my first MF camera but one thing is giving me pause - although I will use this primarily as a landscape camera I do find myself shooting landscapes in portrait orientation fairly regularly.
I have to assume that shooting in portrait orientation with a WLF is going to be pretty impractical, especially handheld. Is it safe to assume that a prism finder will simplify this? It seems there are AE prism finders available for the camera but I prefer a fully-manual camera with no battery requirements. I searched around a bit but didn't see anything about a non-metered prism finder but perhaps I missed it.
I guess that portrait vs. landscape is one issue that I wouldn't have if I went for a 6x6...
LiamG
Allowing Ads
Just be aware that, to my knowledge, all versions of the Mamiya 645 use an electronically timed shutter and require a battery to operate, regardless of the finder installed.
Grim Tuesday
Allowing Ads
You really can't go wrong with any of the 645 SLRs, but unless price is a major concern I would steer you towards a Bronica SQ instead. I think carrying around a whole medium format SLR just up shoot 645 is a waste -- it's not that much different from 35mm but you pay all the costs associated with medium format. With a 6x6 camera, the negative area starts to pay dividends and you open up composing for the square which is nothing if not fun and an interesting diversion from composing for the rectangle. And of course you can crop as you wish. This is not to say I don't like 645 as a format -- I think it's perfect for the Fuji rangefinders. But when you're lugging around a medium format SLR you deserve top image quality.
logan2z
Allowing Ads
Thanks for the info. Definitely showing my ignorance here...
spijker
Allowing Ads
That's a myth as others in this thread have confirmed.
The batteries last a very long time and they are small. Easy to keep a spare in the bag. There is also a non-metered prism finder for the Mamiya 645 series if you prefer that.
MattKing
Moderator
The Mamiya 645 cameras can basically be divided into two types.
The earlier models, and the 645 Super, Pro, Pro-Tl and the 645e.
The later models - with the exception of the 645e - offer the ability to change the film backs mid-roll. I consider that really important!
All the Mamiya 645 cameras use and require the same 6 volt battery - used to be known as the PX-28.
You need an eye level finder to be able to easily shoot in portrait orientation. There is one built into the 645e, but all the rest of the models require them as an accessory.
There are a number of different eye-level finders made for the different models, including non-metered ones. Roughly speaking, the earlier generation of cameras can all use all the earlier generation of finders, while the later generation (Super and later, but not the 645e) can all use all the later generation of finders.
The later generation of eye level finders come in two general types - penta-prism finders which are brighter and show the corners better, but are heavier and more expensive - and penta-mirror finders which are less bright and aren't quite as good in the corners, but are lighter, cheaper, and include an adjustable diopter.
The finder built into the 645e is a penta-mirror finder. The other penta-mirror finders were originally sold as part of a camera package, rather than as a separate accessory, so there aren't a lot of them around.
If you don't need the metering, one good option is to buy a used metering finder where the meter isn't working.
The earlier models, and the 645 Super, Pro, Pro-Tl and the 645e.
The later models - with the exception of the 645e - offer the ability to change the film backs mid-roll. I consider that really important!
All the Mamiya 645 cameras use and require the same 6 volt battery - used to be known as the PX-28.
You need an eye level finder to be able to easily shoot in portrait orientation. There is one built into the 645e, but all the rest of the models require them as an accessory.
There are a number of different eye-level finders made for the different models, including non-metered ones. Roughly speaking, the earlier generation of cameras can all use all the earlier generation of finders, while the later generation (Super and later, but not the 645e) can all use all the later generation of finders.
The later generation of eye level finders come in two general types - penta-prism finders which are brighter and show the corners better, but are heavier and more expensive - and penta-mirror finders which are less bright and aren't quite as good in the corners, but are lighter, cheaper, and include an adjustable diopter.
The finder built into the 645e is a penta-mirror finder. The other penta-mirror finders were originally sold as part of a camera package, rather than as a separate accessory, so there aren't a lot of them around.
If you don't need the metering, one good option is to buy a used metering finder where the meter isn't working.
Alan Gales
Allowing Ads
spijker
Allowing Ads
Lots of info on the various Mamiya & Bronica camera's here: http://ianbfoto.com/downloads.php#
Personally I would advise going for a format larger than 645 in order to really appreciate what MF is capable of. I own a 501CM as well as a Pentax 6x7 system, and both are capable of exceptionally high quality results. I use my 501CM far more though for various reasons: the camera is just so nice to handle and use, it does not rely on batteries, it has removable magazines, and last but not least because I have a taste for Zeiss glass. I do not shoot 645 with it, but that option is certainly there too.
Like you I came from shooting 2:3 and was initially a bit skeptical of the square format, which meant my initial foray into MF was via a 6x7 format camera. However you simply adapt and compose for the format you are shooting (or at least I do). I use my 35mm camera seldom now, and when I do go back to it I actually find the 2:3 format very wide, and there is an awkward period of re-adjustment. I certainly don't miss the wide angle distortion of the smaller format.
Like you I came from shooting 2:3 and was initially a bit skeptical of the square format, which meant my initial foray into MF was via a 6x7 format camera. However you simply adapt and compose for the format you are shooting (or at least I do). I use my 35mm camera seldom now, and when I do go back to it I actually find the 2:3 format very wide, and there is an awkward period of re-adjustment. I certainly don't miss the wide angle distortion of the smaller format.
An interesting overview - Source Book Medium Format : https://www.bhphotovideo.com/FrameW.../SourceBookProPhoto/Section01MediumFormat.pdf
Theo Sulphate
Allowing Ads
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |