Rob,
You must not look at the number on the price tag only.
Good advice.
Two other things are more important: the value of the thingies for you as a photographer,
Good advice.
and the amounts of money you will (no doubt about it) spend feeling your way through the also-rans to end up getting one of the three systems i mentioned.
Well,....
I would agree with that advice if it were less absolute. Maybe they will end up with one of the systems you mentioned, and maybe not.
Price of entry is important to many people. Somebody with college bills or little kids, or for whatever reason not a lot of extra money, will have to wait a lot longer to be able to afford a Hasselblad or Rollei setup.
Many people have been very happy with the so-called also-rans. For someone just getting their feet wet, a less expensive setup can give them an idea of what direction they might want to take, or if MF is even for them. If Hasselblad equipment were close to as inexpensive as a Bronica SQ-Ai, for example, your advice might be valid. Hasselblad bodies can be gotten fairly cheaply but the lenses are
much more expensive. A person can get the SQ, or for that matter a Yashica or Minolta TLR, and find out if 6x6 is even to their liking. If they like it, and want to go to something which will cost more, they can sell it off and lose little if any money doing so.
I wanted to see if medium format was something which would interest me. In this economy, I was not going to tie up a bunch of cash to find out. So a year or so ago I got an ETR-Si with prism finder, 120 back, and 75mm f/2.8 EII lens for $138.50, shipping included. It's been a lot of fun. I have gradually acquired some more lenses and stuff, so I guess ignorance is bliss. Maybe I'll keep it, maybe I'll sell it all and get something else. Prices aren't going to sink much lower, if at all, in the near future, so how much can I lose if I sell it?
If we were talking view cameras, would you tell someone they should get a Linhof or Ebony, and don't even bother with a Calumet or a Tachihara? When someone is just learning a new format, it's better to get going with it, than to worry about whether their equipment is 'grown-up' enough or that they will want something else later.
I intend to get my feet wet in LF in the not-too-distant future, and figure on getting a Calumet for a hundred bucks or so, and one lens. If it's a Caltar or something like that, fine; my aim will be to wring out that camera and one lens, learning all I can from them. Only after doing that will I know my next step. There's so much to learn, why should I etch my choices in stone at the outset?
When I started in 1974, people said, "Buy Nikon, buy once." The only problem with that was at age 18, I only made $2 an hour, and Nikon's lenses were all more expensive than anything else from Japan. Besides, I just didn't care for the Nikkormat, and the F2 was out of the question, cost-wise. I eventually ended up buying Nikon over a decade later, but I still have my first camera and its lenses, and they still work. No matter what you bought back then, the cameras were well built, even lower tier brands. And despite Nikon's stellar reputation for optics, there were a lot of excellent lenses from the other makers. I never regretted passing on Nikon in the beginning; it was the right thing for me to do.
It may look like these thingies are still expensive. But they are not, both for what you get and in light of the total expenditure. They really are cheap as dirt.
I guess you buy some damned expensive dirt!
Have you looked at lens prices? Compared to Mamiya, Pentax, Bronica, etc.?
Nothing against Hasselblad or Rollei, or Zeiss glass: they have enviable reputations. But not everyone can lay out the cash for the "best", when something else will work for them.
A lot of people have made a lot of money and been very happy with 645's or with 6x6 equipment which didn't come from Europe. 15 years ago I talked to a wedding photographer who had dumped Hasselblad gear for Bronica SQ-Ai because he just liked it better. You are probably aware that Salgado used Pentax 645 equipment for years.
So skip the entry-level thingies (which includes Mamiya 6x4.5s, Pentax, and Bronicas) and pick a grown up system to begin with.
That is unmitigated horseshit.
You do an MF novice a disservice by making such an elitist, unfounded statement. You sound like those who say if it's not Leica, forget it. Or the Nikon/Canon types who just have to have the top of the line, and look down on those who spend less for a smaller, lighter model and don't have the fanciest glass, or who use another brand. Or for that matter, those who used to call 35mm an amateur format.
Hasselblads have a great reputation, but what if 6x6 isn't someone's cup of tea? Mamiya 6x7? Not for me, thanks. They're awesome and all that, but they're too bulky and heavy.
Why is the Mamiya RB/RZ okay but not the Mamiya 6x4.5 stuff? Do you consider 6x4.5 format to be not grown-up or just don't like the equipment?
I don't even have Pentax MF gear, and I'm still insulted by your unfounded characterizations of their products as "entry-level" and not "grown up".
The 6x7 format Pentax has an excellent reputation. It wasn't bought by thousands of professionals since 1969 because it was cheap-it wasn't. The 645 series has been very popular, especially with those who wanted something with features and handling similar to 35mm SLR's. Pentax MF glass excels.
Bronica established a reputation and wide respect as a workhorse; unglamorous but dependable.
All Medium Format equipment was so expensive new that to broadly characterize any of it as entry level is ludicrous. Within their lines, Bronica and Mamiya had some simplified machines which were less expensive; that's the closest I can see to anything "entry level". MF equipment was used by professionals, and it was built to take it.
Besides, if someone is at "entry level", what would be wrong with an entry level machine anyway? How many people started out with Pentax K1000's or Yashica FR II's or something like that, and worked up to the top Nikons or bought Leicas as their skills improved and their needs became clearer?
To keep the 'pod light as air, I don't use a tripod head. I just screw directly into the camera. I use the same setup with an rb and an rz sometimes.
I don't hate Hassy's)
