Nikon FE Medium Format Equivalent ?

First, please understand that my Mamiya RB 67 is my favorite camera and that my Holga is a constant companion. I love MF.

Now let's break down what you just told us.

Jaime Marin said:

I dont quite have a problem with my FE I love it and it does exactly what I want it to do.

Click to expand...

So basically you have a tool that works well. I like my FE too.

Jaime Marin said:

However I like how much of the surrounding environment and I guess "full frame" that the Medium Format can capture.

Click to expand...

It isn't the frame size by itself that determines the angle of view. The FE can do the effect you are asking for here just by using a "wider angle" shorter focal length lens. If you are using a 50mm lens now, just go to maybe a 35mm lens.

The "normal" lens you find on a TLR is about 80mm which has a slightly wider view than the "normal" lens on an FE, a 50mm, but not as wide as a 35mm lens or a 28 or a 20 that you can put on your FE.

The FE can actually get a much wider perspective.

Jaime Marin said:

Plus the quality is much higher.

Click to expand...

Yes, without question, medium format film has the potential to catch much more detail which allows for bigger enlargements. But MF cameras are more work and harder to handle and slower to wind and slower to focus.

So to figure out if that extra hassle is worth it we need to know;

How big are the prints that you make?

Jaime Marin said:

Im currently looking at the Yashica-Mat 124g since it has a light meter but I might have to buy a hand held light meter because I dont know how accurate that could be.

Click to expand...

Personally, even if you stay with 35mm I'd suggest you get a handheld meter.

More than ANY other tool I have ever bought my Sekonik L-358 meter has improved my work.

A good incident meter is a must have in my book.

Jaime Marin said:

@DRPAIN

IS the TLR systems you recommended pretty handheld. Or could I get like a "Grip" for it or is it better to just hold from beneath and work that way. Also Im assuming you can put a strap to hold it from your neck for support right? Sorry im super new to this so those are pretty basic questions i know. Also do they just have a fixed lens or are there other lens's that you could add on. I dont need anything large more like a 50mm equivalent.

Click to expand...

Jaime:

At the risk of seeming to be an opportunist, I'm selling a TLR that you can change the lens on - and it comes with a strap too :

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

@mark barendt

Thanks for breaking it down like that. I guess above all I just want one haha. But I do understand that switching formats might be hassle and thats whats holding me back. I dont want to feel as if im starting over in a way. I dont know how large the prints that I want to make are going to be. Im assuming that plays a large roll into what your trying to convey to me? And yes your right I do need to get a light meter I have so far only depended on the one on my FE because I honestly dont know how to use anything else so i guess its time to learn!

Jaime Marin said:

@mark barendt

Thanks for breaking it down like that. I guess above all I just want one haha. But I do understand that switching formats might be hassle and thats whats holding me back. I dont want to feel as if im starting over in a way. I dont know how large the prints that I want to make are going to be. Im assuming that plays a large roll into what your trying to convey to me? And yes your right I do need to get a light meter I have so far only depended on the one on my FE because I honestly dont know how to use anything else so i guess its time to learn!

Click to expand...

Now were talking Jamie.

There are ways that MF cameras can really be useful to you, for example the waist level finder can give you a very different perspective. Looking down into the camera, rather than in to the back, allows you to "comfortably" get a much different perspective. For example, you can put the camera on the ground and work it while kneeling rather than laying down behind it.

Advantages like that need to be balanced against the slower shutter speeds available and the reversed right left view in a waist level finder.

One of the advantages of using a handheld meter is that the information isn't tied to the camera in your hand. What I mean by that is that if you have a favorite film, say Ilford's Delta 100, that you use all the time and you have "your own" handheld meter, then you can use that combo with any camera by manually dialing in aperture and time. Doesn't matter if the film is in a 35mm camera, or a MF camera, or 16x20 inch LF camera.

On print size. Every single shot is different regardless of film size. In general though:

Lower iso films will enlarge better, larger negatives will enlarge better, shots with camera support will enlarge better, shots with better lighting will enlarge better, tightly framed shots will enlarge better than shots that need cropping.

If you are careful a lot of stuff done on 35mm films can make nice 11x14 prints regularly and sometimes even larger. It depends on how much fine detail you need.

If you want more detail, bigger film formats help.

We don't discuss the how-tos and whys of digital tech stuff here at APUG but if you are sharing via electronic media the monitors we all use are the limiting factor (ie 1024x768), virtually any file from a "nicely" scanned print or neg will be overkill for an electronic display.

Jamie, Mark has very nicely put everything I wanted to say into perfect clarity. Yes, I have the Yashica 124G with the wide and telephoto add on lenses and have not used that camera hardly at all since I got it some 3 years ago. (It is what I started out with in High School and found this pristine example then) I have your FE (and it's friend, the FA) too. Use them much, much more than the 124G. Matter of fact I used the FE and it's motor winder out by the pool yesterday trying to get kids going down a home made slide into the pool. Can't wait for those pictures!!

Until Mark brought up the problems and benefits with medium format, I was going to tell you, like others here, how much I enjoy my Mamiya 645 Pro. Yes I have the winder and all the goodies with it, but it is NOT as fast to use around action as the FE, I do still miss alot of shots with the 645 if there is heavy action. Just can't focus that fast......(happens with all my manual focus cameras)

If you can find someone who would let you borrow or even use their MF camera(s), do.....run a couple of rolls though it. I think it would seriously show you exactly how different MF is but also, how wonderful it can be, even with it's limits.

Bob E.

Not to knock anyone else's preferences, just to mention that I don't find a hand-held meter to have any particular metering accuracy virtue over a camera with a good TTL meter, especially one of the newer ones. For instance, Nikon uses with the 1003 element CCD that is color temperature corrected and which is used also for the built-in 1% spot metering. This is arguably better than any handheld meter out there, most of which tend to use SPD cells calibrated to one specific color temperature (and can have glaring inaccuracies used at another).

In MF cameras, I can say with much assurance that Pentax's 645N has a really good Spot/Center Weighted/6 Segment Multi-pattern meter that is worlds faster to use-- even in full manual metering mode-- than any transferred handheld meter reading. Of course, if you're using color neg or B&W materials, your metering requirements won't be as stringent when using color transparency emulsions like Velvia. But if using slide films then, you'll need to be concerned about the accuracy of the shutter, too. (Within the latitude of the film, I'll mention the 645N does a terrific job with color transparency). Older leaf shutters can hold up well but do need periodic maintenance to run well, and even well-maintained ones can run consistently slow after several decades. Newer cameras since the 80's many (if not most all focal plane ones, at least) will have quartz-oscillator controlled timing on the shutters that keep them within a 1/4-stop spec for shutter speed (some throwing an error code if out of spec).

I've got several of them fancy late modle Nikons with the whiz-Bang super sensors. Sure they are pretty good at what they do and handy as heck but they still only read reflected light. Sure I get usable shots 90%+ but rarely will the subject be pegged right where I wanted it. Matrix for me seems to float around within a stop or so of perfect depending on the context around it and in trickier situations it can be much further out.

I have no such problem with handheld incident meters.

Nikon's Matrix on my F5 is really quite good at not blowing out chrome highlights, but it and Pentax's Multi Segment Metering can only take you so far if the subject brightness range of the scene exceeds the contrast ratio (and/or latitude) of the film. In such cases spot metering can really useful to determine the brightness range.

And just because a camera offers automation doesn't mean you have to be a slave to it. Most pro MF cameras allow easily setting shutter speed and aperture manually and metering with match needle and +/- scales in the viewfinder. I really like the implementation of this feature on the P645N and use it all the time with low-key or snowy landscape scenes. I find it much easier than setting exposure compensation dials.

Again, personal preference, but I have fewer errors with TTL metering than stand alone meters, partly because things like filter factors and macro extension are measured directly, and don't require any mental gymnastics. All else being equal, it's better to not have to swap devices between metering to image making.

Metering can be as complicated as you want to make it or as simple as you want to make it. Your choice! I took college courses that pushed the Zone System and all the hype that went with it. It took me a while to catch on, but I finally got it. When I finally could afford it I bought a Gossen Luna-ProF with the spot attachment and used that for about a year. Then I picked up a Pentax Spot-meter and used that for a couple more. Then I needed a new flash-meter for weddings and got a Gossen Luna-StarF. Well, as they say, the rest is history. I now use the StarF for everything, but it is used as an incident meter 99% of the time. I have the spot attachment for it, but hardly ever use it. I guess I'm like Mark above and find the incident reading to get me where I want to go faster and easier. I still have to know my lighting conditions and where I want my values to fall, but it doesn't take long to become educated in this respect. When I was in school and couldn't afford a separate light-meter I used my old Miranda Senorex 35mm SLR and took a reading off a Kodak Grey card, which is pretty much the same as an incident reading, and that got me very close. Just because you have a light meter, built-in or hand-held, doesn't mean your shot is going to be perfect. That's why we see so many pictures of, say people skiing, and the snow looks darn nice, but the person is nothing but a black silhouette. You still have to "THINK". For me the thinking part is easier with a simple incident meter. That's just me of course. Oh, and Mark too. JohnW

Almost any of the cameras mentioned will work. The lenses are more important. Read a lot of lens reviews before parting with your money. If you look for a Pentax 67 make sure the body has a mirror lockup. Otherwise its pretty much useless in low light. Personally I picked up a Bronica ETR-si with three lenses 50, 75, 150 and the metering eye level finder, two 120 film backs and the auto winder for less than 300.00 It has been a lot of fun to use and there are plenty of them around. A camera and some Fuji Velvia 50 and you are on your way.

Bigrockets said:

Almost any of the cameras mentioned will work. The lenses are more important. Read a lot of lens reviews before parting with your money. If you look for a Pentax 67 make sure the body has a mirror lockup. Otherwise its pretty much useless in low light. Personally I picked up a Bronica ETR-si with three lenses 50, 75, 150 and the metering eye level finder, two 120 film backs and the auto winder for less than 300.00 It has been a lot of fun to use and there are plenty of them around. A camera and some Fuji Velvia 50 and you are on your way.

Click to expand...

If you get a real good deal on a Pentax 67 without ML you can always buy it and then get yourself a 90mm leaf-shutter lens for it. I have two Pentax 67's, both with mirror lock-up, but when I shoot timed shots in real low light I use my 90mm leaf-shutter lens. I find the 90mm leaf-shutter lens to be vibration free and better than ML. Having the Pentax 67's, Hasselblad and Rollei's was the reason I sold my Mamiya M645 1000S. Once you work with 6x7 and even 6x6 negs/trans you'll fall in love with them. JohnW

John Wiegerink said:

Once you work with 6x7 and even 6x6 negs/trans you'll fall in love with them.

Click to expand...

This.

I'm too, partial to incident metering

Just another opinion I guess, but with my experience with medium format. 645 is the closest to 35mm not only in format, but in functionality. It seems to me that there are often a lot more good used 645 packages out there when you get a nice assortment of lenses, backs, winders and viewfinders, and since Nikon is Japanese, I'd say Pentax, Mamiya and Bronica are pretty close.

In SLR, I've tried mostly Nikon, Mamiya, Pentax and Konica, and from my experience, having used my Nikon DSLR, Nikon FE2 and Mamiya 645 PRO TL, I'd say that Mamiya is the most Nikon-ish of the brands. I even find using Mamiya lenses on Nikon cameras quite natural.

If you want a good SLR with a good amount of functionality, but still the feel of a good manual focus camera - I suggest getting a good Mamiya 645 package, but Pentax 645 or even Mamiya or Pentax 6X7 could be a good choice. What matters to me is what kind of a deal I get from where I live. But I still feel I got a very nice Nikon-ish camera when I bought my 645 package.

On the other hand, I also got into medium format photography through using good old 1950s folders, and after I tried the MF SLR system, I noticed how ingenious a solution these folders are. Sometimes even the most functional of MF SLR systems seem troublesome compared to the combination of simplicity and optical quality of 1950s folding cameras.

As far as light meters go, anyone interested in collecting cameras and photographic equipment should have a dedicated light meter, especially if you buy a dedicated flash or two.

If you don't want to spend so much money on something as small as a light meter, getting one shouldn't be a problem if you're somewhat updated on technology, an iPhone/iPod touch or Andoid smartphone should do the trick as there are several free light meter applications that use the camera as a light meter, the iPod costs almost the same (if not less) than a dedicated light meter so that might make it a sweeter deal.

Pumalite said:

I'm too, partial to incident metering

Click to expand...

I am also a huge fan of incident metering. I used to always use the built-in meter on my Nikon FE (which was wonderfully accurate in most cases), but I then got an old selenium Gossen Pilot when I got into the MF game. It offered both incident and reflective, but after some reading I started to mostly use incident metering. Wanting more accuracy and the ability to meter in low light, I got myself a Minolta Auto Meter 3 which I use almost every time I go out shooting now (save for those times when I need to pack light and use the Gossen). IMO, incident metering is pretty much perfect, the only problem is being able to meter a certain place/location/etc. I just recently ran into that problem when shooting long exposures of the city from a tower, I couldn't meter the cityscape directly. Otehrwise, it's flawless. That's my $0.02.

EDIT: I should say that, in practice that's what I found. I'm sure some internet champion can find some technical loophole.

Depends on what film stock and what subjects you're shooting.

Color neg, I rarely need anything more sophisticated than an ancient GE selenium meter.

Incident is great when shooting predominantly dark or light subjects in flat light, it's not fooled by the subject reflectance. It's great for portraiture and table top available light.

But the one glaring thing incident metering cannot tell you how many stops difference between the lightest and darkest parts of a scene-- e.g. what light intensity is falling over yonder mountain peak included the scene. Spot metering is needed for this.

Pupfish said:

But the one glaring thing incident metering cannot tell you how many stops difference between the lightest and darkest parts of a scene-- e.g. what light intensity is falling over yonder mountain peak included the scene. Spot metering is needed for this.

Click to expand...

What's the problem here? I just [incident] meter the dark and then the light parts of the scene to get an idea of the difference. The only problem I see here is the inability to be physically in the same place as the two parts if you are shooting landscapes from a cliff or something like that.

Dr.Pain-MD said:

What's the problem here? I just [incident] meter the dark and then the light parts of the scene to get an idea of the difference. The only problem I see here is the inability to be physically in the same place as the two parts if you are shooting landscapes from a cliff or something like that.

Click to expand...

Like I've already said, people can make metering as complicated or as simple as they want to. Our buddy Ansel used a spot-meter, but I'm pretty sure he could have used a incident meter and got by just fine. Why? Because he clicked enough shutters and developed enough film so that he pretty much knew where the values of the scene would fall and where he wanted to place them. Heck, he could probably have got by without a meter at all for most of his work and did for one of his most famous pictures. A meter only measure light either "falling" on the subject or "reflected" off the subject. Either way it's only an "average" and you have to do the thinking past that point. I have had all kinds of meters(still do) and I can get by with an incident meter for 99% of all my metering. A reflective light meter, spot or average, is a dangerous thing in the hands of a person who is either lazy or uneducated in its use. A incident meter is a blessing in the hands of a person who is either lazy or uneducated in the field of metering. I fall into the lazy category as I get older, but I also have enough experience in metering a scene to know how to put the incident meter to good use 99% of the time. Different strokes for different folks! JohnW

Different strokes for different folks; I'd rather this not be taken as an affront anyone's religion. That said, incident metering is out of it's element when you can't physically place the meter where the light is falling, if it's to be included within the frame. For instance, sometimes it's good to know the light intensity on that distant snowcapped peak or where the specular highlight on a distant windowpane or stained-glass window falls.

And no, one does not have to be lazy or uneducated to use in-camera metering or incident metering for that matter to good effect. It's wonderful for certain things. Hi and low key portraiture under available light. As well, I also know how to get incidence-like readings from a spot meter, and do this all the time with my in-camera metering with subjects like this.

I've spent the past 30 years making a fair fraction of my income from photography, which places me squarely in the era of transparency films shot for publication. A commercial photographer had to place the exposure not only within the dynamic range of the film, but within the specific final print page requirements, in other words, containing that contrast within that scene, sometimes to as little as three stops tonal range. So, yeah, the subject of metering can get fine and fussy. Being within 1/3 of a stop of where the subject needs to be is only one part of the question.

But we digress. The OP was looking for a medium format equivalent to his Nikon FE. My short simple answer is that no TLR or simple SLR box sans meter is a close analog to working with a camera having a meter.