MF for close-up portraits

[Alan Gales]

She has a very nice nose.

I agree!

 

[Alan Gales]

I reckon the ultimate roll film camera for portraits is either the Mamiya RZ67 or RB67. Both camera have a rotating back which can be turned to "portrait" orientation without turning the camera. The bellows focussing system means all lenses (ok, not the huge telephotos) focus close enough for a full face portrait. The on-film format is 6x7 which delivers visibly better quality than the 6x4.5 format

The Hasselblad always prompted a twing of resentment. I paid for a 6x6 camera, carried it, shot with it, but ended up with 6x4.5 pictures after cropping to portrait format. And the 150mm lens, one of the finest ever made, would not focus close enough for a face portrait without the nuisance of an extension tube. To finish the rant, in an ideal world Victor Hasselblad should have produced the Hasselblad RZ 67 or RB 67 instead of leaving it for Mamiya to get right!

I completely agree. It's hard to beat a Mamiya RZ or RB for portraiture.

 

[wharris]

Great series Wharris. Did you shoot portrait or cropped later? How is to shoot portrait?

None of my portraits are cropped, The only time I adjust them is for leveling purposes. The 80mm is a joy to shoot with, when focusing you need to use the outer ring on the focus screen instead of the split screen portion. When shooting with it wide open i just take my time, and after a while its easy and you start to trust yourself. now, when I focus I never second guess myself =)

 

[nicholai]

I use the Mamiya RB67 Pro S with 127mm, or 50mm. The 50 has really good macro properties, all of it way more affordable than a blad, and (to me at least) the same or better qualities.

 

[fastw]

Does anyone know min focusing distances for medium format lenses, seems they're hard to find. Extension rings may also work, anyone used them for portraits?

 

[Michael W]

I've used a Pentax 67 with the 165mm lens and +1 extension tube for tight head shots. Don't think I have any scans however. You could google for the Pentax 67 manual, which gives all the lens min focusing info.
The Mamiya 67 also sounds practical, with the rotating back and bellows focus. You do need to be steady when turning the Pentax vertical.

 

[Slixtiesix]

I can recommend Rolleilflex SL66 with 120 or 150mm lens for this purpose.

 

[canuhead]

Mamiya C330 will get you extremely close. Just make sure to use a Paramender to account for parallax. Regret selling mine....

 

[rhcgn]

As suggested by a few of the others I would recommend the Mamiya RB or RZ for the job. I just finished scanning a few negs from yesterday, first one is taken with 127mm at 4.8, the other with 180mm (aperture I don't recall). Neither of them are cropped. Both lenses are the latest K/L version, taken with a ProSD and prism finder model 2, wonderful for portraits and a nice workout for the arms. Minimum focusing distances (from film plane) are 639mm and 1,099mm respectively. If you add extension rings the table applies.

rh-cgn

 

[fastw]

As suggested by a few of the others I would recommend the Mamiya RB or RZ for the job. I just finished scanning a few negs from yesterday, first one is taken with 127mm at 4.8, the other with 180mm (aperture I don't recall). Neither of them are cropped. Both lenses are the latest K/L version, taken with a ProSD and prism finder model 2, wonderful for portraits and a nice workout for the arms. Minimum focusing distances (from film plane) are 639mm and 1,099mm respectively. If you add extension rings the table applies.

rh-cgn

Thanks for the samples. Been seriously looking at the 6x7 Mamiyas. They look great and aren't very expensive. Found one with the 140mm Macro, but without the eye level prism. Would like one, do you use one? What about the weight, good to walk around with?
One thing that puzzled me a bit were the data for different Mamiya lenses I came across. It looks like some of the other lenses focus closer and give greater magnification.
Dead Link Removed

Cheers, Wojtek

 

[DesertNate]

If you want to fill the frame with a face, go longer in focal length, to around 200mm. It's better to have a longer focal length and step back than to use a shorter one and step closer. The reason is that as you get closer to your subject, the difference in distance of the different facial structures to the lens becomes larger. If your nose is three feet from the lens and your ear is three and a half feet from the lens, your nose will be magnified with relation to your ear by 16%. That's pretty unattractive, as it means that if one eye is closer to the lens, it will be larger than the other eye by a fairly large margin as well.
However, if you step back to 6 feet, the relative magnification of your features will drop by half compared to three feet such that the same photo I described above will only have an 8 percent magnification difference between your nose and ear. Double focal length and go to 12 feet and it's 4 percent.
Remember that principle every time you photograph faces- getting in close will exaggerate protruding features like noses and chins, make lips larger, noses larger, foreheads bigger, cheekbones bigger, everything that sticks out in the direction of the camera will be magnified by a factor equal to the closer distance divided by the farther distance. For most reasonable distances, this proportion ranges from about .04 to .1, but if you use a wide angle and move closer, you could end up with something like .3, meaning a 30 percent magnification of close features. That would lead to seriously grotesque rendering of your subject.

It's not the wide angle lens that will distort faces, it's the laws of perspective.

 

[BrianShaw]

If you want to fill the frame with a face, go longer in focal length... It's better to have a longer focal length and step back than to use a shorter one and step closer....

It's not the wide angle lens that will distort faces, it's the laws of perspective.

Amen.

 

[fastw]

Amen.

The problem is that longer lenses don't necessarily get you higher magnification and sometimes wider lens portraits look more interesting because of the distortion.

 

[BrianShaw]

If one is looking for distortion in a portrait, well... that's a look and effect all of its own. I don't like it... just like I don't like the current (?) craze for ultra-thin DOF and fuzzy noses. Others seem to like it so I try not to be too judgemental.

In general, what DesertNate says is correct for traditional portraiture. There is always the possibility for exceptions as you indicate.

 

[MattKing]

Thanks for the samples. Been seriously looking at the 6x7 Mamiyas. They look great and aren't very expensive. Found one with the 140mm Macro, but without the eye level prism. Would like one, do you use one? What about the weight, good to walk around with?
One thing that puzzled me a bit were the data for different Mamiya lenses I came across. It looks like some of the other lenses focus closer and give greater magnification.
Dead Link Removed

Cheers, Wojtek

The prism finders are very large - I would only recommend one as an additional accessory.

The 140mm macro lens for the RB has two advantages over the shorter lenses that focus closer/give greater magnification:

1) the 140mm macro permits a very comfortable working distance and therefore makes it easier to light your subject; and
2) the 140mm macro lens has a floating element that gives you excellent flat field performance at close-up distances. The other lenses are optimised for flat field performance at longer distances.

If you use the 140mm macro with extension tubes, you will achieve higher magnifications and maintain flat field performance.

And half life-size on a 6x7 negative isn't bad .

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Thanks for the samples. Been seriously looking at the 6x7 Mamiyas. They look great and aren't very expensive. Found one with the 140mm Macro, but without the eye level prism. Would like one, do you use one? What about the weight, good to walk around with?
One thing that puzzled me a bit were the data for different Mamiya lenses I came across. It looks like some of the other lenses focus closer and give greater magnification.
Dead Link Removed

Cheers, Wojtek

They are gorgeous cameras. But I HIGHLY recommend you see and hold one before you buy. They are HUGE.

 

[Alan Gales]

They are gorgeous cameras. But I HIGHLY recommend you see and hold one before you buy. They are HUGE.

That's good advice.

I have owned several medium format cameras (Mamiya, Bronica, Pentax, and Hasselblad) and the Mamiya RZ was by far the best portrait camera. With the flash grip it makes it much more manageable hand held.

It's still a beast and if you want to backpack with a camera outfit I would look elsewhere than the RZ or RB although there are some people who do.

 

[fastw]

They are gorgeous cameras. But I HIGHLY recommend you see and hold one before you buy. They are HUGE.

I haven't held one for about 20 years. I'll have to try one before I buy definitely.

 

[Alan Gales]

I haven't held one for about 20 years. I'll have to try one before I buy definitely.

I bought my RZ off of Ebay and it came with both waist level finder and metered prism finder. I loved the waist level finder but hated the prism finder. I have a bad back, it's actually fused together. The prism finder adds a lot of weight to the camera which the RZ doesn't need. To be honest with you, I prefer waist level finders anyway.

Just my opinion. If you can get a chance to handle an RZ with both finders you can decide for yourself.

 

[NJS]

Someone already mentioned Rollei SL66. Can be found relatively cheap, lenses can be also used mounted reversely but bellows can already give you tight framing and tilting options can be very useful if you'd want to avoid fuzzy noses. Lenses are superb and if you know how you can squeeze 13 frames per roll.

 

[fastw]

Just looked at a nice Pentax 67 with a Macro. Very nice. Have to sleep on it.

 

[cyberjunkie]

Just looked at a nice Pentax 67 with a Macro. Very nice. Have to sleep on it.

Back in the old days India was a place where having the smallest camera and the quitest shutter was a definite plus... at least for candid portraits.
Now it's less likely to see a whole crowd jumping in between the camera and your subject
If you don't try to "steal" street portraits, but you approach your subject before firing the shutter, any medium format camera with a longish lens would do the job.
Some cameras need more application, some can even limit your choices, that's all... nothing that can't be overcome in a way or the other.
I can testify that: probably my best pictures were done in Afghanistan (some even done while on horsemount!) with an humble Seagull 6x6 with no meter an a fixed 75mm focal. It was a cheap chinese copy of a Rolleicord, really a piece of crap, compared to the MF cameras i i purchased afterwards.
Nevertheless, what i consider my best all-time portrait (two falconeers with their birds of prey) was taken with the Seagull TLR.

Having said all that, a good camera helps a lot
If you decided for the Pentax 6x7, i second your choice.
After the Seagull, i owned a Yashica 124-G, a Bronica SQa, an Hasselblad 500 C/M, and still own a Rolleiflex, a Mamiya Super 23, and of course a Pentax 67. The latter is by far the best, if you don't do studio work with flashes.
If you do, there were two leaf-shutter optics made exactly for that... but i'd buy a Mamiya RB or RZ for studio use.
Where the Pentax 67 shines is for mixed use: part handheld and part on tripod, in-studio or outside.
With the wooden handle, and with the bottom of the camera resting on your palm, the camera is not so vibration-prone as some people think.

BTW, the Macro 140mm is both cheap and good, i think you won't regret buying one.
Despite some mixed reviews, i enjoyed a lot the 120mm Soft. I had it on loan for some time, and i liked very much the portraits i have done with it!

cheers

CJ

Sent from my Android tablet

 

[xya]

Mamiya C330 will get you extremely close. Just make sure to use a Paramender to account for parallax. Regret selling mine....

yes a wonderful, cheap and easy one. once you've got used to the parallax indicator on the matte screen, you even don't need the paramender for portraits.

 

[fastw]

Back in the old days India was a place where having the smallest camera and the quitest shutter was a definite plus... at least for candid portraits.
Now it's less likely to see a whole crowd jumping in between the camera and your subject
If you don't try to "steal" street portraits, but you approach your subject before firing the shutter, any medium format camera with a longish lens would do the job.
Some cameras need more application, some can even limit your choices, that's all... nothing that can't be overcome in a way or the other.
I can testify that: probably my best pictures were done in Afghanistan (some even done while on horsemount!) with an humble Seagull 6x6 with no meter an a fixed 75mm focal. It was a cheap chinese copy of a Rolleicord, really a piece of crap, compared to the MF cameras i i purchased afterwards.
Nevertheless, what i consider my best all-time portrait (two falconeers with their birds of prey) was taken with the Seagull TLR.

Having said all that, a good camera helps a lot
If you decided for the Pentax 6x7, i second your choice.
After the Seagull, i owned a Yashica 124-G, a Bronica SQa, an Hasselblad 500 C/M, and still own a Rolleiflex, a Mamiya Super 23, and of course a Pentax 67. The latter is by far the best, if you don't do studio work with flashes.
If you do, there were two leaf-shutter optics made exactly for that... but i'd buy a Mamiya RB or RZ for studio use.
Where the Pentax 67 shines is for mixed use: part handheld and part on tripod, in-studio or outside.
With the wooden handle, and with the bottom of the camera resting on your palm, the camera is not so vibration-prone as some people think.

BTW, the Macro 140mm is both cheap and good, i think you won't regret buying one.
Despite some mixed reviews, i enjoyed a lot the 120mm Soft. I had it on loan for some time, and i liked very much the portraits i have done with it!

cheers

CJ

Sent from my Android tablet

The wooden handle, it seems to me like it should be on the other side. How do you use it? I normally focus with right and shoot with right hand.

 

[fastw]

Just realized how close you can shoot with a Mamiya C330. Anyone with any experience with those?