Making the jump to medium format?

[Kawaiithulhu]

Anybody here jump to a bigger format and then dump it all for 35mm?

I'm pretty sure that in the eternally nameless Tao it is written that "Each format has a purpose, the journey and the destination are the same." Pretty sure.

 

[Down Under]

Kawaiithulhu, you wrote: '... in the eternally nameless Tao it is written that "each format has a purpose, the journey and the destination are the same." Pretty sure.'

You said that for me!

In Southern California, certainly. In Tasmania, equally so. In Sarawak, sublimely true.

Further thoughts on this thread will be posted later. Arrivederci...

 

[Sirius Glass]

Anybody here jump to a bigger format and then dump it all for 35mm?

Not dumped 35mm, just do not use it that much. I do not enjoy adjusting a 35mm negative in an enlarger. I am no longer enamored by the too long rectangle. Hasselblad was right, square is the perfect format.

 

[etn]

Not dumped 35mm, just do not use it that much. I do not enjoy adjusting a 35mm negative in an enlarger. I am no longer enamored by the too long rectangle. Hasselblad was right, square is the perfect format.

I agree that square is the perfect format! (I found this even before I became a Hasselblad fanboy).
As a side note, have you tried the very, very long rectangle? I bought an Xpan a few months ago and am having the time of my life with it. It is really medium format on 35mm film. Love it. I found the learning curve quite steep, though - and am still nowhere near where I want to be with my pano composing skills, But the few prints I’ve made so far are stunning.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Good luck with your new camera! A Bronica SQ is a very fine tool, and a classic too..

Trond

I'm a big Hasselblad fan but, from what I see from friends with a Bronica,they get pretty close.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Not dumped 35mm, just do not use it that much. I do not enjoy adjusting a 35mm negative in an enlarger. I am no longer enamored by the too long rectangle. Hasselblad was right, square is the perfect format.

I agree that square is the perfect format! (I found this even before I became a Hasselblad fanboy).
As a side note, have you tried the very, very long rectangle? I bought an Xpan a few months ago and am having the time of my life with it. It is really medium format on 35mm film. Love it. I found the learning curve quite steep, though - and am still nowhere near where I want to be with my pano composing skills, But the few prints I’ve made so far are stunning.

I have a WideLux that I just do not find many opportunities to photograph with it.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I agree that square is the perfect format! (I found this even before I became a Hasselblad fanboy).
As a side note, have you tried the very, very long rectangle? I bought an Xpan a few months ago and am having the time of my life with it. It is really medium format on 35mm film. Love it. I found the learning curve quite steep, though - and am still nowhere near where I want to be with my pano composing skills, But the few prints I’ve made so far are stunning.

If you think the Xpan is wide, try a 6x17. I'm now playing with a 6x17 pinhole camera. Results will be forthcoming, as I just started shooting with it and it takes VERY long exposures (my longest ones were some urban nighttime stuff at 25 minutes per exposure). The Xpan is a 2.5:1 aspect ratio, if I recall correctly. 6x17 is essentially 3:1. Four shots per roll.

 

[etn]

If you think the Xpan is wide, try a 6x17. I'm now playing with a 6x17 pinhole camera. Results will be forthcoming, as I just started shooting with it and it takes VERY long exposures (my longest ones were some urban nighttime stuff at 25 minutes per exposure). The Xpan is a 2.5:1 aspect ratio, if I recall correctly. 6x17 is essentially 3:1. Four shots per roll.

I’ve been thinking about a 6x17 since I saw the (excellent) movie « Koudelka shoots the holy land ». I even hold one in my hands at the local store, camera was in great shape and sold at a good price. But I eventually decided against it (and for the Xpan) because my enlarger cannot take 6x17 negatives, and I do not want to go to a hybrid process. But I’d sure have loved 6x17 transparencies on the light table
Coming back to Koudelka, it’s amazing how this guy uses the 6x17 handheld. One would think this is a tripod-only camera only, but no, not for him.

 

[M. Axel Wikstrom]

I like using both small and medium formats, and sometimes LF. It's nice to have an assortment of tools to fit what I'm doing.

 

[Two23]

I like using both small and medium formats, and sometimes LF. It's nice to have an assortment of tools to fit what I'm doing.

Same here. I love variety. If I had to pick just three film cameras to own it would be Chamonix 045n 4x5, Rolleiflex 6x6, Nikon F3T. I use medium format when I don't have the time to set up 4x5 or 5x7, and want something better than 35mm.


Kent in SD

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I’ve been thinking about a 6x17 since I saw the (excellent) movie « Koudelka shoots the holy land ». I even hold one in my hands at the local store, camera was in great shape and sold at a good price. But I eventually decided against it (and for the Xpan) because my enlarger cannot take 6x17 negatives, and I do not want to go to a hybrid process. But I’d sure have loved 6x17 transparencies on the light table
Coming back to Koudelka, it’s amazing how this guy uses the 6x17 handheld. One would think this is a tripod-only camera only, but no, not for him.

6x17 is a tripod-preferred format, although you CAN use one of those Fuji 617's handheld if you so desire, and have it loaded with the right film, and the light conditions are right. Motion blur from camera movement is a very real problem with something that wide, because a tiny movement at the center of the camera turns into significant, observable motion at the ends of the frame. My 6x17 pinhole kinda-sorta solves that problem by having a hemispheric film plane, but then blows the argument out of the water with an f/300 aperture (daylight exposures with Tri-X loaded are still in the 4+ second range, evenings are 12 seconds, and I did a night-time shot with it that was 25 MINUTES. No way to hand-hold THAT.

 

[MattKing]

I've been having fun with my adjustable format Noons pinhole camera.
One day I might shoot 6x12:

The next day I might choose to shoot a roll at 6x9:

(Aren't they great sports - a 3 minute portrait exposure!)

And then another day I could decide to shoot a roll of 6x6 (need to scan some of those).

 

[mshchem]

I'm a big Hasselblad fan but, from what I see from friends with a Bronica,they get pretty close.

Good advice. I have used both Bronica and I had a nice Hassy 501c setup. I sold the Hassy stuff before it tanked. When I got back in to 6x6 I ended up with 3 SQAi bodies and all the stuff to go along with it. For a while KEH and Ebay were giving away Bronica stuff. I love it.

However, Hasselblad just feels so good. If you want something that is a work of art, as well as a tool, there's no substitute. If I had crazy money I would have a room devoted to Swedish and German cameras and lenses.

If you want nice examples better get them while you can. Never to come again.
Best Regards, Mike

 

[Kevin Ekstrom]

You can get by with a Bronica ETRS or ETRSi on the cheap. The Bronica is a great way to break into MF shooting.