Handholdability of medium format cameras

[MattKing]

The "dynamic" part about dynamic composition, can be related to how much the eye tends to move about the scene.

 

[guangong]

The "dynamic" part about dynamic composition, can be related to how much the eye tends to move about the scene.
View attachment 256963

That’s the idea. Good picture! I didn’t say impossible, but difficult.

 

[MattKing]

By the way, that was handheld, using Ektachrome in a Mamiya 645 Pro or Super (can't recall which one).
I did lean on a bridge railing though.
Here is how it looks full frame:

 

[bluechromis]

Sharpness is a compositional tool just like any other. Portrait photographers often seek a particular point of sharpness, like the eyes, "selective focus". I like a lot of extreme detail in my big prints which actually draw the viewer right in. But even in those cases, there might well be certain areas more acute than others, to give specific emphasis, even if it's subconscious - a slightly sharper area will automatically draw closer inspection (if a person has normal eyesight).
Edward Weston did a lot of soft Pictorialist style work at first. Even though he later renounced it, manifesto-like, in relation to the emerging f/64 mentality, I happen to personally prefer his earlier work. But one still has to distinguish between images he made for himself, even if portraits, and the standard fee work he did in his portrait studio in order to make a living. Either way, his equipment wasn't great, and nothing was intended for big prints - mostly just contact prints - so very few of his negs hold up well to serious enlargements.
To make generic statements about any of this is nonsense, or what affects one kind of sale versus another. Why does a canvas by a famous Photorealistic painter sell for a million bucks - because it's so darn crisp and detailed. Why does a canvas by a famous abstract expressionist sell for a million bucks - because it isn't.

I agree that sharpness is a compositional tool to be used selectively for a particular purpose. I also agree that the perception of sharpness is influenced by many things including other areas of image. I see people obsessing about finding lenses that are perfectly sharp all the way to the edges even at wide apertures. But areas in the periphery that are softer will make the central area seem sharper. In old master paintings you will see over and over that the level of detail trails off towards the edge of the canvas. Ironically using lenses that are sharp in all areas automatically makes the central features seem less sharp than they otherwise would be if the outer areas were less sharp. With perception it is all about context . For example, how we perceive the color of a feature is influenced by what colors are around it.

 

[bluechromis]

How do you hand-holder's feel about accessory handle grips? My first Rollei SLR did not have one, but my 6008i and Hy6 both have built-in side-grips that I like. They have electronic shutter buttons and I think this helps with hand-holding.

I find that the the side handle on my Mamiya C330 f makes all the difference and it is quite nimble to use that way.. My model handle has a slick shutter trigger that works great and enables me to shoot rapidly in fast-paced situations.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I agree that sharpness is a compositional tool to be used selectively for a particular purpose. I also agree that the perception of sharpness is influenced by many things including other areas of image. I see people obsessing about finding lenses that are perfectly sharp all the way to the edges even at wide apertures. But areas in the periphery that are softer will make the central area seem sharper. In old master paintings you will see over and over that the level of detail trails off towards the edge of the canvas. Ironically using lenses that are sharp in all areas automatically makes the central features seem less sharp than they otherwise would be if the outer areas were less sharp. With perception it is all about context . For example, how we perceive the color of a feature is influenced by what colors are around it.

That is YOUR composition. It is not MY composition. I have good lenses so I can get sharpness to the edges if I want. Go take your snapshots with Holgas is you want, but leave my compositions and lenses alone.

 

[DREW WILEY]

bluechromis - The only time I ever visited the Natl Gallery in Wash. DC was on a bitter cold winter day when almost nobody else was around. I spent hours looking at just a handful of paintings, but especially the Vermeers. One can obviously study that kind of things in books, but given the ability to see up close the actual paintings gives one a better impression of just how sensitively he understood how human vision really works, and what a beautiful thing that is, even in its optical flaws, relative to light. Way down the hall there was a big collection of Medieval and Dutch miniaturists, which were remarkable for their detail, and basically the pixel-peepers and sharpness fanatics of their respective eras; but what a contrast with the visual sophistication of Vermeer!

 

[bluechromis]

bluechromis - The only time I ever visited the Natl Gallery in Wash. DC was on a bitter cold winter day when almost nobody else was around. I spent hours looking at just a handful of paintings, but especially the Vermeers. One can obviously study that kind of things in books, but given the ability to see up close the actual paintings gives one a better impression of just how sensitively he understood how human vision really works, and what a beautiful thing that is, even in its optical flaws, relative to light. Way down the hall there was a big collection of Medieval and Dutch miniaturists, which were remarkable for their detail, and basically the pixel-peepers and sharpness fanatics of their respective eras; but what a contrast with the visual sophistication of Vermeer![/QUOTEn
Vermeer is really something. I would love to see his originals. It's interesting that it is speculated that he used a camera obscura extensively in developing his techniques

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Sharpness is a compositional tool just like any other. Portrait photographers often seek a particular point of sharpness, like the eyes, "selective focus". I like a lot of extreme detail in my big prints which actually draw the viewer right in. But even in those cases, there might well be certain areas more acute than others, to give specific emphasis, even if it's subconscious - a slightly sharper area will automatically draw closer inspection (if a person has normal eyesight).
Edward Weston did a lot of soft Pictorialist style work at first. Even though he later renounced it, manifesto-like, in relation to the emerging f/64 mentality, I happen to personally prefer his earlier work. But one still has to distinguish between images he made for himself, even if portraits, and the standard fee work he did in his portrait studio in order to make a living. Either way, his equipment wasn't great, and nothing was intended for big prints - mostly just contact prints - so very few of his negs hold up well to serious enlargements.
To make generic statements about any of this is nonsense, or what affects one kind of sale versus another. Why does a canvas by a famous Photorealistic painter sell for a million bucks - because it's so darn crisp and detailed. Why does a canvas by a famous abstract expressionist sell for a million bucks - because it isn't.

While talking about sharpness: Henri Cartier-Bresson once said, during an interview when visiting the U.S., that "sharpness is a bourgeois concept...".
As he almost always shot handheld (Leica), and was a master in it, this can count as a statement worth considering...

 

[blockend]

I agree that sharpness is a compositional tool to be used selectively for a particular purpose. I also agree that the perception of sharpness is influenced by many things including other areas of image. I see people obsessing about finding lenses that are perfectly sharp all the way to the edges even at wide apertures. But areas in the periphery that are softer will make the central area seem sharper. In old master paintings you will see over and over that the level of detail trails off towards the edge of the canvas. Ironically using lenses that are sharp in all areas automatically makes the central features seem less sharp than they otherwise would be if the outer areas were less sharp. With perception it is all about context . For example, how we perceive the color of a feature is influenced by what colors are around it.

I agree completely. Most still photographs do not lend themselves to panoramic compositions. Those that do maintain interest in each portion of the frame, which is easier to do in a staged movie context than a candid shot. Landscape panoramas have similar limitations, for instance large areas of texture with little to detain the viewer. One of the reasons people obsess about sharpness, is a belief that given enough of it people will marvel at every blade of grass. In reality you can frame as interestingly in a square or 4:3 format as letterbox ratio.

I also found a handle on my C330 made life easier.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I do use extreme detail as a compositional tool (except for 35mm work). Don't misunderstand me. But I employ it thoughtfully in relation to other aspects of composition and depth of field. For example, enlarging from 8 X10 format allows extreme detail, but also introduces depth of field challenges, especially if one prefers longer lenses like I do. I rarely use blatant "selective focus" like small format tele shooters seem addicted to, nor do I ever use "soft focus", though there are obviously masters of that option. Rather, I seek something a lot more subtle, and more subconscious than apparent, that pulls the viewer into detail and aspects of the composition where you want them, without them even realizing it. And a good print will reward many many close encounters, in contrast to instant pie in the face tactics of advertising and "gotcha" photography.

 

[Neil Poulsen]

Any comments on the Bronica S2a? While its mass - closing in on FIVE lbs - would help, the incredible noise of the exposure would have to be a problem as far as inticipatory flinching. I have one, I've used it only slightly since it needed the infinity focus problem corrected. That fixed, I'm off to the races. I also have a Pentax 645n, it is easy to hand hold, and according to Luminous Landscapes the lack of mirror lockup makes no difference with long tele shots.

I had a comprehensive Bronica S2a with with a broad set of lenses for many years. It was kind of a Hasselblad on the cheap for me. Image quality was similar, given the Nikon lenses. It had inter-changeable backs, which is essential for any MF that I would own. I also liked the square format that it offered. I took a lot of nice photographs with that camera.

As for the weight, I always used it on a tripod. So, weight wasn't a problem. My whole kit fit in a large backpack, and it wasn't all that bad to have on my back in those days. I tried using it handheld a couple of times and got lousy results. Having a focal plane shutter, exposures were really about 1/40th sec. (Sync speed.) I won't go into detail.

I sold it, because I got to a point where I couldn't focus it. I don't think that I've ever seen reference to dipoter adjustments for Bronica.

I tried using it handheld a couple of times and got lousy results.

 

[Neil Poulsen]

I like medium format photography. I like the convenience of roll-film backs, the size is large enough for decent tonalities, yet it's a convenient size, compared to LF. It also doesn't have depth of field difficulties, like large format photography. Yet, one can still do view camera photography with MF.

Two essentials that I must have in any film camera are interchangeable lenses and interchangeable backs. The reasons for the former are obvious. As for the latter, I need to be able to allow for different developments for different images. Interchangeable backs makes this possible. I photograph only in B&W using film cameras.

This said, I have two MF cameras . . .

One is an MF view camera. I really like view camera photography. I also have 4x5 and 8x10 cameras, but as I indicated above, there are advantages to MF.

The second is a Mamiya Press Universal system. I like this camera, because it gives me the ability for handheld film photography. It's obviously well designed for this purpose. Yet, it's still a capable camera when mounted on a tripod. Recently, I splurged (boy did I . . . ) for a f2.8 100mm lens (pristine condition) and for a blue-dot 150mm lens (not quite so pristine), so my Mamiya Universal system is capable of sharp images. There are many convenient accessories, including a dipter adjustment for my age-advanced eyesight. Very nice.

What's kind of neat, both these cameras accept Mamiya RB67 backs, so I don't need a separate set of backs for each camera. Normally, this would be challenging with a Mamiya press camera, because RB67 backs are so thick. But I have an eyepiece extension for my Universal that overcomes this difficulty.

 

[ic-racer]

Mamiya made so many great medium format cameras, 330, 220, RB, RZ, Universal, Super 23, etc.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Mamiya made so many great medium format cameras, 330, 220, RB, RZ, Universal, Super 23, etc.

And years before that, the Mamiya 6 -- 6x6 folder, earlier versions had 6x4.5 mask that was captive inside, coupled RF and focus by moving the film plane. Last version had a frame counter, but gave up the 6x4.5 capability (making a counter that does both was probably the issue, though Ensign apparently did it on their Commando in the late 1940s).

 

[ic-racer]

And years before that, the Mamiya 6 -- 6x6 folder, earlier versions had 6x4.5 mask that was captive inside, coupled RF and focus by moving the film plane. Last version had a frame counter, but gave up the 6x4.5 capability (making a counter that does both was probably the issue, though Ensign apparently did it on their Commando in the late 1940s).

Oh yes those also. Did you get a Mamiya 6?

 

[Donald Qualls]

I just got notification that it's shipped from Japan. Should be here before Christmas, barring Covid or customs (or postal) problems.

 

[ic-racer]

I just got notification that it's shipped from Japan. Should be here before Christmas, barring Covid or customs (or postal) problems.

I hope you get it without issues. Last week I got a Rolleiflex from Netherlands and it took only 11 days to arrive from the day I ordered it.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I hope you get it without issues. Last week I got a Rolleiflex from Netherlands and it took only 11 days to arrive from the day I ordered it.

Me, too. Seller is apparently on one of the lesser islands, and warned that he's having to use a specific shipping method to get anything off his island.

 

[grat]

In a fit of insanity, I decided I wanted to have one of the most ridiculous medium format cameras ever made-- it is absolutely not hand-holdable, although I've seen videos of people doing just that. I'm of course, referring to the Fuji GX680. Aside from bulk, the primary problem with them seems to be finding batteries-- but I've determined I can make a working battery pack with a 3D printer and a couple of rechargeable 18650 batteries. KEH kindly supplied me with an "UG" lens which is... nearly spotless after a couple minutes of cleaning.

Shipping is where the story gets comical. The body was ridiculously cheap, so the shipping was nearly as much as the body itself. On the other hand, it was shipped Sunday (Monday for Japan), arrived in the USA yesterday, and should be at my house tomorrow.

 

[ic-racer]

In terms of the battery rebuild, I have had success rebuilding battery packs for many years. Even more so recently as battery technology is continually improving.

Doesn't the GX take AA batteries? Have you considered using Eneloop batteries. That is what I have powering all my AA cameras and flashes. The 18650 looks to have the wrong voltage compared to an AA cell.

 

[grat]

Ah. Well. That's... complicated. So the GX680 I/II run off of either NiCd (7.2v) or the DC adapter (8v). There's a microswitch under the battery pack that tells the camera if it's using the PS or the batteries. If you're using 9v (6x 1.5v AA), then as near as I can tell, the switch should be "up" (there's a slot in the battery adapter). If you're using the NiCd battery pack, the switch should be down (no slot), at which point 7.2v / 7.4v should work.

The GX680 III runs off either the DC adapter (8v) or the 9v AA pack, OR 3x CR123 (3v) batteries (also 9v).

This isn't totally verified.

The 18650 is a 3.7v battery, so 2x will be 7.4v, and at least one person (the guy who designed the 2x 18650 pack on thingiverse) seems to think it works. Obviously, I'll be testing. I found one of the original DC power adapters, and I've verified it's putting out 8v, so.... we'll see.

 

[ic-racer]

Reads like a great project. I hope you start a thread with it.
I recently rebuilt a battery pack and I was very glad it used the AA form factor, so I could put Eneloop batteries in it. This was early 2019 and the pack is still charged.

 

[removedacct2]

Any comments on the Bronica S2a? While its mass - closing in on FIVE lbs - would help, the incredible noise of the exposure would have to be a problem

Bronica S2 (and S2a, basically the same) is what I use mostly by now. With very short days this time of the year or even by midday but with very dark skies I find myself more and more in very low light situation and have been shoting as low as 1/8 without problem, with the 75mm and 50mm lenses. I use a prism. Ergonomics of the body is excellent but it depends own hands size. Mostly the compacity of the mass distribution thanks the recessed lens design helps stability. That’s where the flap down mirror design is superior.
That said to shot at 1/8 requires a bit of discipline in breath control

 

[russell_w_b]

'... but I don't find them great for handholdibility because my fingers are always trying to push into the bellows, which is doubly weird on the bessa, because the shutter release is on the 'wrong' side (the left). I wouldn't give up my folders, though. They are just so portable, especially the Agfa Isolette II - it just slips into the front pocket of Khakis or jacket.

I love my folding cameras. I can hand-hold my Mess-Baldix 6x6 and non-Mess-Baldix 6x6 down to 1/50 sec if I brace myself although I don't really like hand-holding below 1/100 sec. I automatically find myself looking for a handy wall, tree or drainpipe or other street furniture to use with the fold-down stand on the baseboard!

I have a 1938 Zeiss-Ikon Nettar 515/2 6x9 with a Compur shutter and I thought hand-holding it at 1/250 would be a breeze. Nooooo! The shutter spring is that powerful at 1/250 that I reckon it must cause the camera to jump. Sometimes I get away with it, others not. My 1950 Agfa Billy 1 is much smoother to hand-hold at 1/200 sec. Never tried at the next-speed down (1/50 sec). Maybe...

My Yashica D TLR is easy to hand-hold down to 1/30 as it has a nice sensitive shutter button and it's easy to grip. Not as handy or pocketable as my folders, though.