I Hate Medium Format...

Snapshot · Apr 30, 2014

...because now I don't use my 35mm equipment much anymore and I spent a fortune on it. I'm spoiled on the relative image quality of MF. Now, I better avoid looking at that 4x5 camera I saw the other day, otherwise I might be writing a "I Hate Large Format..." thread in the near future. Anyone else have a similar experience?

paul ron · Apr 30, 2014

Yeah

My name is paul and i am a medium format junkie! I tried quitting many times, even tried large format to no avail.

I AM ADDICTED!

Shame i have a ton of 35mm stuff in the closets too that i just cant let go of!

I AM ADDICTED!

OH this isnt photographer junkies annonymous? PJA?

eclarke · Apr 30, 2014

Then, get a view camera..

Poisson Du Jour · Apr 30, 2014

Most people consider that 35mm will be the first film format to disappear in the future. Roll film and sheet film will hold on for a bit longer given the popularity of the imaging quality, as you have found out. No secret then that MF was the chosen format for wedding photography for so many, many years.

Yes, I spent more than 30 years on 35mm and invested many thousands over the same time (printing to Ilfochrome Classic). I still do have a good use for it, though nowhere near intensively as it was.

skysh4rk · Apr 30, 2014

Yeah...

I've sold every last piece of my 135 equipment and film so that I can hate medium format exclusively now...

Vaughn · Apr 30, 2014

I use an 11x14 -- 4x5 is small format! LOL!

But I use MF mostly (8x10).

Snapshot · Apr 30, 2014

eclarke said:
Then, get a view camera..

One step at a time...

DREW WILEY · Apr 30, 2014

I love whatever format system I happen to be shooting on a particular day. It helps the creative juices to switch things up from time to time.
But once I'm in the darkroom things are no longer equal. The bigger the better, meaning 8x10 is my favorite film size, then right down the line.
Medium format is awfully nice when it's just too windy or rainy for a view camera (and when I want a larger neg than 35mm), for quick pot shots from the highway, and for vacation travel (when my wife gets impatient if I set up a view camera). I also sometimes take "finanacial
vacations" from the cost of sheet film by shooting 120 roll film.

Sirius Glass · Apr 30, 2014

For me 35mm is for when I am not siriusabout the quality of the finished product or I am traveling without much spare time.
My sirius work is done with the Hasselblad using 120 film of course.
The 4"x5" format is when I want to play shooting LF handheld or as a view camera with shifts and tilts.

snapguy · Apr 30, 2014

love

When I take my Yashicamat out on a "date" she is the most beautiful creature in the world. But when I sneak out with my Yashica Y or Minister rangefinder 35mm, my poor heart goes thumpatythump.
But when I get into a darkened room with my Yashicamat negatives I forget all about those other vixens.
I have a Canonet 35mm that is over 50 years old but she looks like a teenager.
I have owned a Nikkormat since they first came on the market and just recently obtained a 50mm f 1.4 Nikkor that matches it perfectly. What a sockaroo one-two punch.
However I still pine for my Praktisix 2 1/4 by 2 1/4 SLR that was built like an oversized 35mm and that dyanmite 180mm f2.8 Olympic
Sonnar. A lot of camera to love.

stormpetrel · Apr 30, 2014

I have only one 35mm camera now (a zorki). I use it from time to time and won't stop using it as 35mm pictures have their own charms and characteristics which would be difficult to duplicate with a medium format camera (grain, roundish perspective, e.g. pictures of Salgado, Robert Frank...) .

I just realize writing this post that I'm seriously addicted to film photography.
I thought I was cured of GAS but I bought a nice pentax 67 with its wooden handle two weeks ago.
Did I need it? No. I have already many medium format cameras (Mamiya 7ii, a C330, super 23, Moskvas, holga...) but medium format is so addictive (and our kiwi currency is so strong nowadays). The quality of the pictures, the variety of format size 6x6 6x7 & 6x9, the great feeling of the body in your hands, the ayimam red mark on your neck at the end of the day...
I often recommend people interested in film photography to start with medium format instead of 35mm for the same reasons.

I also shoot 5x7. I try to use large format as often as I can but it is hardly compatible with my family life.
It is such an effort to shoot large format that when I succeed to make a nice picture, it gives me an immense satisfaction!

Trail Images · Apr 30, 2014

To keep myself well tuned I use both MF & LF formats on alternating weeks. I'd fallen out of practice a bit with the MF for awhile and now with the LF E-6 vacillation I use the MF a lot more again. So, it's a good idea to retain usage of your various platforms if you've got access to them. One never knows what film type or size will not be available as time goes by.......:confused:

whlogan · Apr 30, 2014

It happens. I fell in love with Bronica until I met Rolleiflex SL66, then I was apostate, a regular bad, badn boy and now have two. Very expensive. Just like a trophy wife. Which I have occassionally luisted for but never played with.... oh well

Logan

RattyMouse · Apr 30, 2014

Same here. I havent shot with my 35mm camera in nearly 9 months. I have many bricks of Neopan 400 on ice but never shoot it. All because I cannot pick up the 35mm camera in place of my medium format gear. I just can't do it.

RalphLambrecht · Apr 30, 2014

Yes, the image quality jump from 35mm to MF is hugebut the jump from MFto 4x5 is disappointing.In my mind MF give the biggest bang for the buck.It's my favorite format and always has been.

Nuff · Apr 30, 2014

I shoot my 35mm when I want grain images. I don't shoot much colour with it, mostly BW photos. Most of my colour is shot on MF.

jp498 · Apr 30, 2014

The image quality of MF and the affordable equipment is very nice. I'm happy with only 12 shots per roll too (in 6x6 format) In the pre-digital days, I drooled over MF equipment while using 35mm gear. Now the equipment is affordable, image quality good, etc... It's a good time to enjoy MF. I rarely use my 35mm gear either. I pulled the batteries from it so they wouldn't corrode in the 35mm camera.

I do LF as well, not so much for the image quality but so I can use old lenses and old styles and have big negatives for contact printing, alt process, etc...

I like LF as well as MF and alternate back and forth depending on what I'm after for results. If I want 1950's looking results, MF TLR does well. If I want hundred year ago pictorialism look or thin DOF or crazy nice portraits, LF is hard to beat.

removed account4 · Apr 30, 2014

i sometimes shoot glass paper and metal negatives in 35mm cameras
but they are easier to work with in larger formats. one of my favorites
is 3a (postcard) 3.5x5.75 (i think?) nice and long. its like a mini version of 7x11

Nathan King · Apr 30, 2014

I still use my Leica M6 anywhere extra speed and mobility is absolutely needed, but even that wonderful Zeiss glass can't match a 6x7 negative!

ntenny · Apr 30, 2014

whlogan said:
(...) and now have two. Very expensive. Just like a trophy wife.

Wait, you have two very expensive trophy wives??

I was fortunate to start with medium format, but I keep finding there are miniature format cameras I just can't give up. Why didn't they think to make the Contax rangefinders in 6x9? (I suppose the closest thing is Fuji's Texas Leicas, but I want my Sonnars!)

-NT

grahamp · Apr 30, 2014

Use the formats for their strengths:

35mm: Good for wide and long lenses, and macro work. Portability (if you leave some of the lenses behind!) is good.

MF: Can be very portable (one often has a fixed lens or fewer choices), reasonably economic, and good all-round quality. Practically every design variant you can imagine.

5x4 and up Movements, odd lenses, contact prints, smaller final enlargement.

hoffy · Apr 30, 2014

I observed somthing interesting a little while ago.

In reality, a Bronica SQA, with an 80mm f2.8 attached, is not much bigger then, say, a Canon 5D, with battery grip and a modern 50mm f1.4 ( the new Sigma springs to mind).

MF is the perfect compromise between quality and portability.

j-dogg · May 1, 2014

I've moved to 5x7 LF and an RB67 system.......only two of my 35mm cameras see regular use and those are my old Nikkormat and a FED-2

I do have a 3rd Nikon Lite-Touch I use because of how small it is and it has a 28mm f3.5 lens so it's a great walkaround

Roger Cole · May 1, 2014

Snapshot said:
...because now I don't use my 35mm equipment much anymore and I spent a fortune on it. I'm spoiled on the relative image quality of MF. Now, I better avoid looking at that 4x5 camera I saw the other day, otherwise I might be writing a "I Hate Large Format..." thread in the near future. Anyone else have a similar experience?

I don't hate it, but I feel almost the same way. I mostly only use my 35mm now to shoot slides for projection and moving/fast subjects with print film so I can get 36 shots per body. Even then my M645 gives me 15 and I can change backs much quicker than film in my 35mm and if I pre-load inserts I can insert those faster too. I don't have my fast-ish zooms or as-fast primes, though.

I wouldn't worry about the LF so much though. I shoot 4x5 and like it, but the fact is I'm more tempted more often to get an RB67 system to replace the 4x5 than to hang up my M645 and Yashicamat. Medium format gives you probably 70% of the quality jump (especially for 6x7 or 6x9) for a tiny percentage of the hassle. Hassle with sheet film holders and dust a while and you'll see what I mean. And for the sizes I print (only up to 16x20) MF is more than good enough, again especially 6x7. I only shoot color in a rollfilm back even on my 4x5 provided I have a wide enough lens, for example, because it's affordable and won't be ruined by dust. 4x5 B&W isn't all that expensive given the shooting speed but color is.

If I could have only one it would be MF over 35mm or LF.

Roger Cole · May 1, 2014

RalphLambrecht said:
Yes, the image quality jump from 35mm to MF is hugebut the jump from MFto 4x5 is disappointing.In my mind MF give the biggest bang for the buck.It's my favorite format and always has been.

Spot on.

I enjoy working with a view camera. I don't enjoy sheet film for the most part, or the dust battles even though I now mostly win that one. MF gives me almost all the quality, none of the hassle. (But then there are movements and that big gg image, the enforced slow contemplation - I do enjoy using 4x5....most of the time...)

I Hate Medium Format...

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency