Need help deciding on a medium format camera

[JCook0113]

Well, I've done a lot of walking with my RB67 and no tripod - in town and everywhere. It's not that heavy, though Hasselblad is lighter and smaller.

For eye-level viewing, RB67 prism is like Soviet-era tank, so I use waist-level instead. Eye-level prism for Hasselblad is nice!

Maybe consider TLR like Yashica 124G (has meter) - decent quality for the money.

Also possible is something like Fuji GW690III - if you like rangefinders and one lens.

I really like the cameras you commented here. Im not the biggest fan of square images but I think its just because I am not used to them and I love that it has a meter. Does the fuji?. And then the massive gw690 which I have considered in the past but I shied away from it because its a rangefinder. To be honest, after the year or so Ive been shooting film i haven't even looked through a rangefinder except a digital Leica years ago and I though it was the weirdest freaking thing . I love the aspect ratio its basically Lance Armstrong 35mm. Man I have too many options Im probably not going to figure this out very soon

 

[JCook0113]

I'm going to throw another suggestion:
Kiev 6c
You can find them CLAd on ebay. Excellent and inexpensive lenses. Cheap body. Takes 120 or 220 film. Has a reputation for shutter slap but this is undeserved. You simply have to use a cable release and can take sharp pictures handheld down to 1/8.

Ive never really been good at composing square photos (I only know that because of my phone camera ). But maybe, it could be a good learning experience.

 

[btaylor]

You have so many choices! Actually you can definitely hand hold a speed or crown graphic, they were made for that. But then you'll have to use a rangefinder if you're not on a tripod. Remember, with a 6x6 camera you can always crop the square image. That's what people did to print onto rectangular paper before the 645 and 6x7 formats were invented. Any of the cameras mentioned on this thread can make great pictures. You can just buy one that you think you might like and try it. If you don't like it you can probably sell it for what you paid for it and try something else. Have fun and don't sweat it too much.

 

[JCook0113]

You have so many choices! Actually you can definitely hand hold a speed or crown graphic, they were made for that. But then you'll have to use a rangefinder if you're not on a tripod. Remember, with a 6x6 camera you can always crop the square image. That's what people did to print onto rectangular paper before the 645 and 6x7 formats were invented. Any of the cameras mentioned on this thread can make great pictures. You can just buy one that you think you might like and try it. If you don't like it you can probably sell it for what you paid for it and try something else. Have fun and don't sweat it too much.

Great advice. Ill just do that. Buy something ill have fun with.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hello, I just joined this forum so bare with me please I hope Im posting this is the right spot as well. Anyway, I am deciding between 3 or 4 cameras, The pentax 645, mamiya 1000s, and surprisingly the rb67. That is about my price range so if there are any other cameras you recommend feel free to post. I am mainly wanting a medium format camera for architecture, and some landscape so Im in no hurry but I would rather not use a tripod. I do have one but its just annoying. I don't mind slowing down but there are times where I have to take the picture pretty quick but most of the time I don't. To be honest, I am not sure if I will need interchangeable backs or not because I have never used a camera like this before so I guess I will take your word for that and I have had thoughts about wanting one on my 35mm lol. I know that the Pentax system has a built in light meter which I hear is very good but the mamiya doesn't so i don't know how long it takes to use a light meter or how expensive a good simple light meter costs? Also, looking around at photos taken by these, I can't seem to find good photos taken with the pentax, i don't know if it's because i just don't like how the pentax looks compared to the 1000s or if no one is posting great photos on flickr and such. But I did find some super amazing shots on youtube from the pentax 645n, I think they have the same quality? I also did however find great photos taken with the 1000s and amazing photos with the rb67. So if anyone has some stellar shots with the pentax or any of them please post them. Sorry for sounding like such a noob but i guess I just am. I hope thats enough information for you to help me with this decision and if you need any more just ask below, I usually respond pretty quick. Thanks.

if you dislike a tripod so much, You may want to check into some MF rangefinders.As far as quality goes, You can't do much better than Hasselblad but, they may be out of your budget and also benefit from a tripod.

 

[miha]

It should be noted that some MF cameras don't have instant return mirrors, a feature invented 70 years ago already. Do a search if this feature matters to you. For me, it's a deal breaker.

 

[Neil Grant]

..rigid body cameras aren't really ideal for architecture, but those few systems that have a shift lens available are at a distinct adavantage. To my way of thinking, the stand-out option is the Mamiya 645. It's 50mm 'shift' lens helps control image shape and offers a useful field of view. It's available 'used' at giveaway prices and is almost portable.

 

[etn]

Remember, with a 6x6 camera you can always crop the square image.

You can indeed, and this "feature" has been widely advertised by Hasselblad's marketing literature. However, I believe it is the wrong approach. Choosing a 6x6 with the intent of eventually cropping to, say, 2:3 is adding an unnecessary level of complexity to the process. In my case, if I shot a picture with the intent of cropping it later, I would forget what I originally had in mind by the time the negative gets enlarged in the darkroom - but that's just me

Choose a camera for the aspect ratio you want. The great thing about MF is that pretty much every format is available, including 3:4 (6x4.5 or 6x8) or 2:3 (6x9) up to more exotic ones (6x12, 6x17 etc).

As a side note, square format can be learned, even if it is not intuitive at first sight. Composing on a 6x6 ground glass is a different experience than on a cell phone, I'm sure you will get much better results.

 

[etn]

if you dislike a tripod so much, You may want to check into some MF rangefinders.As far as quality goes, You can't do much better than Hasselblad but, they may be out of your budget and also benefit from a tripod.

+1 on that. If you have architecture in mind, a Mamiya 6x7 rangefinder with 43mm is hard to beat (and certainly as good as the famed Hasselblad 38mm), although this is clearly out of the budget you mentioned in the first place.

 

[Ian Grant]

I am actually secretly considering a speed graphic and I am sure it would be tons of fun. Thats the only 4x5 camera I have done any searching on though. you think thats something I should get? I wont be able to hand hold it I don't think

I have a couple of Speed Graphics but tend to use my Crown Graphic (which I leave in Turkey) or preferably my Super Graphic which has better movements. I use both hand held where tripods aren't permitted. I considered moving to an RB67 around 30 years ago but decided that the bulk/weight and more importantly lack of movements were too restrictive and went for a Wista 45DX instead something I've never regretted.

For architecture you really need good movements on a camera and they are sadly lacking on most medium format cameras. I actually made my own 6x7 camera last year to give me the movements I required, rise/fall and front tilt.

Ian

 

[Theo Sulphate]

... I love that it has a meter. Does the fuji?. And then the massive gw690 which I have considered in the past but I shied away from it because its a rangefinder...

The Fuji GW series does not have a meter.

The massive GX680III does -- and it has movements -- but that is definitely one for the tripod.

Not having an in-camera meter is not a liability in medium format so much. Usually the pace of making images is slower and more deliberate.

Also, by "architecture", are most of your photos those of structures in their entirety? If so, then perspective control lenses or perspective movements would be important. If, however, you concentrate on selected smaller features such as an archway, staircase, balcony, etc., then you may be able to use ordinary wide, normal, and medium tele lenses.

 

[hsandler]

An easy way to start medium format is with a late 50s or later Japanese TLR like a Diacord or Yashica-mat. The square format gives you room to keep the camera level and compose with buildings near the top of the frame in horizontal shots, equivalent to some front rise on a camera with movements. Another option in line with the SLRs you were considering is the Bronica ETRSi. Get a 50mm lens and shoot loose, giving you room to correct perspective in photoshop if you are scanning, or by tilting the easel if you are enlarging. The AEii prism gives you aperture priority metering.

 

[Paul Howell]

Like Ian I have both Crowns and Speeds but tend to use the Crown as it is lighter and has a little more movement, as already noted Crowns and Speeds are press cameras designed to used hand held. Most came with either a 127 or 135mm with is on the wide side, in the day the idea was shoot with a wide lens then crop for the final image. A baby crown with interchangable backs can take a number of formate, the most common was 6X9 but I have seen 6X6 and 6X9. Horseman and Lindhoff were also designed to be hand held, but with ground glass back like the Crown can used as a viewcamers with much more movement than Grafic models. Other option is a Mamyia Press with a wide and normal lens. In the end there is no one camera that does it all. When I travel light I take 35mm, when shooting interiors where a tripod is not allowed again 35mm or DSLR with vibration reduction, if shooting were I can use either a monopod or tripod I use MF or LF.

 

[JCook0113]

It should be noted that some MF cameras don't have instant return mirrors, a feature invented 70 years ago already. Do a search if this feature matters to you. For me, it's a deal breaker.

Ya I really like seeing exactly how the picture will turn out without any parallax. Im not completely sure but are rangefinders usually exact on what is in the frame? Or does it cut off some of the image at certain distances? I ask because a gw690 is in my alley for sure.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

Get yourself a 2.8F. Rolleiflex's are for life!

 

[JCook0113]

The Fuji GW series does not have a meter.

The massive GX680III does -- and it has movements -- but that is definitely one for the tripod.

Not having an in-camera meter is not a liability in medium format so much. Usually the pace of making images is slower and more deliberate.

Also, by "architecture", are most of your photos those of structures in their entirety? If so, then perspective control lenses or perspective movements would be important. If, however, you concentrate on selected smaller features such as an archway, staircase, balcony, etc., then you may be able to use ordinary wide, normal, and medium tele lenses.

The only reason I would like a built in meter is because meters are just so expensive. Maybe if I can find a good 100 dollar meter. I don't need flash or anything fancy on the meter just an accurate reading like an in camera meter would work so if you know of anything that would be great too. I have some pictures here of what I take. My town is pretty boring so I cant get much out of it but i try my best. The square photo was my first time using a 6x6 camera lent to me from a friend but the quality was very bad for some reason, it could have been my fault when i scanned it.

Whoops it didn't work

 

[JCook0113]

The Fuji GW series does not have a meter.

The massive GX680III does -- and it has movements -- but that is definitely one for the tripod.

Not having an in-camera meter is not a liability in medium format so much. Usually the pace of making images is slower and more deliberate.

Also, by "architecture", are most of your photos those of structures in their entirety? If so, then perspective control lenses or perspective movements would be important. If, however, you concentrate on selected smaller features such as an archway, staircase, balcony, etc., then you may be able to use ordinary wide, normal, and medium tele lenses.

Heres just a website link
https://jacomedia0113.imgur.com/all/

 

[BrianShaw]

One generally can’t blame a film format on poor quality...

 

[Dan Fromm]

OP, pause a little and think again about what you want to accomplish. Shooting "architecture" as most of us understand it can require movements, especially vertical rise to eliminate converging verticals. This usually means a view camera. And it nearly always requires a tripod. If this is what you have in mind and you insist on shooting hand held, well, good luck.

You mentioned thinking about a Speed Graphic and someone mentioned having one and a Crown Graphic. I have a 2x3 Pacemaker Speed Graphic. Also a, actually several, 2x3 Crown Graphics. These are Pacemaker Speed Graphics with no focal plane shutter and shorter bodies. The only usable movement 2x3 Pacemaker Graphics offer is 19 mm of vertical rise. This ain't much. They have a little shift (turn the camera on its side to shoot in portrait orientation and shift becomes rise) but it is unusable with most lenses. My Graphics all have Graflok backs, will accept clip on and insertion type roll holders. A Graphic with a spring back will accept only insertion type roll holders. I use Graflex' own clip on types and Adapt-A-Roll 620 insertion type roll holders.

I also have a couple of 2x3 Cambo view cameras. Cambo's 2x3 international back accept only clip on type roll holders. Cambo's 2x3 bail back accepts only insertion type roll holders. I also have a hybrid Cambo (2x3 front standard, 4x5 rear, tapered bellows, ...) whose 4x5 Graflok back accepts all types of roll holders. I use an insertion type 6x12 Sinar and a clip on type Linhof 2x3 Super Rollex with the hybrid. They all have what are called reversible backs, which can be attached to the rear standard in landscape or portrait orientation. There's also a rotating back, saves the trouble (not much) of detaching the back, turning it 90 degrees and reattaching it.

Re hand held meters, shop for a used one. Coupla years ago I bought a cute little Sekonic L-328 at a camera show for all of $20. They're offered on eBay for similar prices.

 

[JCook0113]

OP, pause a little and think again about what you want to accomplish. Shooting "architecture" as most of us understand it can require movements, especially vertical rise to eliminate converging verticals. This usually means a view camera. And it nearly always requires a tripod. If this is what you have in mind and you insist on shooting hand held, well, good luck.

You mentioned thinking about a Speed Graphic and someone mentioned having one and a Crown Graphic. I have a 2x3 Pacemaker Speed Graphic. Also a, actually several, 2x3 Crown Graphics. These are Pacemaker Speed Graphics with no focal plane shutter and shorter bodies. The only usable movement 2x3 Pacemaker Graphics offer is 19 mm of vertical rise. This ain't much. They have a little shift (turn the camera on its side to shoot in portrait orientation and shift becomes rise) but it is unusable with most lenses. My Graphics all have Graflok backs, will accept clip on and insertion type roll holders. A Graphic with a spring back will accept only insertion type roll holders. I use Graflex' own clip on types and Adapt-A-Roll 620 insertion type roll holders.

I also have a couple of 2x3 Cambo view cameras. Cambo's 2x3 international back accept only clip on type roll holders. Cambo's 2x3 bail back accepts only insertion type roll holders. I also have a hybrid Cambo (2x3 front standard, 4x5 rear, tapered bellows, ...) whose 4x5 Graflok back accepts all types of roll holders. I use an insertion type 6x12 Sinar and a clip on type Linhof 2x3 Super Rollex with the hybrid. They all have what are called reversible backs, which can be attached to the rear standard in landscape or portrait orientation. There's also a rotating back, saves the trouble (not much) of detaching the back, turning it 90 degrees and reattaching it.

Re hand held meters, shop for a used one. Coupla years ago I bought a cute little Sekonic L-328 at a camera show for all of $20. They're offered on eBay for similar prices.

Thank you for your meaningful reply! I dont insist on not using a tripod its just not prefered but if I have to use one than I do. Its just not fun walking around with one because that is how I usually get to places especially with a heavy camera. The kind of architectural photography I do doesnt really require movements because the buildings I photography are usually at max 2 stories (i dont live in a city) and I could be completely wrong because my knowledge of movements it pretty small. And thank you so much for the meter recommendation.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Thanks! that clears up a lot. I guess I should man up and use my tripod. Ive always likes being able to just walk around with my 35mm though

I almost never use a tripod. Shoot ISO 400 film and almost completely separate yourself from a tripod.

 

[Sirius Glass]

if you dislike a tripod so much, You may want to check into some MF rangefinders.As far as quality goes, You can't do much better than Hasselblad but, they may be out of your budget and also benefit from a tripod.

+1

 

[Sirius Glass]

You have so many choices! Actually you can definitely hand hold a speed or crown graphic, they were made for that. But then you'll have to use a rangefinder if you're not on a tripod. Remember, with a 6x6 camera you can always crop the square image. That's what people did to print onto rectangular paper before the 645 and 6x7 formats were invented. Any of the cameras mentioned on this thread can make great pictures. You can just buy one that you think you might like and try it. If you don't like it you can probably sell it for what you paid for it and try something else. Have fun and don't sweat it too much.

I hand hold my 4"x5" Speed Graphic and 4"x5" Graflex Model D. They were designed to be hand held.

 

[Sirius Glass]

You can indeed, and this "feature" has been widely advertised by Hasselblad's marketing literature. However, I believe it is the wrong approach. Choosing a 6x6 with the intent of eventually cropping to, say, 2:3 is adding an unnecessary level of complexity to the process. In my case, if I shot a picture with the intent of cropping it later, I would forget what I originally had in mind by the time the negative gets enlarged in the darkroom - but that's just me

Choose a camera for the aspect ratio you want. The great thing about MF is that pretty much every format is available, including 3:4 (6x4.5 or 6x8) or 2:3 (6x9) up to more exotic ones (6x12, 6x17 etc).

As a side note, square format can be learned, even if it is not intuitive at first sight. Composing on a 6x6 ground glass is a different experience than on a cell phone, I'm sure you will get much better results.

If one crops before shooting, then cropping is not needed later. Compose before taking the photograph.

 

[Alan Gales]

Ive never really been good at composing square photos (I only know that because of my phone camera ). But maybe, it could be a good learning experience.

A lot of wedding photographers used to shoot 6x6. They liked the square format because they could decide upon the crop later. So what I am saying is that you can shoot square and then crop to a rectangle later. Of course you will be using more film than a 645 camera. With 6x6 you also don't have to change the tripod head position for shooting landscape versus portrait images. RB67's have a revolving back to solve this but of course the downside is that the revolving back makes the camera larger and heavier. RB's are essentially 7x7 cameras that expose 6x7 images.

Personally, I own an 8x10 camera and a couple medium format 6x6 TLR's. I find mixing it up (rectangle versus square) helps me creatively. It's fun too!

 

[JCook0113]

If one crops before shooting, then cropping is not needed later. Compose before taking the photograph.

Thats why I dont really want a 6x6 because I dont really like the format (my opinion might change though) and I always compose like I cant crop later