Options for a medium format camera

[GMMorris]

As far as SLRs go, I know the pentax 6x7 is relativaly compact, they look like larger 35mm SLRs, though I know nothing of the prices or lenses.

I tried the p67 a while ago actually and didn't like it.
But thanks

 

[GMMorris]

My personal shortlist, to fit what you want to do, would be something like:
A Rolleiflex with either a Planar or a Xenotar 2.8. (On a budget the camera will most likely be from the fifties or early sixties, but the Rolleis are very strong and sturdy.)
A Mamaya 6 with a 75mm lens. (OK, the lens is f/3.5 or even f/4, but that is still shallow enough and the lens is super-sharp.) You can get a 50mm lens later if you want to go wide too.
Possibly a Hassy with a 80mm, but it's heavier and needs a bit more learning.
On these three cameras, the glass is about the same when it comes to quality and sharpness. You'll need a microscope to tell them apart, given a clinical testing environment.
All of the cameras does have a "personality" and they are three very different cameras, but they are all also very good professional grade cameras.

My own MF cameras are all Hasselblad. An SWC, a 500 C/M and a 2003FCW with "enough" lenses to go with them. But that is according to what I want and "need". Your needs are a bit different.

//Björn

hmmm nice options... thinking
thanks

 

[Resoman]

I recently shot test rolls on my Rollei E3 and Hasselblad 503 CW, each equipped with a 2.8 Planar. I was prepared to see significant differences, since the Rollei lens was made around 1963 and the Hasselblad more like 1999. In fact, the results were remarkably similar, with the modern lens just a bit contrastier than the older one. The sharpness of the two lenses was comparable.

Since out of focus backgrounds are something you desire, I would say that the Planar on the Rollei produces rounder, slightly more pleasing (to my eye) OOF highlights that the Hasselblad lens, whose highlights are noticeably hexagonal.

Still I really like using the Hasselblad as a portrait camera, though it's considerably heavier and noisier than the Rollei.

Good luck!

Gary,
East Snook, TX

 

[GMMorris]

Like I said, I don't own a rangefinder so I can't really answer your question, but someone else will. I have a question for you: If your serious about doing portraits why don't you look at longer focal lengths. I would take O.G's suggestion as a good one. A 60mm for groups and 150mm for single - full length (standing) and head and shoulders portraits. The portrait taken with the 80mm would look fine as long as you don't compare it to one taken with a 150. You can guess which one is a better portrait lens. The 60mm, on the other hand, is an extremely useful general purpose lens for almost everything else.

I'm not rejecting the idea at all its just that being a "normal" lens the 80 tends to be more compact - which will make it a better choice for travel.
And since 80 is suited for the kind of project I plan on doing it is my first choice - but I won't reject the idea of 120 or 150 if I find a suitable setup.

 

[Pinholemaster]

I love my Mamiya 7II rangefinder for travel. A great big Leica (unfortunately made with lots of plastic). Light weight and easy to use.

If you prefer the 6x6 format, the Mamiya 6 rangefinder is great.

I have a complete Hasselblad system, but would never think of traveling great distances with it.

 

[kiku]

... Jap....

Perhaps a poor choice of words. Cordially, Howard Tanger

 

[Q.G.]

I have a complete Hasselblad system, but would never think of traveling great distances with it.

I have too, but do travel with Hasselblads.
They are not that heavy.

What's more, though some cameras are indeed less heavy, the seemingly general assumption that TLRs and rangefinders are much lighter just isn't true.
A Mamiya 6, for instance, is only about 300 grams lighter. It is not much smaller either. Yet comes with all the restrictions rangefinders have.

To put in in perspective a Nikon F4 35 mm camera, without lens (!), weighs about the same as a fully equiped (camera, lens and film magazine) Hasselblad. With lens, the Nikon is about the same size too.

 

[GMMorris]

I'm less worried about weight as much as size.
I am a former soldier and used to going great distances with much heavier equipment than a Hassy- but I don't want to lug around a big bulky brick.
If it is small enough to fit in a Domke stachel along side my M6 & a pouch of film- thats good enough for me.
So far it seems only TLRs (which I'm considering), the RFs (which don't fit me I'm afraid) & several 6x6s (namely the Hassy, Bronicas & Rollei SLRs) fit the bill.

I met a couple of days ago a guy who had a really cure ricohflex- I'd never seen one before.
That was small and light but I don't know how the optics fair and considering its a lower tier camera presumably any used one will be in bad condition anyway.

 

[alanrockwood]

I want to get a medium format camera and am not sure which one to get.


My requirements are thus:

1. Light weight & compact. This is a must since I will be traveling by Plane,car and train over a period of two weeks and wish to keep ny equipment as close to me as possible.
2. Capable of giving me a shallow depth of field suited to portraits. This means capable (or equiped) with a 80mm (or longer) 2.8 (or larger) lens.
3. Sharp! The difference between a sharp protrait and a soft one are huge and I am willing to pay the premium on this.
4. Cheap. I know, this one doesn't fit in with the pervious two - but I'd like to hear the cheapest options you can think of.
5. One last thing - I prefer 6 by 6, though I am open to other suggestions. That said - I don't fancy 645 at all...

Now, build quality is important obviously... but it isn't the top priority.

Thanks!

Just for grins, how about a Kiev 60 with 80mm f/2.8 Zeiss Biometar, or 80mm f/2.8 Arsat, and maybe a 180mm f/2.8 Zeiss Sonnar to go along with it?

Inexpensive camera with sharp lenses. Not sure how it would stack up as far as "compact" is concerned. Reliability can be an issue, but they say if you get a good one they are reliable. The best way to get a good one is to buy one that has been enhanced and upgraded by one of several companies. You could also buy a second body.

Feature-wise these cameras aren't as modern as the Western European and Japanese cameras. For example, the metering prisms available for them are uncoupled. However, they are inexpensive and you can get some very good lenses for relatively little money.

You should be able to get used one (with lens) for about $150 at the auction site if you are patient. Sometimes you can do a lot better. For example, I recently got one with an upgraded body in good condition, two lenses (Arsat and Biometar), two finders (a TTL eye level finder and a waist level finder), bellows, extension tubes, some filters, and a few other items for about $160.

The Zeiss Biometar lenses are reputed to be excellent, and the Arsat lenses are reputed to be very good. The Zeiss Sonnar lense is, of course, legendary, and you can get one in the Pentacon 6 mount (same mount as Kiev 60) for a fraction of the price of the same lens in a mount for a high-end medium format camera.

 

[GMMorris]

oh no! Never again!

I had a Kiev 60 - she was very rude to me and gave me lots of trouble.
Bad mechanics & bad light leaks and the optics were only so so.

Never again a Soviet... unless shes' a blond.

But thanks

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I'll go with the Rollei 2.8F.

Jeff

 

[GMMorris]

Rollei 2.8F IS very nice... but expensive.
a 500cm with 80 2.8 seems to be quite a bit cheaper.

tough decisions

 

[GMMorris]

ok, if you guys need to choose between:
1. Hasselblad 500 cm with Planar 80 2.8, WLF & a12 back

vs.

2. Rolleiflex 2.8D (Planar)

The CM looks like it is in very good condition - looks used but not very much.
The rollei looks good, not great but definitely not bad.

Which do you think suits my needs better (based on the original post).

Thanks

 

[Q.G.]

It's a choice between a system camera and a one trick pony.
One only you can make.

 

[GMMorris]

well obviously only I can make the decision
I wantto hear what you would choose, if you were acing these two projects - and why.

 

[kiku]

Nice photo of the 2 gentlemen walking. But I think a better composition would have them entering the frame and not exiting. (my opinion only and it carries no weight anywhere in the world). Howard Tanger

 

[Q.G.]

I wantto hear what you would choose, if you were acing these two projects - and why.

I would choose, no, i have chosen the system camera.
Because it is so much more versatile (i.e. more useful) than the one trick pony.

Not that the Rolleis aren't excellent cameras. They are.
But take a hint from Rollei themselves, and note that they too have been making excellent system SLR cameras for a very long time.

TLRs have very few (if any at all!) advantages that would make them the best choice for ... well, anything.

For your stated purposes, the 80 mm lens is not the best. The set i mentioned earlier 'does' what you want perfectly well.
Not a choice with a Rollei TLR.

But you say you are considering an 80 mm lens on the Hasselblad too.
Well, not the best lens for that. But even then, the system camera allows you to expand your possibilities. The one trick pony does not.

So it's an easy choice.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Given your desire to have something compact that travels well but still gives you that fast lens, I would opt for the rolleiflex.

 

[GMMorris]

Q.G. - Thats actually what I thought, but I was wondering of there was something I was missing.

ok... I think I know in that case.

Flying - I keep hearing that the 500 CM is light and small enough for travel.
Do you disagree?
I haven't had a the chance to try one my self...

 

[GMMorris]

By the way- are there 35mm backs for the V system?
I mean, could I, some how, shoot 35mm using a 500 CM - giving me a kind of xpan frame?

 

[lns]

ok, if you guys need to choose between:
1. Hasselblad 500 cm with Planar 80 2.8, WLF & a12 back

vs.

2. Rolleiflex 2.8D (Planar)

The CM looks like it is in very good condition - looks used but not very much.
The rollei looks good, not great but definitely not bad.

Which do you think suits my needs better (based on the original post).

Thanks

I have both!

The Hasselblad is obviously a better system camera, and the one I would choose if I could only have one medium format camera for general use. It is my favorite camera.

However, for travelling, I take my Rollei. It's lighter and can be handheld to good effect. Whereas I find my Hasselblad really requires a tripod for best results. This will especially be true if you are shooting indoors. Though I'm not big and I've never served in the army, so feel free to take that into account.

Finally, a Hasselblad with two backs and two lenses would be a lot to fit into a Domke bag along with your Leica. The 500CM is small and light on its own, for sure, but the lenses are not particularly. Then you must add the weight of the back (or two).

Many wonderful portraits have been taken with TLRs. Consider Imogen Cunningham, Richard Avedon and Diane Arbus for starters.

-Laura

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

A 500 CM is a great travel camera, especially if you limit yourself to a single lens. The lenses are the source of the weight in that system - you start carrying around three lenses and a couple of backs and it really adds up. I know- I've done it. I got some great images with it, and overall was very happy, but at the same time, I found myself constrained by the camera (always being hyper-aware of the camera and the bag, not being sure if I could go in some museums etc because of the amount of gear). Everything is a tradeoff of course.

 

[Q.G.]

By the way- are there 35mm backs for the V system?
I mean, could I, some how, shoot 35mm using a 500 CM - giving me a kind of xpan frame?

Yes, there are, or rather: were 35 mm backs.
They are rather rare, so do not hope to find one one in a hurry.

They are rare because the idea didn't catch on.
Why use 35 mm film and restrict yourself to one strip format when you can crop any strip, horizontal, vertical or at any angle, from the 6x6 frame?
Why rob yourself of the opportunity to have both a nice square shot and a strip-panorama taken from that same shot?

So unless you need 35 mm film because that's the only size a particular emulsion comes in, it is easier, and cheaper too, to just use a full frame 6x6 back and crop.


You can travel with Hasselblads, yes.

I have a 'walkabout' kit, consisting of a motorized body, with metering prism, an extra magazine, two lenses (with hoods) and a teleconverter (or three lenses), that does not take up much more room than, say, a Canon 1Ds with a couple of zooms and what else you need to carry with such a thing.
All fits comfortably in a not-that-large LowePro Specialist.

For 'more serious' travel, i change the motorized body for an unmotorized one, expand the kit to 4 lenses, add a short extension tube or two, plus a separate light meter, and put that in a LowePro Reporter 400.
That too is not the largest of bags, but it will hold more film, and all sorts of
extras (maps, note book and pens, and what have you).

 

[mcgrattan]

kiku,

You are right! I was taking shots of the shadows of people walking, not the people themselves, and then when the two guys walked into frame I couldn't resist (but left it a little late).

re: the Rollei versus Hasselblad debate:

My Salyut with a single lens and single back takes up about the same size in the bag as my Rolleiflex and I'd happily carry either around all day. But as others have pointed out, once you add a second back and more than one lens it gets much larger and heavier. If you want to use a prism finder, even more so. There's also a lot to be said for the quiet leaf shutter and better `handhold-ability' of the Rolleiflex, and, as others have also mentioned above, the lack of mirror blackout really makes a difference, too.

I suppose it depends if you plan to use the camera for a huge variety of shot types [favouring the Hasselblad], or mostly the environmental portrait type shots. I think that sort of shot/framing is something that TLRs are pretty good at as it's right in their 'sweet spot'. You are never going to be able to do a really tight head-shot with a Rolleiflex without adding accessory lenses, but the sort of shot you show in your original post would be right up their alley.

 

[wiltw]

Bronica SQ-Ai (or older SQ-A or less fancy, entry SQ-B) with any PS lens. These were used extensively by wedding photographers who did not want to tie up their working capital in the cost of Hasselblad stuff, but wanted good, dependable, sharp alternative.