Need help choosing a MF system.

pbromaghin · Dec 10, 2014

Sirius Glass said:
4"x5" allows so many more ways to screw up a photograph than MF or 135. It opens a new universe of mistakes and screw-up. That is why I love to use it.

+1!

Sirius Glass · Dec 10, 2014

miha said:
You can't make an exposure with the lens open.

When one is using the focal plane shutter the lens shutter is left open.

Alan Gales · Dec 10, 2014

Sirius Glass said:
4"x5" allows so many more ways to screw up a photograph than MF or 135. It opens a new universe of mistakes and screw-up. That is why I love to use it.

If it was easy then the digital crowd would be doing it!

miha · Dec 11, 2014

Sirius Glass said:
When one is using the focal plane shutter the lens shutter is left open.

I have missed the focal plane part. My bad. Does such LF camera even exist?

Richard S. (rich815) · Dec 11, 2014

miha said:
I have missed the focal plane part. My bad. Does such LF camera even exist?

Speed Graphic

miha · Dec 11, 2014

Richard Sintchak (rich815) said:
Speed Graphic

Thanks, this is new to me but I have found a video that demonstrates it right away: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9t047UI8zU

lxdude · Dec 11, 2014

Sirius Glass said:
I looked at 645 as a choice for 120 film. I realized that 645 is not much of an improvement over 35mm and I decided to use 6x6 instead. I would not recommend 645 to anyone.

But if someone crops 6X6 they end up with 645, or close to it. 645 is 2.7X larger in area over 135, and I can clearly see a the difference in quality. 42mm is 75% longer than 24mm, and 55mm is 53% longer than 36mm.
When I got my 645's I had no inclination to use 6X6. Since then, I have come to like square format, (opposite to the past), and would now probably go with 6X6, generally shooting square. The ease of vertical/horizontal composition (if desired) without a prism offsets the moderate increase in bulk and weight.

flavio81 · Dec 11, 2014

lxdude said:
But if someone crops 6X6 they end up with 645, or close to it. 645 is 2.7X larger in area over 135, and I can clearly see a the difference in quality.

Yes, I agree with this. I think i mentioned in this thread that you can go from Delta 100 in 35mm to HP5 400 in 6x4.5 while keeping the same level of graininess and sharpness. Or even improving it.

gareth.ig · Dec 14, 2014

Can I crash the thread a little with my own, very related conundrum - Why not Rollei 6008 series? May not work for the OP, as the wide angle lenses come pretty dear, but waist level auto exposure (as a side bar question is there a 645 that can do this?) Sounds like a real joy to use. Similarly the backs and film advance sound good to me. I'm currently using gs-1 which creates great negs, but for the predominantly 8x10 prints I make feels like overkill.

TheTrailTog · Dec 14, 2014

Hi Gareth, the 6008 does seem to be a very capable system from all that I have seen. However, definitely not going to fall in the budget of staying under $1000.

gareth.ig · Dec 14, 2014

The 6008 professional series will come in under $1000 with an 80mm planar (I've been watching closely over the last couple months). Going wide will get expensive quick though.

I'm looking at a substantial consolidation of my kit. All my creative work is through film now, all I use my digital stuff for is pictures of my kids. I'm a big fan of medium format and waist level viewing, but really like the automatic exposure of digital and 35mm.

Sirius Glass · Dec 14, 2014

gareth.ig said:
The 6008 professional series will come in under $1000 with an 80mm planar (I've been watching closely over the last couple months). Going wide will get expensive quick though.

Hasselblad Vs are less expensive, more available, have a bigger lens and equipment selection, and easier to get service than the Rollei 6000 series.

Need help choosing a MF system.

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency