Good starter medium format camera?

[BrianShaw]

A retired photographer I know made his career with hassies for 25 years and he never sold a single square photograph. Square is square, horizontal and vertical, you concentrate in the subject's expression and you frame in the printing.

I’m sure your friend had a valid experience. Perhaps you missed my point, though. Shooting square format film allows visualizing the final result in either portrait or landscape orientation without turning the camera. Allows less concentration on gear configuration and more on composition. Of all of my “square format” work I probably only printed 10% square.

 

[138S]

I’m sure your friend had a valid experience. Perhaps you missed my point, though. Shooting square format film allows visualizing the final result in either portrait or landscape orientation without turning the camera. Allows less concentration on gear configuration and more on composition. Of all of my “square format” work I probably only printed 10% square.

Yes... there is some debate about if cropping is a sin or not.

No doubt that being able to frame directly the final image is a nice skill, artists and cinematographers tend to that... Cartier-Bresson for example.

But a Pro commercial photographer usually goes to a more practical approach, an artist may show the 1% of his shots, but in the past a 500 C/M wedding film photographer had to nail every shot he made. A good recipe was concentrating in subject's expression and in focus, framing slightly open, and later refining the framing in Post. In intense shooting, if playing much attention to the composition then expression and focus may suffer, we are humans... (more or less)

What I'm suggesting is that some MF Pro photographers played attention to expression, focus and composition, but keeping open the final framing to refine composition in the printing.

MF allowed those pros to later cropping without a significative quality loss. Recently I reviewed some wedding works made with hassies (and the like) and they are atonishing.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Not only zero, but you might also make a buck. It’s crazy like that.

Those of us who "need" near-zero cost to afford a/the hobby will never see that. You have to buy new or near-new equipment, and you can't hang onto it too long before replacing it with more new or near-new equipment. Further, while you might buy that Super X camera for $2000 and sell it five years later for $2000, in between you'll have had it CLAd at least twice (and only the factory can work on it, they don't sell parts to independent shops) for $500 a pop, and during that time your money has inflated anywhere from 10% to 50% (depending who's running the government at the moment).

End result, for your use of the camera, you're out $1000 and the inflation on your original $2000, not to mention time value of money -- that $2000 has been out of your hands for that time. So "free" equipment is and always has been a myth. If you manage to sell at inflation adjusted price, it's a fluke of having been lucky enough to buy the right camera before you could possibly know it would be the right one.

And then there's accident -- drop that $1500 lens into the lake, and the very least it'll cost you is a $300 CLA. Drop it on a sidewalk, it'll be worse. Drop it over a cliff, you're out the $1500 (but it might cost you $2000 to get another one by then, if they've gotten popular).

Drop a Jupiter 8 off a cliff, it'll cost you $20 to $50 to replace.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I'm with NB23. Kiev MF is just as junk Lubytel.
I would also not mix Jupiter-8 or any FSU RF lenses into this thread. It is not FSU MF lenses with jammed apertures.

For OP money and portraits as it was mentioned before Mamiya 645 is fine. I had 645J with lens for under 100 USD three years ago and it was working, no issues camera, lens kit. Next to neat and compact for MF SLR.
Just like this one:
https://www.lomography.com/magazine/18183-taking-the-mamiya-m645j-for-a-spin

 

[Helge]

You push for the kiev a way too hard, and you will never win the argument. Firstly, because you are mistaking me for a novice, for an beginner amateur, or for a guy that doesn’t have a clue. I’ve been a Professional making a good living in the business even before digital even existed. Juste like there’s no way you could sell a Lada to a professional racer, you won’t be able to sell a Kiev to me.
“Yes but a Lada...”. No. Just no.

This is the problem with the internet: it’s easy to mistake people and get sucked into a following. Like bloggers: mostly nobodies, newbies, that think they know it all. Pros don’t give a damn about creating a blog. And they discern the wannabe bloggers real fast. Let me tell you, I’ve seen my share of bloggers having born and died, but man they “sounded” so knowledgeable. Shit, a Kiev following? Does this mean it’s suddenly a good camera? What? A cool blogger endorses a Kiev? Must I be buying one now?
I’ve seen enough of such bullshit with Leica, and now Kiev?

As my final argument: You pay me 150$ for using a kiev-88 (and other cheap stuff) and I will refuse. My reason is mathematical and logical.
Spending 4 hours, from shooting a roll, developing and printing a proof, and ending with unsatisfying results is worth 150$ for my time.
This is how serious I am about this stuff, in case you havd mistaken me for a skaterboy or a sloppy artist, or a faux-tographer.

How about $200?

 

[BrianShaw]

Yes... there is some debate about if cropping is a sin or not.

Sure, but bringing that up in this context seems merely an attempt to stir the pot rather than address the question at hand.

MF allowed those pros to later cropping without a significative quality loss. Recently I reviewed some wedding works made with hassies (and the like) and they are atonishing.

Absolutely! When I got married the industry was transitioning from film to digital. The photographer we liked was shooting 100% digits but caved to my desire for MF film. After that he started marketing MF film services again but at a premium price.

 

[138S]

After that he started marketing MF film services again but at a premium price.

Well, José Villa and the like... this is being successful. The Contax 645 with the z f/2.0...

California is special... Hollywood is there. Many actors are aware of what film does, an actress knows very well how she looks in a digital movie compared to a Vision 3 movie, would she allow his wedding shot with an A7Rn ?

Today many top notch wedding Pros still work with MF film at least in part, of course there are also very good digital works, but those made in film... It is not a "vintage look", this is about rocking: https://josevilla.com/santa-barbara-wedding-photography-home/

 

[NB23]

Q

How about $200?

In my particular case there is the permanent notion that “each shot I take with a cheap camera is a shot I do not take with my favorite camera”.

This is why I don’t mess with cheap chinese lenses for my Leicas. Or point and shoots. Or whatever. Every hour spent with a Pentax K1000 would be an hour NOT spent with my Original Black Paint M2. Why would I inflict that to myself when I have the choice?

 

[grat]

Yes... there is some debate about if cropping is a sin or not.

There's some debate whether the earth is flat or not, but it's a useless debate.

Cropping a photograph is no more a sin than chipping away all the bits of rock that don't look like your subject in order to make a statue.

The only time cropping is a sin is when you crop something like Lawrence of Arabia to 16:9.

6x6 is nice in that it gives you more options for cropping

 

[campy51]

If I only had $400 to spend and it was going to be the only camera I could have it would be the Bronica SQ-A. Focusing is very easy and if you add the speed grip and a prism it balances very well, but I don't think you could get one with the speed grip and prism for $400 but maybe you could get one or the other for that price. BTW I have a Hassy 203CW, Bronica EC-TL, Kowa Six, two Rolleiflex's 3.5F, 2.8E and the Minolta Autocord and the Bronica SQ-A I had, I should have kept. The one I sold had the grip and prism and sold for less than $400. I know I'm lucky to have so many classic cameras but I have been buying low and selling high and upgrading and for now collecting for many years. I alternate them and the one that sends a tingle up my leg when looking at and holding it is the chrome version Hasselblad. The Bronica EC-TL is also nice but big and heavy.

 

[NB23]

So You have been “buying low and selling high”.

Someone in this thread won’t believe you

If I only had $400 to spend and it was going to be the only camera I could have it would be the Bronica SQ-A. Focusing is very easy and if you add the speed grip and a prism it balances very well, but I don't think you could get one with the speed grip and prism for $400 but maybe you could get one or the other for that price. BTW I have a Hassy 203CW, Bronica EC-TL, Kowa Six, two Rolleiflex's 3.5F, 2.8E and the Minolta Autocord and the Bronica SQ-A I had, I should have kept. The one I sold had the grip and prism and sold for less than $400. I know I'm lucky to have so many classic cameras but I have been buying low and selling high and upgrading and for now collecting for many years. I alternate them and the one that sends a tingle up my leg when looking at and holding it is the chrome version Hasselblad. The Bronica EC-TL is also nice but big and heavy.

 

[138S]

The only time cropping is a sin is when you crop something like Lawrence of Arabia to 16:9.

Well, this is a big sin.

__________________

Well, first, everyone can do what he wants, but many people have a criterion to determine when cropping is adding something good to the image or it only "profanates" the scene. But this is a totally personal matter.

 

[John Koehrer]

Yeah for sure man, so try "not a tlr otr lubitel" At least TRY to stick to the OP's question not nitpick through
the wasteland.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Why can’t people approach these gear recommendation threads as if they were salespeople in a camera shop? It’s not a competition for who owns better stuff and makes better shopping decisions.

I don't understand this point of view...Should we always suggest the most expensive option like a camera shop salesman, and never have discussions/arguments with other people in the community about their advice? The whole value in a thread like this is to get different perspectives from different people who might have different perspectives and opinions. Why would you want to quash that aspect of it?

 

[abruzzi]

You should be able to find a working Bronica ETR (or ETRS or ETRSi) with a prism, 75mm lens, grip and 120 back for under $400. They currently seem to be about the cheapest medium format system SLR camera out there. They may not be everyone’s cup of tea, but they are very capable cameras, and lenses are cheap—most are $100-150–so you can build out a respectable system inexpensively. You can also find older Mamiya 645 cameras for a similar price, but they seem to have creeped up a little more. They seem to be great cameras, but I have no experience with them.

for cheaper than that, there is a long history of folders from dozens of companies, and some inexpensive TLRs. They are going to be less flexible with fixed lenses and many are old enough that they won’t feel like a modern camera. I own a couple old folders, and personally, I wouldn’t recommend them to a beginner. They are just too finicky, IMO. (Maybe not to shoot, if you have a good, CLA’d model, but buying them have a lot of pitfalls.). TLRs feel more usable than folders to me, but personally, I’d stick to ones with automatic film spacing, so you don’t have to worry about red windows fogging you film (or the numbering being too light to see..

 

[brainmonster]

You're right, it looks like the Bronicas are just a hair cheaper than the Mamiyas of comparable models, I'm not sure why. I'll keep my eye out for one domestically, I'd rather not order from Japan with the current situation, it seems like international shipping has really slowed down.

I guess it just comes down what I can find for cheaper/newer models/ etc. and just keep searching till I find a good one.

I'm surprised at how terse some of these listings are. Like just Bronica ETR for sale. Like hello does it WORK? Think they'd get more interested buyers if they added more description.

You should be able to find a working Bronica ETR (or ETRS or ETRSi) with a prism, 75mm lens, grip and 120 back for under $400. They currently seem to be about the cheapest medium format system SLR camera out there. They may not be everyone’s cup of tea, but they are very capable cameras, and lenses are cheap—most are $100-150–so you can build out a respectable system inexpensively. You can also find older Mamiya 645 cameras for a similar price, but they seem to have creeped up a little more. They seem to be great cameras, but I have no experience with them.

for cheaper than that, there is a long history of folders from dozens of companies, and some inexpensive TLRs. They are going to be less flexible with fixed lenses and many are old enough that they won’t feel like a modern camera. I own a couple old folders, and personally, I wouldn’t recommend them to a beginner. They are just too finicky, IMO. (Maybe not to shoot, if you have a good, CLA’d model, but buying them have a lot of pitfalls.). TLRs feel more usable than folders to me, but personally, I’d stick to ones with automatic film spacing, so you don’t have to worry about red windows fogging you film (or the numbering being too light to see..

 

[grat]

I wouldn't be too concerned about shipping from Japan-- but prefer FedEx / DHL over EMS / Japan Post. On any given day, either can be slow, but it will show up. Eventually.

I would be worried about fungus from Japanese sellers. Seems to be a common issue. But they're usually scrupulous about listing it in the description.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

I'm surprised at how terse some of these listings are. Like just Bronica ETR for sale. Like hello does it WORK? Think they'd get more interested buyers if they added more description.

I have seen this lack of information more and more recently.
1. Many of these clowns now are just brokers. They know little or nothing about the camera.
2. They are too cheap to buy the correct battery. This is the one that really amazed me.

 

[Sirius Glass]

A retired photographer I know made his career with hassies for 25 years and he never sold a single square photograph. Square is square, horizontal and vertical, you concentrate in the subject's expression and you frame in the printing.

Which explains why he had to retire.

 

[reddesert]

OP, don't keep making the same mistake over and over - buying the cheapest thing as a novice and then becoming frustrated with its limitations. An experienced person can work around the limitations if they want to. But that's not the way to start.

The old way of starting economically in medium format was to get a TLR - affordability usually meant a Yashicamat, or some other options like Japanese TLRs, Rolleicord. These will have much better viewfinders than the Lubitel if the viewing system (lens, mirror and focusing screen) is clean, which is sometimes a problem by now with poorly stored cameras.

Now that many professionals sold off medium format systems, you can also spend a little more and get into the next tier of price, like Mamiya TLR, 645 SLRs, RB67 or Mamiya Press. These are very different to carry and hold and in negative size so it depends on what you want to do with the camera.

For any of these, buying something that is well-described or the seller has a good return policy is likely more important than bargain hunting, or you'll just be repeating the cycle of possibly getting something sub-par and becoming frustrated.

Ignore the Kiev vs Hasselblad flamewar as it is not relevant to the "good affordable starter MF" question.

 

[baachitraka]

A retired photographer I know made his career with hassies for 25 years and he never sold a single square photograph. Square is square, horizontal and vertical, you concentrate in the subject's expression and you frame in the printing.

These cameras (Hassy or any other 6x6) are able to put quantum signatures on the negatives and tell the paper during printing, hey "Good Luck" and here I throw all the weird quantum effects on you.

or I never understood the aversion towards the square at all.

 

[138S]

I never understood the aversion towards the square at all.

For each scene there is a particular aspect ratio that's delivers an ideal composition, at least to suit a particular taste.

When we view a real landscape we have a wider H angle than V, and our mind is used to inspect a vertical "rectangle" when we look at one person. Portrait vs Landscape

Of course it's about taste, but in general rectangular formats are more flexible, we have two flavors by rotating 90º the camera. With squared we have a single flavor, by rotating 90º the camera we have the same. But we always can crop to make an square a rectangle or the counter.

Of course, nothing wrong in intensively exploiting the particular possibilities of the square format...

 

[johnha]

Unless you have a compelling reason not to look for a general purpose camera, a 6x6 (Mamiya C220/330, Bronica SQ) or 6x4.5 (Mamiya, Bronica, Pentax) system is likely the cheapest/easiest/most reliable way in. It depends somewhat on your future plans as to whether you need/want interchangeable lenses/backs/finders but they do provide more versatility. There's more to 'get used to' in medium format than 35mm (film handling, dark slides, leaf shutters etc.) and buying something that's relatively recent/reliable and can grow with your future plans will give you a head start. Don't stress about the gear, you need a usable/reliable (YMMV) camera on a budget that allows you to shoot the photographs you want - most cameras/systems will do that unless you have specific requirements.

My choice: Bronica SQ or Mamiya 645 (I have both).

Back in the day when the FSU was still the Soviet Union, the UK Kiev distributor would recondition every camera they imported before selling it to try to bring it up to an acceptable standard. That was back then (and the only route to getting one), I doubt they will have improved with age.

My Lubitel 166U cost me £22 new back in the day - it is the best £22 I have spent on photography, even if all it did was to get me into medium format. Not wanting a TLR is fair statement - although the Lubitel isn't a great benchmark to measure against - I doubt many 'as is' $50-100 folders would 'better' it.

 

[radiant]

I would vote for Yashica 124G or Yashica C - both lightweight and TLR are easy to compose and focus.

I have one Zeiss Ikon Nettar and personally dislike that because the viewfinder is crap and you need to focus it either by guestimating (awful) or using external distance meter.

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

My choice: Bronica SQ or Mamiya 645 (I have both).

I'll throw another vote out there for a Mamiya 645.

I have the 1000s and a few Pro's. I'd give the slight nod to the Pro as a choice as its newer, lighter, and has light traps instead of seals. I also like the modularity of the Pro with the replaceable backs and other accessories. Prices on both models have jumped slightly in the last two years, especially on the Pro models. The 1000s isn't too bad but for some reason the WLF for them has skyrocketed in price compared to the prisms.

The 80mm f/2.8 is a great lens and that's whats most often found on a complete camera. I know folks tend to wax-on about the 80mm f/1.9, but to be honest they are super hard to nail focus with wide-open and the DOF is so narrow only the eyes are generally in focus, with someone's nose being OOF. It's best to shoot that one stopped down a stop and then you are basically near the 2.8 anyway. I own both and rarely use the f/1.9 anymore.

Most of the time I am shooting with my RB67 Pro SD, but if I'm hiking or just walking around and need something light, I'll carry a Pro with a WLF and hand winder for a lightweight combination.

The only negative I'll put out there for the Pro is that they can be fragile. You often read about the mirror stop breaking. That's actually never happened to me, but I've had two of them just go dead and not fire anymore.

Jeremy