I'm done with 35mm... need a few MF alternatives!

JRJacobs · Apr 10, 2008

max_ebb said:
Have you never had circumstances or seen evidence that caused you to change your opinion about something? Although I was doing quite a bit of macro work at the time I posted that, most of it at the time was significantly less than 1:1. Also, I wasn't setting my tripod on padded carpet at the time. When I started using a room with carpet and pad, that's when I had to start hanging weight on the camera to keep it stable. The biggest factor though, is at that time, I hadn't printed the negs larger than 8x10 yet. When I printed 20x24, I started seeing some softness due to shutter vibration that I didn't know was there.

LOL, backpeddling when busted.

max_ebb said:
"Although I was doing quite a bit of macro work at the time I posted that, most of it at the time was significantly less than 1:1."

But back when you were happy with P67 for macro you said:

max_ebb said:
"As far as shutter vibration goes, I have never had any problems with it ....I do a lot of macro work (using all three tubes together giving magnification higher than 1:1)"

So what is the truth? It's getting hard to take you seriously anymore.

...

patrickjames · Apr 10, 2008

Jason- For about the same amount as a good Hassy you can get a Rollei 6008. It is the best camera by far if you want to shoot square. The lenses are as good and sometimes better than a Hassy as well. You have your choice between Zeiss and Schneider. Not too many people know about them in the US but in my mind after using one now for quite a while, I think Hassy's are the poor stepchild of the Rollei. I think Hassys have too many issues until you get used to them and how to fix them on the spot. The Pentax is a great camera as are the lenses, but I found it clunky. If you want to use longer lenses be aware that shutter vibration is a real problem with the camera. The Mamiya 7 is a fantastic camera, and I have plans to buy one of those as well. It does have downsides. You can't focus up close so forget about it for portraits. Nice and compact for landscapes though and the lenses are amazing because they don't have to be designed to allow for the added distance of the mirror.

I have used all of the cameras that I have mentioned and this is just my opinion. If anyone wants to flame me, I won't respond.

Jason, I Live in SD if you want to take a look at a Rollei.

Patrick

max_ebb · Apr 10, 2008

JRJacobs said:
LOL, backpeddling when busted.

But back when you were happy with P67 for macro you said:

So what is the truth? It's getting hard to take you seriously anymore.

...

Just exactly what is your problem? Maybe you need to get a life. I explained the things that transpired between then and now, even though I didn't owe you any explanation at all.

GO AWAY AND FIND SOMEONE ELSE TO HARASS

JRJacobs · Apr 10, 2008

patrickjames said:
I have used all of the cameras that I have mentioned and this is just my opinion. If anyone wants to flame me, I won't respond.

LOL - I took the bait of a troll and I apologize to the forum.

At any rate, I have never seen a 6008, but I have used an SL66 and it was a mighty nice camera with the built in bellows, I definitely liked it over my old 500CM. What is the difference between the SL66 and the 6008?

jasonjoo · Apr 10, 2008

Patrick, thanks for the kind gesture.

This may seem trivial, but not having to worry about batteries is something I've come to enjoy with my Rolleiflex. The Rollei 6008 seems like a great camera though. I'll have to think about all of this some more.

Thanks,

Jason

patrickjames · Apr 11, 2008

The camera does need batteries, but a great workaround that I have used is to rebuild the battery packs and instead of Ni-Cads you use Nickel Metal Hydride batteries. They pack a serious wallop. I would have to dig out where I bought the (eight) pack already soldered for me, but I highly recommend this to anyone with a Rolleiflex. If anyone wants to know I can dig it up. Only cost about $25 for the pack as well. Cheap.

The battery thing can be an issue though, so I do understand. I have never had a problem though. I just keep two around. I use a Maha charger as well instead of the Rollei charger.

If anyone wants any info on this setup let me know.

Patrick

Tom Hoskinson · Apr 11, 2008

Mark Antony said:
Remember that image is comparing a Pentax 110 to a 6x7.
I had a Pentax 6x7 for a while and loved it, sharp lenses, well built and cheap.
The disadvantages compared to a Blad are no interchangeable backs no leaf shutter (no flash sync at all speeds)
Advantages are eye level operation (although you can get WLF for Pentax and Prisms for Blads) and the lenses are a lot cheaper, it also handles a lot like a big 35mm.
Make sure if you go for the Pentax you get a MLU version some early ones were sans mirror lock.
I swapped the Pentax for a Fuji 6x7 RF, which although doesn't have interchangeable lens or backs is very quiet and fast to use and I can hand hold down to 1/8 sec
Mark

And, the Fuji lenses are excellent.

Soeren · Apr 11, 2008

max_ebb said:
But you did see some shutter induced movement? How solid was the tripod you were using? Was the tripod on carpet/pad? Did you try hanging weight on it and see if it helped?

As mentioned before I tried with two different tripods, my manfrotto 055 and 058 with the weight of approx 2 and 6 Kg. The 141 head put another 1kg on.
I don't no the name or weight of the borowed Ballhead I tried but the (in this case) inferior minimagicball was used as a worst case example
To eliminate vibration from me moving around I tried the setup on a concrete floor(bathroom) My expectations was that the heavier 058 tripod would out perform the 055 but I was proved wrong under all circumstances. Even with the ballhead that proved to be the best there was no difference between the tripods used. I did not use additional wieghts to improve stability due to the tripodhead findings.
I admit my trial has flaws:

#done on a concrete floor It does not simulate real shooting situations(If you like).
But under real shooting situations you introduce a lot of other parameters that will interfere making mirror or shutter vibrations lees of a concern. Wind soft ground, trafic, 40cm errors etc.

# Two pods and three heads is not statistical enough and my samples may have flaws.

# No pics to prove my points.
I did not do testshots to see the influence on image quality. I have done shots in the field and not found any significant proof of unsharpness due to cameramovements

# you may find my trials lacking in several more ways so....

Offcource one could conclude that there is shutter induced vibration.
The question then is does have influence on image quality and in which situations to what degree?
Based on the amount of shots done by great photographers all over the world including macros and the succes of the camera over time
(yes its not made any more but thats because of the lead in the soldering)
I would say that if it really was a problem it would have been solved simply because it wouldn't sell otherwise.
kind regards

eddym · Apr 11, 2008

patrickjames said:
The camera does need batteries, but a great workaround that I have used is to rebuild the battery packs and instead of Ni-Cads you use Nickel Metal Hydride batteries. They pack a serious wallop. I would have to dig out where I bought the (eight) pack already soldered for me, but I highly recommend this to anyone with a Rolleiflex. If anyone wants to know I can dig it up. Only cost about $25 for the pack as well. Cheap.

The battery thing can be an issue though, so I do understand. I have never had a problem though. I just keep two around. I use a Maha charger as well instead of the Rollei charger.

If anyone wants any info on this setup let me know.

Patrick

Patrick, I'd be very interested in that information. I have a 6003, and both batteries that I have for it have memory problems. Each one barely gets through a roll of film, then recharges in about 10 minutes. Obviously, it's not getting fully charged.

Sirius Glass · Apr 11, 2008

jasonjoo said:
...Again, thanks for all of the suggestions. Another reason why I'm choosing the Hasselblad route is that in the future, if I need a repair or CLA, I'm sure there will be a handful of Hasselblad techs around.

Jason

For Hasselblad CLAs and adjustments see Mike on the third floor [in th eback] at Samys Camera on Fairfax Avenue. He is a certified Hasselblad tech.

Steve

patrickjames · Apr 11, 2008

eddym said:
Patrick, I'd be very interested in that information. I have a 6003, and both batteries that I have for it have memory problems. Each one barely gets through a roll of film, then recharges in about 10 minutes. Obviously, it's not getting fully charged.

Here's what you do. First thing is to get a different charger than the Rollei charger. I use a Maha and they aren't expensive.

Dead Link Removed

This charger can get you longer life out of the two battteries that you already have by running them through a bunch of charging cycles. It is also good for charging just about anything and if I remember correctly can be used in the car as well. If you are really adventurous the next step will be to rebuild the batteries. I went with NiMH batteries the second time I rebuilt one because the first one I rebuilt just ended up having the same Ni-Cad problems. Unfortunately the place that assembled my battery pack looks to be out of business (batterystore.com). I am attatching a picture of the cells-

The name of the cells is Intellect, 2/3a is the size and they are 1400mAh which is nearly three times the 500mAh that the Rollei cells are. I am not sure where you can get a pre-made pack anymore. It is best to spot weld the cells together if you can only find loose cells because they are a really tight squeeze into the shell of the battery. If you end up doing this, you can't use the Rollei charger any more, you have to buy one like the Maha. Make sure you are using the appropriate fuse for them as well.

I know I need to point out that I am not an expert so you do this at your own risk. It has worked for me though. You can find more info if you search P-net for it, though I don't like going on there myself.

Good luck.

Patrick

max_ebb · Apr 11, 2008

Soeren said:
Offcource one could conclude that there is shutter induced vibration.
The question then is does have influence on image quality and in which situations to what degree?
Based on the amount of shots done by great photographers all over the world including macros and the succes of the camera over time

A camera is just a tool, and like any other tool, it is better suited for some uses than others. The shutter vibration is only an issue with long lenses or super close up macro at slow shutter speeds, so it's not an issue for many users. Many feel that the P67 is not that well suited for studio work. It's all a matter of personal preference, and what works best for each individual and each set of circumstances.

Soeren said:
(yes its not made any more but thats because of the lead in the soldering)

Hmm, there are plenty of other cameras still being made in Japan with lead in the soldering. Doesn't the Pentax digital camera have lead in the soldering?

Soeren said:
I would say that if it really was a problem it would have been solved simply because it wouldn't sell otherwise.
kind regards

Shutter vibration is the nature of the beast with large focal plane shutters. It's a matter of physics, there is no getting around it. It's not an issue that can be "solved". It is a known issue, just like the problematic film advance mechanism that was improved on the 67II. Lots of people had problems with the film advance locking up on the 6x7/67 bodies.

eddym · Apr 11, 2008

patrickjames said:
Here's what you do. First thing is to get a different charger than the Rollei charger. I use a Maha and they aren't expensive.

Thanks Patrick, I'll start with the charger and then look for the batteries.

orto · Apr 17, 2008

Answering the OP question and similar ones, very few people mention the Contax 645. Partially because it was mostly a costly variant still some time ago (isn't anymore!) and there are not so many amateurs that use it. But it became available in your suggested price (you can get a complete kit with 80mm lens for well under 2000$) and it is the most modern and the most... plenty of things (have a look at Contax reviews, too many good things to write about) MF camera to get. Don't let be fooled by its rarity in people's suggestions rather check it out!

jasonjoo · Apr 17, 2008

Thanks for the suggestion goldfart.

I think I am going to have my second Rolleiflex CLA'd and install Maxwell screens in both. With the change left over, I may dive into the LF territory. But man... that is really opening up a whole new world for me! I love the diversity in analog photography!

What's next... home made wet plates? The sky is the limit

Jason

voceumana · Apr 22, 2008

Back to the original question

I've owned a number of MF cameras, as well as 35mm & LF.

The choice of a particular style of camera is very personal--while a specific camera can be a fine tool, if the photographer doesn't relate to it, then it's the wrong camera for that photographer.

For example, when I was in high school, I used a Yashica Mat 124--took lots of pictures, and many good ones. But, I can't use a TLR today--my 56 year old eyes can't focus it, and holding it steady just doesn't happen!

I used to own a Bronica SQ-A, and it's a very fine camera. But, it's not a hand-hold camera FOR ME, and ultimately I sold it. Still, I would recommend one to someone who likes the format and style.

My Fuji 6x4.5 folder rangefinder is cute, and pocketable (for a large pocket)that's easy for me to use--but I don't like the vertical orientation of the format as I have to rotate it for horizontal shots. And it has not proven particularly reliable, so it doesn't get much use--still, I fell in love with Fuji lenses because of it. It has a superbly sharp lens with great contrast. It produces great chromes.

My Fuji GW690III is my latest acquisition: the negative size is nearly large format. Since I'd really always prefer a view camera, it's close at least in format size, if not in movements. It's very hand holdable.

And I have a Pentax 67II, and am building up the system with lenses. Yes, it has it's limitations (no interchangeable backs), but it's a nice format size, with decent, affordable lenses. And it operates very intuitively for me. There are 2 leaf shutter lenses available for it: 90mm & 165mm (for flash at higher sync speeds), though the 90mm is discontinued it's plentiful on the used market. The Pentax has one of the flatest film planes on the market, and it's often used for astro photography for that reason alone.

So, my best advise is: go to a camera store if any is near you, and put some of these different cameras in your hands, and dry shoot. That'll be worth more than any of us can tell you. If there's no camera store near you, go to a camera swap meet. There will be enough different cameras there for you to get a good sense of what you like & don't like.

In all, what matters is that it fits how you like.

B&Jdude · Apr 23, 2008

That 67's little puppy to the left in the photo has to be the goofiest thing Pentax ever made. I picked up one at a yard sale for $8.43 (The guy wanted $10, but accepted my offer of all that I had on me). A 110 cartridge system camera. A metered aperture priority SLR with interchangeable lenses, auto flash, powered auto winder, filters, hood, etc., etc. All that for a 110 cartridge camera!! Why didn't somebody produce a 110 monorail view camera - - there might have been a big hungry market out there for it!?!

Paul Goutiere · Apr 23, 2008

The Rolleiflex TLRs (perhaps many other TLRs) are pretty fine cameras. I had no idea until I acquired two Rolleiflexes.

One is a old Rolleiflex Standard w/ uncoated Tessar (1939) which I was given some years ago. The viewfinder is terribly dim but the pictures are quite adequate.

I purchased a Rolleiflex Automat (1953) earlier this year which has a much brighter screen and coated Tessar. If I'd had this camera first, I might not have purchased my Hasselblad. The Hasselblad is more versatile and somewhat more ergonomic to be sure, but the Rollei is simple, reliable, no mirror, and I like to use it handheld. The images are to my eyes as good as the Hassy. This is a old Rollei.

I cannot imagine what a newer Rolleiflex would be like. Maybe one day I'll get an upgrade.

philsweeney · May 11, 2008

walter23 said:
If I was buying MF gear right now I'd probably go with the RB67. I like the 6x7 aspect ratio, the optics are great, and the camera looks like a 70s sci-fi plasma cannon. Much cheaper than Hasselblad and similar quality (just not as flashy). How can you go wrong with that

But why not just skip the MF and go to 4x5? You'll get movements for perspective and focus control, easy film handling (sheets are simple to deal with in the dark), impressive scans of 40 to 200 million pixels, and the ability to dabble with contact printing methods like cyanotype, salt printing, van dyke brown, etc.

Oh, and phenomenal optics with little distortion and corner to corner sharpness.

If you're already scanning your film anyway, you may also consider keeping your nice L lenses to put on a, well, another small format 35mm-compatible body that is forbidden to discuss here at APUG. A lot of us do secretly use them from time to time, you know.

I am considering the RB67 for occasional shots while out fishing. My primary camera is an 8 x 10 and the RB67 looks like a good pick for occasional hand-held shot, though I would carry a tripod also.

Reading the manual it looks like the "forked mirror lock up cable" would be a good item for me for the hand-held shot?

Nick Zentena · May 12, 2008

I can't imagine using a RB67 like that. With lens the RZ67 is similar in weight to my 8x10. The RB is heavier -)

If you really want to use it handheld why not the grip?

Personally I'd look for something smaller to pair with the 8x10. Something like one of the Fuji RF would be my idea.

philsweeney · May 12, 2008

Hi Nick,

thanks. Weight is not the issue for me. The grip sounds good and I'll look at the Fuji.

Am I correct in understanding the forked mirror lockup cable would be helpful for a hand shot?

Nick Zentena · May 12, 2008

I think it's mostly for mirror up. Are you doing mirror locked up handheld? How do you focus?

Steve Smith · May 12, 2008

I use an RB67 hand held. Yes, it is heavy but it is managable with the left hand grip.

I don't see how the mirror up would help hand held as you would get a delay between the mirror going up and the shutter firing during which the ground glass would go blank. Secondly, the advantage of mirror up is to reduce mirror vibrations at relatively slow shutter speeds. At these speeds you wouldn't really want to hand hold anyway as you would not be able to hold the camera still enough. At 'normal' hand held shutter speeds, the mirror vibration is not an issue anyway.

The RB67's mirror mechanism is very well designed and is damped well and I don't think mirror vibration is so much of an issue as it is with some other cameras. I'm thinking about the 'clang' my Bronica makes when the mirror reaches the end stop. I think the RB67 mirror is on a cam system which decelerates to a stop rather than stopping instantly. It also makes a much nicer, more civilised sound!

Steve.

MattKing · May 12, 2008

I used to work with a wedding photographer who used RB67s and Koni-Omegas to shoot weddings.

Hand-held is doable.

Matt

j4425 · May 12, 2008

Steve Smith said:
The RB67's mirror mechanism is very well designed and is damped well and I don't think mirror vibration is so much of an issue as it is with some other cameras. I'm thinking about the 'clang' my Bronica makes when the mirror reaches the end stop. I think the RB67 mirror is on a cam system which decelerates to a stop rather than stopping instantly. It also makes a much nicer, more civilised sound!

Steve.

I hand hold my RB all the time. It CAN get tiring after a while but can be done. And yes, the mirror slap is is minimal. I could of swore there was a post not to long ago comparing the RB and Hassy at slower shutter speeds. I've shot some super sharp pics at 1/30 with the RB. Although I've never had serious time with a hassy, I've heard a lot of photographers say it's quite difficult without a tripod at those speeds.

I'm done with 35mm... need a few MF alternatives!

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency