Please Recommend a Great Entry Level MF Camera

36cm2 · Dec 7, 2015

C330 or C220, unless you can splurge for a mid level Rolleiflex. And since there are lots of very wide-ranging suggestions here, just go ahead and grab a Linhof III, 135mm lens, good tripod and a couple of Sinar MF backs. That way you can skip right to large format for movements, tune into Adams' trilogy, and dig into compensating development methods using dedicated high and low contrast backs. Ok, maybe a bit too fast on the upswing there... but enjoy the ride nonetheless.

Doc W · Dec 8, 2015

Mikkornat said:
I'm still learning on a 35mm, but I have an eye to the future. What's the best "bang for your buck" entry level MF camera? And what's the best way to go about getting it?

Looking forward to the impressive collective wisdom of the APUG community.

I agree with Kirks. An RB67 is relatively inexpensive and you can get a body, back and lens for under $300. In normal bright daylight, they can be hand-held easily but they are a bit on the heavy side and you will find you need a tripod quite a bit. They are not a fast, street photography kind of camera. If you go this route, get the most recent Pro-SD model you can find and get the most recent lenses. A 90mm is all you need to get started. Mamiya made really good lenses for these cameras. Unlike a lot of MF cameras, the RB67 has a removable film magazine so you can take both b&w and colour, one back for each. It is also an SLR so what you see in the ground glass is what you get. I also like the 6x7 format rather than the square 6x6. I prefer rectangles and I would always be cropping a 6x6.

bo eder · Dec 8, 2015

I've yet to burn a roll of film, but I managed to find a mint condition Bronco SQ with waist level finder, two lenses and two backs for under $400. I hate to say it, but it looks like the former owner didn't even use it. I bought some expired film to practice loading and firing off a few shots to see how the camera works, but once I get my Tri-X or Tmax rolls, I'm going all the way and will learn how to develop my own negs. I just bought a Epson V600 scanner as well. These are exciting times, I say

nosmok · Dec 8, 2015

Any damn folder with a leather bellows (the synthetics tend to leak). I have a lot of them and love them all. If I had to pick one for a first, it would be a 6x9 Franka Rolfix with a Rodenstock Trinar on it. This is a camera you can start on and keep. Basic as hell, but the photos are amazing. Zeiss Nettars are good choices too, esp. in 6x4.5.

HiHoSilver · Dec 8, 2015

By the time the orig. poster (OP) endures all our fav. pet rock votes & some normal, good sensed-questions. This may be unneeded, but there's a moderately well done decision tree on just this topic.

Zeb Andrews wrote it, and according to his boss, Zeb shoots 400+ rolls/yr. He's on Flickr & has his own site also. Should any of you pass through Portland, OR - Zeb and the shop are both a pleasure to spend time with.

http://codex.bluemooncamera.com/2014/02/21/becoming-medium-format/

Sirius Glass · Dec 8, 2015

High Hoe Ag, that is both useful and funny.

tomfrh · Dec 8, 2015

My only mf camera is a Pentax 645n. It's a great camera. It works very similar to 35mm slrs. It's perhaps not as "serious" as 6x6, 6x7, 6x9 cameras, however it's a big step up from 35mm. I love using it. its so easy to use. Perfect interface.

645 is also a good format for projection, if you're into slides...

Sirius Glass · Dec 8, 2015

I had a circa 1935 Certo Super Sport Dolly. It was a folding 120 film range finder camera that had a Zeiss lens. The photographs were very sharp. I sold it because I was not using it since I liked the Hasselblad better.

Mikkornat · Dec 9, 2015

OP here.

Thank you all for your input! I'm planning to begin MF photography in a year or two. So there's no rush to narrow down the "perfect" camera. All I want to do is take some incredible photos.

I don't want to spend more time fussing with a MF camera system than I do taking and processing my photos. I want something flexible and practical. I like rare and exotic cameras, and after I am proficient with my first MF camera system I would certainly try out others.

I have no clue about all this 6x6, 645, yada yada technical stuff. I'm still learning basic 35mm photography and I am excited to have my first patterson tank and to build a DSLR film scanner. If I have to choose about that stuff, is there a MF that does them all? I'd like to be able to try it all, so a camera that has the most relevant/popular technical stats is desirable to me.

There's a lot to digest in this thread so far. I'll be spending a few days going over it all and start a list.

Again thank you all, you're all wonderful!

tomfrh · Dec 9, 2015

645, 6x6 etc simply refers to the size of the image/negative.

645 = 6cm x 4.5cm

6x6 = 6cm x 6cm (ie square).

See, common mf film is a roll 6cm wide, and different cameras use different amount of the roll per shot.

Use 4.5cm length per shot - 645
Use 7cm length per shot - 6x7

georg16nik · Dec 9, 2015

Mikkornat said:
OP here.....[]
I have no clue about all this 6x6, 645, yada yada technical stuff. I'm still learning basic 35mm photography and I am excited to have my first patterson tank and to build a DSLR film scanner []....

...

bo eder said:
I've yet to burn a roll of film, but I managed to find a mint condition Bronco SQ with waist level finder, two lenses and two backs for under $400...[]... I'm going all the way and will learn how to develop my own negs. I just bought a Epson V600 scanner as well. These are exciting times, I say

So, your feet are not wet from real darkroom work and no optical enlargements but you wanna MF...?
Right!
All that fuss, so that you can scan your films with DSLR film scanner, Epson V600 scanner... eyeballing a crappy file, on a crappy display?
Right!

You guys don't need medium format! Your current gear is most likely totally fine but it looks like you are really scared from the darkroom.
So scared, that you wanna hide behind larger piece of film and bazuka format MF camera - le tracteur

I would recommend enlarger, baryta paper and all the darkroom jazz and get to the essence of photography - THE PRINT!
When you get to 16x20 and larger prints, the MF dilemma might or might not fully crystallize and then, there is always LF after.
Then you come back to 35mm.

baachitraka · Dec 9, 2015

Medium format enlargers capable to take negatives up-to 6x6 are rather very cheap.

I never really get the idea behind scanning the film and uploading them in the web. Okay, The real beauty with film for me is enlarging and printing them.

I may scan the prints for web but do not want to give up the joy of printing.

My recommendation for an entry level camera is Rolleicord Va/Vb.

Folders are good too if you find one with good bellows and working shutter and in that case Agfa Isolette III with Solinar f/3.5 lens.

John51 · Dec 9, 2015

ime, it all boils down to how the camera feels in your hands as you take the photo. In my youth, I owned a Mamiya C330. One fine camera...except that it wasn't for me. I just never took to shooting with a TLR. In the time I owned it, I shot more film with my cheapo 35mm camera. For others it is different, they love their TLR and wouldn't be without one.

Formats:

35mm has a long side/short side ratio of 3 to 2, 36mm by 24mm. Prints tend to have that ratio as 5 to 4. So in a 10x8 print some detail on the 35mm neg is missing.

6x6: Some prints looks best as square. Otherwise, 6x6 is handy because you can crop it how you want, no need to tilt the camera 90 degrees when shooting. Was the mainstream medium format size for many decades. Umpteen millions of couples have had their wedding photos taken with 6x6 cameras. 12 negs per roll.

6x4.5: This format was popular with folders. Either a dedicated 645 camera or a 6x9 with a mask. Just when it had been all but forgotten, it came back with a heavy marketing campaign plus bells and whistles. A 6x6 neg is actually 56mm square. So when you make a 'full frame' 10x8 print, it is 56mm of neg on one side and 44.8mm the other side. Whole lotta wasted neg. In theory, a 645 is just as good as a 6x6 for regular ratio prints but the 645 gives you 16 negs per roll.

6x7: aka the ideal format. (Many photogs will spit if you use those 2 words.) 56mm becomes the short side of the neg. To get a full frame 10x8, the long side needs to be 1.25 times longer. ie.70mm. Just when all the 'I must have the latest' addicts had spent up on a 645 system, the marketing guys went to town pushing 6x7. 10 negs per roll.

6x9: Once only found on folders and the Kodak Medalist, (plus some rarities I forget) this has the same neg ratio as 35mm. Fuji made them in the 70s as a fixed lens camera for pros that shot lots of groups. ie. get off the coach to [whatever] attraction. Everyone gets photographed as a group. End of day, get on coach with a print of you and the rest of the group. Lots available from Japan. Some have had a very busy life. 8 negs per roll.

HiHoSilver · Dec 9, 2015

Hey Serius,

I'm fortunate to have 2-3 good shops in the area. I'm so happy w/ Bluemooncamera I must sound like a shill or advertiser - which is not the case. In some ways they're a bit like Keh (price-wise), but the face to face help is the best I've encountered. Zeb - author of the chart - is wonderful to talk to, and his shot often want to make me cry & trash my gear. He's not at all arrogant about his work, and at 400 rolls/yr - its fair to say he pays his due to master the craft.

Each person there seems to drive for the love of the image and development of skills. Its a good influence on me - to focus on skills rather than unimportant fluff or imagine that some gadget will make me a good shooter.

bgibb187 · Dec 9, 2015

Ignore anyone telling you not to shoot medium format because you intend on scanning your negatives and ignore how many negs per roll you can get when picking format. Pick the format that best suits your composition needs.

Sirius Glass · Dec 9, 2015

bgibb187 said:
Ignore anyone telling you not to shoot medium format because you intend on scanning your negatives and ignore how many negs per roll you can get when picking format. Pick the format that best suits your composition needs.

Welcome to APUG

Alan Gales · Dec 9, 2015

Mikkornat said:
OP here.

If I have to choose about that stuff, is there a MF that does them all? I'd like to be able to try it all, so a camera that has the most relevant/popular technical stats is desirable to me.

The Fujifilm GX680 series does almost all of it. By installing various masks you have the choice of 6x8, 6x7, 6x6 or 645. It is a monster camera though and best suited for the studio on a tripod or camera stand. I believe that the Mamiya RZ67 and RB67 6x7 cameras had 6x6 film backs available.

The most technical laden cameras were some of the 645's like the Pentax 645N and Nll. They had built in meters, auto film advance, auto focus, auto exposure with matrix metering, etc. That stuff is all nice until you start having problems with it. Remember that medium format film cameras are obsolete and getting older. There is something to be said for the Hasselblad V series and Mamiya RB67 cameras that were simpler mechanical cameras.

Alan Gales · Dec 9, 2015

bgibb187 said:
Ignore anyone telling you not to shoot medium format because you intend on scanning your negatives and ignore how many negs per roll you can get when picking format. Pick the format that best suits your composition needs.

+1

To quote Cartman, "Whatever, I do what I want!". https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Cartman+I+do+what+I+want

michr · Dec 9, 2015

bgibb187 said:
Ignore anyone telling you not to shoot medium format because you intend on scanning your negatives and ignore how many negs per roll you can get when picking format. Pick the format that best suits your composition needs.

Seconded. Don't be discouraged by those issues, get out there and enjoy yourself. Shooting medium format is not complicated. Go buy a $30 Holga, take photos, have the film processed, scan it at home -- now you're shooting medium format. You have to start somewhere. Pick a tool and run with it. Maybe not a Holga if you're looking for higher-quality than 35mm results. Look for cheap, working cameras which offer a selection of shutter speeds, apertures, and the ability to focus. These features are an indication that the camera was targeted toward enthusiasts and possibly professionals (depending on the camera). That's a good place to start. Get a Ciro-Flex or Graphlex 22, a Yashica A, or the like. It's everything you need to get started in one package. Learn to use a no-frills camera well and you'll be able to pick up almost any camera and begin using it immediately. If you're shooting black and white film, you don't even need a meter, just an educated guess, or use your digital camera or cell phone (there are apps).

MattKrull · Dec 9, 2015

georg16nik said:
...So, your feet are not wet from real darkroom work and no optical enlargements but you wanna MF...?Right!All that fuss, so that you can scan your films with DSLR film scanner, Epson V600 scanner... eyeballing a crappy file, on a crappy display?Right!You guys don't need medium format! Your current gear is most likely totally fine but it looks like you are really scared from the darkroom.So scared, that you wanna hide behind larger piece of film and bazuka format MF camera - le tracteur I would recommend enlarger, baryta paper and all the darkroom jazz and get to the essence of photography - THE PRINT!When you get to 16x20 and larger prints, the MF dilemma might or might not fully crystallize and then, there is always LF after. Then you come back to 35mm.

So, I'm going to argue 2 points here:
1 - In the OP's case, MF actually makes MORE sense than 35mm, because with a scanner like the V600 (which I have) the medium format negatives look much better. The scanner really obscures a lot of the fine detail in negative, and it really hurts the quality of a 35mm negative. A 645 scan is much more useable.
2 - Following that, yes, a darkroom is required to really understand what makes film great. But really starting someone off with baryta paper? Talk about an expensive and time consuming (thus: intimidating) way to learn. Grab a box of cheap kentmere 8x10 VC RC paper, and go nuts. Once you're comfortable with the process, dabble with whatever papers, toners, and anything else that grabs your interest. But start easy and non-intimidating.

Kirks518 · Dec 9, 2015

As much as I'd like to have a darkroom, it can't be done in my house. No garage, no basement, and no available spare rooms or spare bathrooms, so I have a darkbag and a digital darkroom. There is nothing wrong with shooting MF or LF and using a digital darkroom.

Anyway, I re-assert my recommendation for the RB67 system. While you can use masks and what-not to get the other formats, it's easier (IMO) to crop in the process rather then monkey with masks out in the field. the RB67 (or RZ67) gives you the second largest negative, with the full flexibility of a modular system. And AFAIK, if you use one of the motorized backs, you get a 6x8 negative. It's always easier to crop out what you don't want, then to try and put in what's not there....

DWThomas · Dec 9, 2015

bgibb187 said:
Ignore anyone telling you not to shoot medium format because you intend on scanning your negatives and ignore how many negs per roll you can get when picking format. Pick the format that best suits your composition needs.

+1

It's always fun to watch these threads where a relatively simple innocent question spirals off into pages of responses, but I suppose many of us wouldn't be here if we weren't a bit on the obsessive side!

Most of my film shooting these days is medium format -- or larger. Compared with 35mm, the larger frames reduce the visibility of dust and mishaps, and are far easier to scan -- if you're doing that -- on a flatbed. I do still darkroom print some of my work for exhibition from time to time, but much of my stuff winds up shared on the web to reach far-flung friends and family.

I use a Perkeo II (6x6cm) folder, an Ercona II (6x9cm) folder, a Yashica Mat 124G TLR (6x6cm), and a Bronica SQ-A SLR (6x6cm). That list is loosely in the order of "seriousness." Although the two folders are sort of tied, I tend not to use the Ercona as much. With its 6x9 format, it only gets 8 shots on a roll, and the camera is bigger and heavier than the Perkeo (in theory it has the ability to do 6x6, but the masks are as common as pink unicorns). I omit my Kodak Brownie Target Six-20 box camera from the active list, although it does shoot 6x9. It still works, so I guess the four or five dollars my parents paid for it in 1949 was well spent.

The last year or two I've been shooting the Yashica on vacation trips that are not specifically photographic expeditions. It has only one focal length and a pretty decent lens. (I believe have been some auxiliary attachments for mild wide angle and telephoto, but have never looked into that.)

The Bronica I have had periodic GAS attacks that have gone way beyond my once intended minimalist approach. But it is the one I use for Really Serious Projects(tm). That, like the legendary Hasselblad, is a system camera one can view as an "Adult TinkerToy."

The current problem with medium format is that most cameras are twenty to fifty or more years old and it can be tricky to get one with assurance that it will work decently. This tends to push one toward buying from a seller who cleans and adjusts them, which runs the price up. If you can get a folder with good bellows and working lens/shutter/aperture, or any of the TLRs mentioned along this thread, they are a good place to start.

(If I was in fact the Dave Thomas of Wendy's fame, I would have a recent Rolleiflex and a suitcase of Hassy gear. But I'm not -- and he's under the dirt, so "we're even." :munch: )

Harry Stevens · Dec 9, 2015

I like taking pictures of my analog darkroom and then I scan the negative ............

If you get a TLR be prepared for the 20 questions you will get every time you use it....

Poisson Du Jour · Dec 9, 2015

There are a number of skills which are different in medium format from the smaller postage-stamp size of 35mm. One of these is the much larger image (400% over 35mm) requiring careful thought about your choice of lens(es), now and in the future. The other is fitting the subject to the distinctive MF format; many photographers coming from 35mm screw many an otherwise good scene (repeatedly!) by failing to understand perspective and 'fit' as it applies to the scene they are photographing. Put an ultra-wide angle lens on 35mm and you have a sprawling, atmospheric scene, but in MF no such equivalent fun exists. The shape of the format (e.g. 6x6, 6x4.5, 6x7... others still) is another consideration feeding into this.

sagai · Dec 9, 2015

Harry Stevens said:
I like taking pictures of my analog darkroom and then I scan the negative ............

If you get a TLR be prepared for the 20 questions you will get every time you use it....

One of those question is
.... So where did I left my incident meter !!??? [emoji2]

Please Recommend a Great Entry Level MF Camera

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency