medium format SLR help needed

[tballphoto]

I am trying to decide on what camera i should get. My needs are simple

Be able to be used if the onboard electronics die on me. I WAS the proud owner of a good late 1990s 35mm SLR that was rendered unusable when the winding motor died. And I have been hosed in getting onboard light meters repaired in canon FTbns, and still dont believe they are accurate.

Have the option of affordable lenses.

Be found with prism view finders on them, bronica, pentax, mamiya come like that on the ebay all the time.
I have a Diacord G TLR and the view finder is very hard for me to use.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

Are you looking for a digital camera or a film camera? You wrote DSLR.

 

[tballphoto]

My bad on that, Single Lens Reflex is my goal. I accidentally wrote the D down as I have been seing used digital back for low cost on ebay for some of these models.

 

[Donald Qualls]

There are really only a couple sensible choices of MF SLR that are all-mechanical, and one costs a mint, while the other is a portable gym masquerading as a camera.

There's the Hasselblad (original version from 1959 or so was all mechanical), and the RB67 (100% mechanical, only battery involved is if you get one of the metering prisms). The 'Blad will set you back a bunch of money, the RB67 weighs enough to make you look like Ahnuld.

 

[Paul Howell]

By the time everyone has chimed in you be just as confused, there are a number of options, knowing your shooting style will help. What do you shoot, do you need longish telephotos or wide lens, how fast, and what format? 6X6, 6X4.5 6X7 or 6X8. What are the issues with the TLR you use, to dim or you don't like the look down waist level finder? Last what is your price range, not just a body but how much are willing to spend for a system?

 

[agfarapid]

Try Mamiya 645 system Prices are rising but still a good buy and pretty reliable. They use a 6v battery which are very cheap and the system is excellent. Or, for back to basics try a 6x6 folder.(Zeiss Nettar). Bronicas are a good choice too.

 

[tballphoto]

my camera herd:

2 canon ftbn quick loads
lenses: a 100-300 and a 75-210. Have a 50mm lens I barely used.

1 voightlander vitomatic II

Nikon D7500
nikon 100-300 zoom and a sigma 150-600mm

Right NOW my shooting style is plants that seem nice, and animals at long range.

The Diacord G TLR i have. Well the main issues is that the viewfinder sucks for my eyes. It is clear but dull. Focusing on anything is hard unless I put in on a flat surface that wont move. I have a plate in one arm that limits how I move that wrist, and have injured the thumbnail portion of my dominant hands thumb and fore finger so my manuevering of the focusing lever isnt that easy.

What i am LOOKING for

6x4.5 format. Most frames that size and the ratio is more of what i am used to shooting with a 35mm negative. IE one side longer then the other.

pentaprism view finder. mamiya/pentax/bronica's commonly on ebay with them for LOW prices. less then canon AE-1's are going for.

Electronics, i dont mind electronics but i expect electronics on these old cameras to die suddenly and i would really like a camera that will keep working if the built in electronics like the light meter dies, or the mother board fries itself.

My vitomatic II came with a functional lightmeter, but boom it died. No problem, it works well with hazy 8/sunny 16 if i use the right film speed. The late 1980's/mid 1990 cameras i have had with electronic functions, meters, motors, are completely useless once the motor burns out, or the mother board shorts out.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

How much do you want to spend? I think the only cameras that will satisfy your no-electronics and prism-viewing, and are common enough on eBay are Hasselblads, Bronica S-series, Mamiya RB67, Mamiya C330 and Kowa 6.

Of these, the C330 is the cheapest, but I think its prism is very dim. The screen itself is pretty good. The bronica S-series is the next cheapest, but I've never had one and don't know much about them. Then comes the RB67 which meet all your requirements, but are extremely bulky and heavy. The Kowa 6 meets all your requirements but is hard to find. Hasselblads trade off price with the Mamiya RB67's weight. I don't know of any 645 SLRs that do not have any batteries.

Anyways, I think you should get a Mamiya RB67.

 

[Donald Qualls]

FWIW, though less common, there are 6x4.5 roll film holders for the RB67 -- I have one. It gives a full 16 frames, unlike some 645 cameras and film backs that only give 15.

Pretty heavy camera for 6x4.5, though. Heck, it's heavy for 6x7!

 

[DREW WILEY]

Among actual SLR's, for 6x7 it's hard to beat the reliability, abundance, affordability, and excellent lens selection of the Pentax 6x7 system. There are no electronics to worry about on the MLU version; but a simple battery is required to operate the shutter. It will be significantly lighter than an RB67, but much heavier than something like a Mamiya 645, which might be right up your alley if you do your homework and select the correct version for your particular needs.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Drew, I agree with you that the Pentax 6x7 is an awesome camera for all the reasons you listed, but I thought OP was against all battery power. If OP is OK with an electronically controlled shutter then he should also look at Bronica SQ, and the Mamiya 645.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I agree, if a battery-dependent camera is okay, and with a preference for the 645 frame, it's really hard to beat the Mamiya M645 -- either original or 1000s (the J model has the original shutter speeds, but not mirror prefire option and no dual shutter release buttons). Excellent glass, reasonably priced bodies and lenses, preloaded film inserts possible to permit fast reloads, and finder options include a prism (so no mirror image viewfinder). Plus far lighter than either the Pentax 6x7 or the RB67.

Only down side I see other than age is the fact you have to turn the camera on its side to shoot verticals -- which is a PITA if you have the waist level finder mounted. Not a big deal with the prism, however.

 

[halfaman]

I can't think in any pure SLR 6x4.5 camera with a mechanical shutter. All have an electronic shutter with some of them offering an "emergency" mechanical single speed for use in case of dead batteries, it goes from 1/60 to 1/500 of a second depending on the camera.

You can have a mechanical SLR of a bigger format with a 6x4.5 back, but.. do you really want that?

 

[Paul Howell]

The Mamiya 6X4.5 can be had at a reasonable price, buy 2 so you have a back up it the electronics fail. I have Kowa, 66SL and super66, as I print 8X10 and 11X14 for me it is a 6X4.5, so I get 12 rather than 16 frames, but I crop in either direction, no worries about using on a tripod. But if you have deep enough pockets I would go with a Hassy, parts and repairs are still available, large selection of lens and finders, and you can find a 6X4.5 back.

 

[fabulousrice]

I am trying to decide on what camera i should get. My needs are simple

Be able to be used if the onboard electronics die on me. I WAS the proud owner of a good late 1990s 35mm SLR that was rendered unusable when the winding motor died. And I have been hosed in getting onboard light meters repaired in canon FTbns, and still dont believe they are accurate.

Have the option of affordable lenses.

Be found with prism view finders on them, bronica, pentax, mamiya come like that on the ebay all the time.
I have a Diacord G TLR and the view finder is very hard for me to use.

Do you need to actually have "electronics on board"? A 120 Zeiss or a Kodak Retina are undying and a great thing about them is the absence of batteries!

 

[narsuitus]

Here are the three medium format all-mechanical battery-free cameras that I own and use:

Fuji 6x7cm rangefinder with fixed 90mm f/3.5 normal lens (left) which I prefer for general photography.

Mamiya 6x7cm SLR with 150mm f/4 SF-C telephoto lens (center) which I prefer for shooting head & shoulder portraits.

Fuji 6x9cm rangefinder with fixed 65mm f/5.6 wide-angle lens (right) which I prefer for shooting landscapes, scenics, architecture, and group portraits.


Medium Format by Narsuitus, on Flickr

 

[ProfessorC1983]

I may be in the minority but I love my Arax 60 (refurbished and upgraded Kiev 60) which is all-mechanical and significantly less expensive than the Fuji, Mamiya and Hasselblad options. With the eye-level prism it's become my primary "walking around" camera despite the weight, which is the main drawback.

 

[Sirius Glass]

1) If possible have take out the 'D' in the title, otherwise ask the moderators to help you by send a request with the "!Report this post".
2) Noted above while the prices have risen over the last ten years Hasselblad is a full system of interchangeable lenses and accessories that are upward and downward compatible. Service, parts, lenses and bodies are still readily available. The only draw back is that it takes a little longer time between buying lenses than buying 35mm lenses. Please feel free to send a PM [Private Message] with any questions. I have been using Hasselblad for over a decade after four decades of using 35m slrs. I recommend CF or later lenses since, for most lenses, one set of filters will fit the whole set. I personally have CF lenses and not needed any newer lens designs.

Welcome to APUG Photrio!!!​

 

[tballphoto]

Its why Im here, trying to get help from people who USE the cameras. And you guys all seem to be pretty damned decent. Even with someone who only knows enough about the subject to be very dangerous.

Im not exactly concerned about weight at all. My nikon D7500 weighs 1.41 lb / 640 g (Body Only) and my sigma 150-600mm contemporary weighs 4.03 lb / 1830 g. Its a hefty load, prone to make your arms and pectorals ripple like the men shown on covers of a romance novel, but THAT has been my go to setup for the last year. Sure i havent been able to do photo work this winter very often but its what i have ready to go.

And I seem to be confusing the group so I will relist my thinking on the subject.

I need the ability to have an actual view finder, the waist level view finder is a negative for me as the EXPERIENCE i have with my Diacord G is less then good. With my eyes I have to put it on a flat solid stationary surface and get about 3 inches away from it with my eye in order to get things FOCUSED. Sure i can SEE through it fine, but to get a photo that doesnt look like big foot running through the woods its HARD.

Electronics are an unpleasant fact of life. The newest and best of the pentax and mamiya and bronica lines have no option but to embrace built in electronics like auto focus and light meters. MY CONCERN is that the amount of money for it, makes me want a camera that can work even if the light meter dies or the auto focus system goes kaput.

And I am concerned about basic reliability of the camera as i have READ on filmphotography forum threads were the person gets a medium format SLR, and while winding to frame 4 of their third roll of film in it, something in the film mechanism goes SNAP and they have a paperweight.

What id like to do, wildlife photography. And perhaps someday human photography. But the immediate out come id like is to sit on my back deck and get some good pictures of a baby deer and momma or a nice close up of a chickadee, and if its sharp enough, enlarge it out to a poster and put it on my wall.

 

[Donald Qualls]

And we're back to RB67, at least for what I'm reading that you want.

I have 645, 6x6 (via Graflex 22 roll film back) and 6x7 backs for mine. The 6x6 doesn't provide dark slide interlock and because the other 120 backs are first-gen (Pro rather than ProS or ProSD) they don't have double exposure interlock, but aside from the meter in my chimney finder, these are battery free, 100% mechanical -- and with the shutter in the lens, if a shutter goes down a lens switch will get me back to a working shutter, so I don't have to poke at it and try to figure out if it's broken or just jammed when I should be composing and exposing.

Lenses range from 37mm fisheye, 50mm rectilinear, to 360 or 500 mm (I've got a 50, 90, and 250, plus a 2x teleconverter). The 50 and 65 are retrofocus (37mm too), 90 and 127 normal, 150 and longer are "tele" -- with the result that the balance and weight don't change much as you swap lenses, and all of them except the fisheye take 77mm filters. Put on a prism finder (under $100 when I got mine) and left hand grip (includes a trigger with simple lever to operate the body mounted shutter release), with a good strap (special strap lugs are easy to get on eBay) it's a fairly comfortable walking-around camera that really builds upper body strength -- and because of the rotating back, there's no turning the camera on its side to switch from vertical to horizontal.

Film backs are repairable items, and of course they come off quickly and easily in case of problems. If you get extra film backs, you can preload and swap backs in seconds, or carry one with fast, one with slow, or one color and one B&W. Film backs are reasonably priced, too (though the 645 is probably higher, because it's less common, and the Mamiya 6x6 back is pretty rare, any 2x3 Graflok mount film back will work, with loss of dark slide and double exposure interlock functions). There's even (intermittently) an Instax back for the system.

 

[Dan Daniel]

What id like to do, wildlife photography. And perhaps someday human photography. But the immediate out come id like is to sit on my back deck and get some good pictures of a baby deer and momma or a nice close up of a chickadee, and if its sharp enough, enlarge it out to a poster and put it on my wall.

There are reasons wildlife photographers use digital so frequently. A 12-shot roll of film while trying to frame, focus, and shoot wildlife from a distance is going to be a real challenge and mean lots and lots of failures.

The D7500 is a good camera. And you have a lens or two that should work fine. To get equivalent telephoto range in medium format is going to mean 1000mm and longer lenses which will be huge.

Not saying it can't be done. But just because you can point a medium format camera at a deer and burn some film doesn't mean that it's a good way to achieve what you want with photography.

 

[Neil Grant]

..i just wonder how suitable an RB 67 is for wildlife photography. Unless a close working distance can be achieved, the subject will be very loosely framed and any advantage of the medium format, lost. But, if you must go that route, maybe consider a 645 back and 360mm lens.
I don't think you can easliy judge the usefulness of the RB 67 WLF against that of your 'Diacord'. You really need to try the real thing. The RB 67 prism is super-heavy, and raises the camera's c of g, but on a tripod this may not matter too much.

 

[Kino]

I'll also give a nod to the Kiev/Arax 60, although you should spring for one of the "newer" units from Arax with mirror lock up and updated mechanics.
The only problem is the 6x4.5 version requires you to rotate the camera 45 degrees to get the large edge of the negative to the horizon, so I would instead get the 6x6, have a 6x4.5 viewfinder mask installed and crop the image rather than endlessly rotate the camera.

A lot of people don't like these cameras for various reasons (mostly unrealistic considering their price and build) but if you learn their idiosyncrasies they can be a reliable performer.

https://kosmofoto.com/2020/06/shooting-the-kiev-60-and-arax-60-mlu/

On another note; while I like my Kiev 88, with interchangeable 6x6 and 6x4.5 backs, I wouldn't recommend it as a knock-about, rugged camera. It's just a bit too fussy to be a quick performer and most have shutter capping issues at the highest speeds unless overhauled every 5 years or so.

It would be a good idea to reach out in your local area and see if anyone has one of the cameras you are considering to see if you can even just hold the camera and dry fire it. You can often tell real quickly if the camera will be suitable for your shooting style.

Good luck with your quest.

 

[Donald Qualls]

..i just wonder how suitable an RB 67 is for wildlife photography. Unless a close working distance can be achieved, the subject will be very loosely framed and any advantage of the medium format, lost. But, if you must go that route, maybe consider a 645 back and 360mm lens.

The "normal" for a 645 is 75mm; a 360 mm lens would be about 4.7x, so comparable to a 230 mm on full frame or 35mm. Given it's a large enough negative to crop heavily and still maintain high image quality, I'd think this is adequate. Shoot on Portra 400 and you can get daylight shutter of 250 to 400, which should be fine (even hand held) with the very smooth mirror action and in-lens shutters on the RB system. For wildlife, you'd probably be using at least a monopod anyway, unless shooting from a blind, because otherwise the movement of raising and lowering the camera will tend to spook the subjects. I'm pretty sure I've seen a 500 mm for the RB as well (and since all the lenses longer than the 127 are "tele" this is barely any bigger/heavier than the 180 and 250 -- albeit slower, probably f/5.6).

Unless you're shooting mainly hummingbirds, this is probably actually a very practical outfit, providing you can drive fairly close to your blind...

 

[Paul Howell]

For wildlife I shoot 35mm with 300 to 600mm lens. If I was going to shoot wildlife it would be with a 6X4.5 or Hassy with motor drive. Not all that fast but 2 frames per second. with the Hassy you can get a few backs.