A Rolleiflex does not have interchangealble lenses for it is not in the ball park. I am talking about the Mamiya C family.
Folders do not offer interchangeable lenses.
SLRs are smaller that TLRs.
TLRs do not stop down to see the depth of field.
Are you Sirius?Hasselblads & Rollei SL66 & Bronica or Kiev 6C.... smaller than a Rolleiflex TLR ?
Part II: Medium Format Cameras (Rollei v Hasselblad) — InTents Adventures
Part I: The Joy of Medium Format Film So you are interested in medium format film photography. There are a litany of follow-on questions including: where do I get film, how do I develop film, and what kind of camera do I use? There's a bit of good and bad news when it comes to medium format filmintents-adventures.com
I don't disagree, but curious to hear what you mean exactly. I try to take as many photos as I can and in different settings, try different things. Been reading Minor White's book about the zone system. Also been reading about composition and framing. Part of why I started developing and doing my own printing is to improve my skills. I want to be in touch with the images throughout the entire process and oversee it all. I also think that these formats were really made to be seen printed on photographic paper. Good prints look almost 3d like. This rarely if ever comes across scans.
A Rolleiflex does not have interchangealble lenses for it is not in the ball park. I am talking about the Mamiya C family.
Then you get it. Maybe sharpness is the wrong term for it, but you get what I mean.
A Rolleiflex does not have interchangealble lenses for it is not in the ball park. I am talking about the Mamiya C family.
Sirius, like your post, I was responding to Sanders' previous one. The Mamiya C family was not mentioned....in fact the opposite. "fixed lens Mamiyaflex"....was. Nobody said Rolleiflex had interchangeable lenses.....but the SL66 did
The SL66 was my first choice, but Samys Camera in 2007 advised that I choose the Hasselblad V series and not the SL66, Hasselblad 200 series and Hasselblad 2000 series because of Samys advise that parts and service were, in their opinion beginning to show signs of problems. That changed my direction. Since I have seen nothing to refute that since then.
At this point, you have learned as much from us as we are able to tell you. This thread will continue on while we all recite the catechisms of our learned wisdoms, to wit: Hasselblads are better for everything. Portraits need long lenses. Leicas make the best images because hey Cartier-Bresson. It’s all shite without a tripod. Et cetera.
Save yourself this spectacle. Go over to Central Camera this afternoon. Ask the nice man behind the counter to show you some small light entry-level MF cameras that don’t cost a fortune. Fondle them. Buy the one that appeals to you. Ask the nice man behind the counter if you can bring it back and trade it in on another camera, once you have a better sense of what works for you. Buy some film. (And a light meter — I prefer an old used Sekonic Studio Deluxe but that’s another matter of religious dispute.) Go shoot. And come back to the thread next week and tell us what you learned.
Sirius we all know you're a big big Hasselblad fan....... but in the OP's context of "less than 1k"....it's a pipe dream. He also mentioned maybe getting another 35mm and an MF for $1k. Without knowing how he's scanning/printing in greater detail it's a gamble to say where he'll find the 'sharpness' he's missing.
+1
You need to get hands-on with the camera(s) of your choice. Find what YOU like best, not what we are used to using and thus like best.
Vintage folding cameras are one area where a person might still find a solid medium format bargain to last a lifetime.
Might be worth starting out with a cheaper Japanese TLR and, assuming the experience/ergos/results are to one's liking, you could always proceed to look at more upmarket options. I just purchased a mint Ricohflex (new) Dia for $82 because $82 and it's a fine enough camera. If TLRs turn out not to be for you, one could always resell it at a very minimal loss. Folders are great, but I would tend to agree with Rolleiflexible. Hassy are also awesome, but you can only sell one kidney.
Thank you. I've got an old Speed Graphic in a box somewhere, used to shoot it back in college - great cameras and entry point into large format. Should probably dig that out...Welcome to Photrio
I started with a Kodak Brownie Hawkeye camera, later was given an inexpensive German TLR, then a Voigthlander Vito II 35mm rangerfinderless camera and then settled on a Minolta SR-7. For decades I used Minolta SLRs upgrading occasionally. Then in 2004 I moved to Nikon N75 AF and 2007 to Hasselblad 503 CX. About 6 years later I started using a Pacemaker Speed Graphic and Graflex Model D 4"x5" cameras. So I started with medium format, stayed with 35mm for decades and moved back to medium format and wandered into large format.
Right now I'm shooting with a Canon A-1 with 50mm f1.4 and 35mm f2.8 lenses. I like the A-1 and it's been serving me well, especially after getting the 50mm calibrated and taking sharper photos. However, I'm looking for something sharper yet. I also wish the A-1 had the ability to spot meter and a quieter shutter/mirror slap (it draws so much attention every time it goes off). I've been looking at rangefinders because they're different beasts than SLRs, quieter, and I can probably take pictures at lower shutter speeds with less shake. Also considering medium format because pretty much everything I've seen that was shot on medium format cameras is beautiful and with very minimal grain.
My main requirements are these:
1) Have a wide range of lenses available. I'm not looking to collect, nor am I going to get a lens in every focal length. But I would like to, for instance, try different types of 50mm lenses and stick with the one I like the most.
2) Be somewhat compact. I don't mind something bigger and heavier than the A-1, but I take my camera with me in all types of situations. I ride my bike with it strapped to my shoulder, ride the train, etc. I've seen some medium format SLRs that are just way too big to lug around and want to avoid those.
3) under $1000 for the body, preferably the body + a lens.
4) built-in meter, but I wouldn't mind getting one of those attachment meters for the right camera.
The Leicas immediately come to mind, but the bodies are just too expensive. I know the M3 can be had for around or sometimes less than $1k, but that's really stretching my budget. Having to prep the film by cutting a longer leader is also a major turn off.
Are there cameras made with the M3 mount so they can accept different Leica lenses? I know there are several that were made with LTM, but I'm a bit hesitant. It's "last year's model" and to be fair, I don't know just how many lenses are available with that mount, or how many are affordable...
Another options is a Nikon F3. Very affordable and has a lot of lenses available! But an SLR still.
Like I mentioned earlier, I like the look of medium format cameras. The Fuji ones seem loved and appreciated by many. I heard that the Plaubel Makina 67 has a really great lens. I wouldn't mind getting medium format camera with a fixed fantastic lens.
I feel like there are a lot of options and opinions I'm not even aware of, and I would like to hear them all. Thank you!
....but he's saying he wants something 'sharper'...... How would a T-70 provide different than his A-1 ?
This thread has been bumped a few times recently, so I thought I'll give an update.
I ended up buying a Leica M3 locally for less than a grand. It was CLAd in July so it was a no brainer. I actually started with the lens - I got a good deal on a Rokkor 40mm M lens, so that led me down the M camera path. I had a CL for a couple of weeks, and it was really light and compact but I returned it because that particular one had a couple of issues. The M3 is incredible! It's so much fun to use. It's light and compact, and I really can't imagine using anything else. I'm also happy that I can choose from a wide array of lenses to try on this thing, but again, the 40mm Rokkor/Summicron is beautiful and I have a hard time wanting to use anything else.
I did go to a store to try some cameras and it was a mediocre experience at best. I also looked at some cameras in person, and nothing grabbed me quite like the Leica. I still have my eye on medium format, but honestly I'm having so much fun with the Leica that I don't know if I'll add another camera anytime soon.
So if you are in the position I was in a few months ago and you're looking for a new camera, consider a Leica.
Just curious how the M3 works with a 40mm lens. Since it has 50mm framelines do you just use the whole viewfinder? I’ve never looked through a M3 VF before. Just curious as I too am interested in a Leica to use with just 40mm.
I don't understand why the Canon FD 50 mm F 1.4 lens isn't sharp enough for the O P, it's recognised as one of the best standards lenses ever made , indeed I shot with one on various FD bodies for more than thirty years and it always gave sharp results. There's something wrong with either this person's lens,, camera , or technique.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?