Deciding on medium format ...

[rayonline_nz]

Thanks again guys.

This is ideally my main MF rig. I don't want more than 1 rig for this hobby. Mamiya 7 is nice .. but it is expensive mainly and then it's a rangefinder not that it inhibits my photography but I prefer a more traditional slower method of MF experience than a 35mm rangefinder on steroids.

I do prefer to go larger than 645, so that's 6x7. But the 40mm lens cannot use Cokin P filters maybe I can use a step down adaptor ... maybe also I may not use that much filters with the WA.

I will have a look at the Pentax 67 with the WLF but that's on the heavier side right ... isn't it like 1.8kg from memory and the Bronica ETRSi is under 1kg (with the normal lens and a film back). Correction I meant under 1.3kg.

I also thought about partnering my main MF camera with a 6x9 Fuji, hahah. Won't use them both at the same time though. I think with my main MF rig I would still have my Nikon FM for walk about with a 35mm prime for some snaps walking about and street photography oveseas and use the MF camera for production (in mind) shots. Or other times the 6x9 and my Nikon FM.

Well I guess a few of you might why 4x5, haha, I think a few of you already mentioned 4x5 that you used yourself already. Just talking about this - dunno how I would have to load film in a hostel / hotel though, carry a changing tent or a larger changing bag. Is it safe to send sheet film overseas to develoop b/c the lab here is super expensive in NZ that is why with my 35mm I have been shipping to the USA for development. For 4x5 it should cost $12US per sheet man for E6. For b/w I guess I can do that myself with a make shift Patterton Tank (?).

Basing on 645 the Bronica seems superior on paper, it's the most (cost) effective option, I don't need AF and Bronica has enough lenses for myself.

 

[Soeren]

Soeren-

Looks like with the lighter WLF it could be just a bit heavier than the Mamiya, though probably still larger.

It is my experience the Pentax 6X7 is a lot heavier than the Mamiya 645 Pro but not that much larger. The distribution/dimensions are way different though. Take a Nikon F100 with vertical grip and put on the 85mm f/1,4 and you look at a camera/lens compo of roughly similar size to the P6X7. The way the Mamiya 645 Pro system is built makes it more comparable sizewise to the Hasselblad and Bronica systems. Those does not need prismfinders and motordrive under normal circumstances thus having an advantages in size and weight compared to both 6X7 and 645 systems. The big drawback for both 645system and the P67 system is they are a pain to shoot verticals with if you have only the waistlevelfinder.
Hmm maybe I should take both th P6x7 an the 645 Pro out for a day in the wild.
Best regards

 

[Jaf-Photo]

Well, I was in the same situation a year back and after a lot of research and some testing I went for Mamiya 645. The benefits were better durability, more accurate light metering, cheap lenses, interchangeability, size etc.

But if you consider a Pro system, then it's not much more money for an AFD. Then you get a modern body, which can still use the manual 645 lenses, versatile metering and excellent controls. Plus as I mentioned a very economical market in second hand digital backs.

If you want bigger negs to control grain, then the same can be accomplished with the right choice of film and developing technique. And of course you should develop yourself. It's vital for the final result. Shooting and developing are two sides of the same coin.

 

[dorff]

Well, I was in the same situation a year back and after a lot of research and some testing I went for Mamiya 645. The benefits were better durability, more accurate light metering, cheap lenses, interchangeability, size etc.

But if you consider a Pro system, then it's not much more money for an AFD. Then you get a modern body, which can still use the manual 645 lenses, versatile metering and excellent controls. Plus as I mentioned a very economical market in second hand digital backs.

If you want bigger negs to control grain, then the same can be accomplished with the right choice of film and developing technique. And of course you should develop yourself. It's vital for the final result. Shooting and developing are two sides of the same coin.

I have both Pro TL and AFD bodies. The AFD doesn't give indexed metering on manual focus lenses, so stop-down is the only way. That is fine if you only have AF lenses, or shoot all your manual focus lenses wide open, but it is a pain when shooting at f/8-16 most of the time. The Pro TL has a better screen for manual focusing, and the AFD is barely an autofocus camera so I end up doing lots of manual focusing with it in any event. I suppose a split screen for the AFD would help. Additionally, my AFD meter crashes below a certain point, typically 1/30 at f/4, ISO 100 is the lowest light I can reliably meter with it. Below that, the meter goes haywire. No such problem on the Pro TL. I am not sure whether it is my camera or all AFD's, but it means hand-held metering in low-light conditions if I want to use the AFD. AFD backs are twice the price of Pro/Super backs. The former typically go for $150-200 each on the bay, the price of a good camera.

Try not to develop yourself, especially if you use deep tanks . If you have a good understanding with whomever develops your film (if not yourself), that should also be adequate. I do know people who develop on behalf of others, who do a mighty fine job of it. As long as you can tune your exposure to the development, and use the right film for the application, such an arrangement can work. Home processing is of course more fun and provides more options.

 

[Jaf-Photo]

Well, there are always different points of view. I know some accomplished photographers who would't use any other camera. Your metering issues seem particular as Mamiya's metering systems are among the best.

Besides, when you buy AFD second hand, you often get a setup with several backs, a few lenses and not uncommonly, a split screen.

The Pro really has few advantages over the M645 models, except being larger, lighter and more plastic, if you prefer that.

And sorry to disagree, but developing your own film is invaluable for understanding exposure and learning how films behave. Experiences from developing will go right back into shooting practice. Besides, of the few labs that still do B&W, most are not up to scratch. Commercial development tends to be very inconsistent. Besides, even if you have a knowledgeable pro lab, you still have to know what to ask for. If you need a variety of chems, which you do, that could be an issue.

But as always, it's a matter of horses for courses.

 

[frank]

There is a reason that some cameras cost more than others. It's about engineering and materials of a higher standard, not just marketing as some would claim.

That being said, buy whatever fits best in your hand and working style.

 

[jspillane]

Is it safe to send sheet film overseas to develoop b/c the lab here is super expensive in NZ that is why with my 35mm I have been shipping to the USA for development. For 4x5 it should cost $12US per sheet man for E6. For b/w I guess I can do that myself with a make shift Patterton Tank (?).

I would develop it all at home, color and B&W. I haven't done E6 at home, but C41 is remarkably easy (really not much harder than B&W, just keep the temperature constant). $12 a sheet is crazy-- doing it yourself should cost you around $1 a sheet for C41 and considerably less than that for B&W. I develop 4x5 using the 'taco' method in steel tanks and have never had any problems, and actually achieve more consistent results than I have gotten from labs (all in a tiny apartment bathroom).

 

[Jaf-Photo]

There is a reason that some cameras cost more than others. It's about engineering and materials of a higher standard, not just marketing as some would claim.

That being said, buy whatever fits best in your hand and working style.

For secod hand cameras, prices also depend very much on demand. That's why you can still get excellent bargains on MF cameras today. Some brands and models are simply less in demand, despite being equal or occasionly superior to the popular brands and models.

Unless you want a status marker, good MF photography is remakably cheap.

 

[jerrybro]

There is a reason that some cameras cost more than others. It's about engineering and materials of a higher standard, not just marketing as some would claim.

That being said, buy whatever fits best in your hand and working style.

This is the best advice actually. You could buy the best whiz bang camera with the most critically sharp optics, but if it doesn't fit you won't use it. I'm selling off a Leica system for this exact reason, wonderful craftmanship, very nice optics, doesn't fit my hand well.

 

[Jaf-Photo]

This is the best advice actually. You could buy the best whiz bang camera with the most critically sharp optics, but if it doesn't fit you won't use it. I'm selling off a Leica system for this exact reason, wonderful craftmanship, very nice optics, doesn't fit my hand well.

Also if you persist, you will adapt to most systems. If you use a camera often enough, it becomes second nature to use it. But that also makes it a bit harder to switch system. Rather than doing things instinctively, you have to think about it and adapt to a new feel in your hands. When I buy a new body, I usually hate the ergonomics for a couple of weeks, sfter that I can use it in my sleep.

IMO opinion, futureproofing is the most important factor. If you don't buy what you will want to use in a couple of years, you'll just waste time and money on the upgrade cycle.

Thats, why I mention Mamiya AFD because it'll grow into any use you want in the future. A basic AFD setup costs the same as a basic Hasselblad 500 setup. But the Mamiya will do more. (Think about the cost of a metered, autofocusing Blad with a digital back...)

Also price does not always reflect robustness. Mamiya 7:s sell for quite a lot but are quite fragile (check the amount of 7:s being sold for parts).

 

[blockend]

My problem with medium format has been the way the cameras grew mainly into studio photography equipment, with the size and weight that goes with it. Most of us don't need interchangeable backs, big lenses and mirror bodies to get a large negative. For that reason I use old folders that fit in a pocket. I've used Hasselblads, Mamiyas and Bronicas and see no fun in carrying them for pleasure photography.

 

[fretlessdavis]

My problem with medium format has been the way the cameras grew mainly into studio photography equipment, with the size and weight that goes with it. Most of us don't need interchangeable backs, big lenses and mirror bodies to get a large negative. For that reason I use old folders that fit in a pocket. I've used Hasselblads, Mamiyas and Bronicas and see no fun in carrying them for pleasure photography.

There's plenty that went the other way, too: Bronica RF645, Fuji RF's, Mamiya 6 and 7. Personally, after seeing what can be done even with the lowly GA645zi zoom 645 that Fuji makes-- pretty much as simple and easy to use as a nice point and shoot! I almost snagged one instead of my ETRS kit. You don't *have* to set the cameras up like studio cameras, eithrt-- if you go for Mamiya or Bronica 645's, they're still more compact than the average DSLR shooter's kit. You can set 'em up for tripod work, you can set 'em up to handle like a giant 35mm SLR. You don't have to have everything to change it all around, just get the pieces that fit your shooting style.

 

[Sirius Glass]

My problem with medium format has been the way the cameras grew mainly into studio photography equipment, with the size and weight that goes with it. Most of us don't need interchangeable backs, big lenses and mirror bodies to get a large negative.

My problem with medium format has been the way the cameras grew mainly into studio photography equipment, with the size and weight that goes with it.

Not true. The Hasselblad's design was driven by Victor Hasselblad's desire to take wild life photographs of birds.

Most of us don't need interchangeable backs,

Not true. There are times when I will shoot photographs in color and then in black & white because I either am not sure which will be better or because I will print them in different ways.

big lenses

Not true. Longer focal lengths are used when the subject requires them. They are not chosen by weight.

mirror bodies

Not true. Mirrors allow one to see what the photograph will look like. Also, it is much easier to take a photograph with a polarizer it a single lens reflex camera is being used. Forget doing that with a folder.

I have owned and extensively used medium format folders. Folders have their uses, but that does not make them the be-all and do-all of medium format photography.

 

[Jaf-Photo]

Yeah, if you get a decent bag and neck strap, it's no matter to carry around a MF camera.

Mostly, they're not larger or heavier than a full frame DSLR.

If you want a small analogue camera to carry in your pocket (just in case), there are a lot of choices for 35mm.

 

[Soeren]

My problem with medium format has been the way the cameras grew mainly into studio photography equipment, with the size and weight that goes with it. Most of us don't need interchangeable backs, big lenses and mirror bodies to get a large negative. For that reason I use old folders that fit in a pocket. I've used Hasselblads, Mamiyas and Bronicas and see no fun in carrying them for pleasure photography.

Most of us don't need interchangeable backs

N/+/- development, IR-, Ordinary B/W and colorfilm. There are lot of reason to have interchangeable backs

big lenses

hmm The 80mm f/2,8 on my Mamiya aint that much bigger than the 50 f/1,4 on my Nikon

mirror bodies

Hey My Nikons has mirror bodies

For that reason I use old folders that fit in a pocket

I don't know any pocketable folder I can use with wides (eg 24 fisheye or 35mm for M645), for close up/macro work or with a decent portrait tele.

 

[Soeren]

>SNIP

The Pro really has few advantages over the M645 models, except being larger, lighter and more plastic, if you prefer that.
SNIP<

Hmm lower mileage, brighter screens, better AE finders, interchangeable backs ( even D.BEEEP backs can be had for them) motordrives, more infomation in the finder. Lighter is off cource a really bad thing
Has the older M645 a T-setting?
Best regards

 

[frank]

I'm drawn to mechanical cameras over electronic ones, just like I'm drawn to film over digital. But that's just me, I'm not saying that it's rational.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I'm drawn to mechanical cameras over electronic ones, just like I'm drawn to film over digital. But that's just me, I'm not saying that it's rational.

Actually it is quite rational, mechanical cameras will not be come obsolete if a particular battery size becomes no longer available. Furthermore, mechanical cameras are less affected by cold temperatures. For extensive cold temperature use mechanical cameras can be serviced with special low temperature lubricants while doing the same for electronic ones will not over come the effects of low temperatures on batteries.

As for film over digital, the sane people come to this website because film is superior.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Actually it is quite rational, mechanical cameras will not be come obsolete if a particular battery size becomes no longer available. Furthermore, mechanical cameras are less affected by cold temperatures. For extensive cold temperature use mechanical cameras can be serviced with special low temperature lubricants while doing the same for electronic ones will not over come the effects of low temperatures on batteries.

As for film over digital, the sane people come to this website because film is superior.

I think,it's rational too;ofcourse;i'm bias,being a trained mechanical engineer but Ialways felt that mechanics could bee understood by mere mortals;whereas electronics will forever remain a mystery to me.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I think,it's rational too;of course; i'm bias,being a trained mechanical engineer but I always felt that mechanics could bee understood by mere mortals;whereas electronics will forever remain a mystery to me.

Interesting. I am an electrical engineer and I came to the same conclusions.

What is the difference between a mechanical engineer and a civil engineer?

Mechanical engineers design fire control systems and munitions.

Civil engineers design targets.
​

 

[DWThomas]

Some of the arguments here just support having more than one so as to be able to choose for the project at hand. My initial incursion into MF was to be minimalist. I bought a Bronica SQ-A body, back, WLF and the 80 mm f/2.8 PS lens in 2006. After finding the back didn't index properly, I returned it, but became conscious of the idea that it is nice to have spares to be able to troubleshoot.

So now I have two working bodies, 50, 65, 80, 110 1:1 macro -- and as of last month -- 150 mm lenses. Four backs, right angle and 45º prism finders and a speed grip. And oh yeah, a compendium shade -- and a 2x tel-extender.

But then for "other" projects I have, over the past five or six years, acquired a Perkeo II 6x6 folder, an Ercona II 6x9 folder, and then a Yashica Mat 124G TLR. I use them all at various times for various reasons. And the whole pile didn't cost much more than one of the latest whiz-bang Canon L series zooms!

 

[frank]

Some of the arguments here just support having more than one so as to be able to choose for the project at hand. My initial incursion into MF was to be minimalist. I bought a Bronica SQ-A body, back, WLF and the 80 mm f/2.8 PS lens in 2006. After finding the back didn't index properly, I returned it, but became conscious of the idea that it is nice to have spares to be able to troubleshoot.

So now I have two working bodies, 50, 65, 80, 110 1:1 macro -- and as of last month -- 150 mm lenses. Four backs, right angle and 45º prism finders and a speed grip. And oh yeah, a compendium shade -- and a 2x tel-extender.

But then for "other" projects I have, over the past five or six years, acquired a Perkeo II 6x6 folder, an Ercona II 6x9 folder, and then a Yashica Mat 124G TLR. I use them all at various times for various reasons. And the whole pile didn't cost much more than one of the latest whiz-bang Canon L series zooms!

Yep, just like a carpenter wouldn't own just 1 hammer or 1 type of saw.

Hasselblad is my only system camera, but I use folders, a tlr, and RF MF cameras.

 

[Jaf-Photo]

Hmm lower mileage, brighter screens, better AE finders, interchangeable backs ( even D.BEEEP backs can be had for them) motordrives, more infomation in the finder. Lighter is off cource a really bad thing
Has the older M645 a T-setting?
Best regards

This differs somewhat. The mileage depends on the previous user. There are a lot of beat up Mamiya 645 Pros, from extensive studiowork. The older AE finders were excellent and mostly deliver the same readings as a hand held light meter. Detachable backs are good for studio work or weddings. Otherwise, the inserts work just fine. The M645 has bulb mode at least. The motor drive for the Pro is slow and noisy, and you can get one for M645 too. A lighter camera is more prone to camera shake.

So, it always depends on what you need the camera for. I much prefer handling a neat and nimble M645 to a bulky, noisy Pro. As they use the same lenses and similar a shutter system, there is nothing in it for image quality.

 

[Jaf-Photo]

Yep, just like a carpenter wouldn't own just 1 hammer or 1 type of saw.

Hasselblad is my only system camera, but I use folders, a tlr, and RF MF cameras.

Yeah, but I also know a photographer who has been using the same Hasselblad and Leica since the 70's. That's two cameras over a whole career. Try that with digital!

 

[Sirius Glass]

Yep, just like a carpenter wouldn't own just 1 hammer or 1 type of saw.

Hasselblad is my only system camera, but I use folders, a tlr, and RF MF cameras.

Hasselblad 503 CX
Hasselblad 903 SWC
Hasselblad 50mm lens
Hasselblad 80mm lens
Hasselblad 150mm lens
Hasselblad 250mm lens
2X converter [rarely used]
B60 filters
Extension tubes
PME prism
WLF [never used, it came with the camera]
Several film backs
Adapter for and viewer for the back of the SWC