Recommendations for breaking into medium format

Status
Not open for further replies.

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
52,996
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
An aspect ration of 4:3 works much better for me than 3:2.
In many cases, when I shoot my square format camera (Mamiya C330) I'm planning to crop the result to a 4:3 aspect ratio anyways.
That is how I used the Mamiya C330 when I did wedding and portrait work.
The professional photographers I used to print for never ordered square enlargements.
I have printed particular negatives to square prints, and have even had a series of exhibition prints in a show where I elected to print them square.
Some of them started from square negatives, and some didn't.
 

Pieter12

Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2017
Messages
7,613
Location
Magrathean's computer
Format
Super8
I agree that going to a square format can make a big difference. However, my understanding of the OP's intent is to improve the image quality through a larger negative, not to change to a square format for aesthetics or as a challenge.
 

Alan Edward Klein

Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2017
Messages
9,473
Location
New Jersey formerly NYC
Format
Multi Format
6x7 as in an RB67 is substantially different than 3x2 in a 35mm. 6x7 just about fits 8x10" or 16x20" prints 35mm would be 16"x24".
 

mgb74

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 24, 2005
Messages
4,774
Location
MN and MA US
Format
Multi Format
Low cost and high image quality are often at odds (not surprisingly). But you can beat the odds by finding a camera that just doesn't get much love today. The Mamiya TLR, the Mamiya RB67, and perhaps the Bronica SQ or ETRS fit the bill. Forget the Yashicamat unless you find a "below market price" deal - their price has run up too high. Needless to say, a lot depends on your local market.

But I'll be the contrarian (since you mention digital workflow) and ask how you display your photos. Because - and others can weigh in - if you just post them online I'm not convinced you'll see the quality difference in medium format.
 

moggi1964

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 18, 2020
Messages
275
Location
Rossendale, UK
Format
Hybrid
I bought two medium format cameras in the last year. Both were operational and required no repair though I did CLA the folder just to increase its longevity (hopefully).

Anyway, I bought an Agfa Isolette !! on eBayUK for about £40 I think. I then bought a Mamiya C3 at auction for about £120.

I gotta admit I love the C3 and the TLR style of shooting. I'll keep the Agfa for the times I need something compact.

I would recommend both.
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,369
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
The Mamiya C2xx and C3xx cameras besides having interchangeable lenses, allow one to focus or trip the shutter with either hand. I believe that that is unique and quite useful depending on ones handiness and mobility.
 

Mike Lopez

Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
642
Format
Multi Format
Fair warning: you are getting onto a slippery slope. Your words “for occasional use when spectacular scenes present themselves” sound exactly like what I told myself I’d do when I first sought a medium format system over 20 years ago. Now I use everything from half-frame 35mm up to large format. When you see your negatives (or slides) from your first medium format outing, you will in all likelihood want to do that a whole lot more, regardless of whether you find “spectacular” scenes in front of you or not.

Good luck to you. There are lots of positive attributes to be found among all the formats discussed here. 645 negatives, when contact printed, make wonderful little wallet-sized portraits. 6x9 pictures feel like small, but beautiful, postcards in the hand. Disregard the marketing hype—no one format is perfect, and all have their attributes. (I say that because, for years, Mamiya marketed their 6x7 products as the perfect format, mostly because the aspect ratio almost perfectly matches a sheet of 8x10 paper).
 

Mike Lopez

Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
642
Format
Multi Format
mgb74 said:
But I'll be the contrarian (since you mention digital workflow) and ask how you display your photos. Because - and others can weigh in - if you just post them online I'm not convinced you'll see the quality difference in medium format.
Click to expand...

Very good point.
 

RalphLambrecht

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 19, 2003
Messages
14,654
Location
K,Germany
Format
Medium Format

I recommend to get started with a medium format folder. They're very inexpensive and some have impressive lenses. They all take 120 film and a great way to get into medium format.
 

Donald Qualls

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
12,301
Location
North Carolina
Format
Multi Format
Sirius Glass said:
645 is not much of a change from 35mm and is not worth the effort
Click to expand...

Yeah, there was a nice graphic illustration above about why this isn't true (and I know you weren't saying it was, I just didn't want to overquote). Someone said something about "adjacent formats" -- and 35 mm and 645 are not that.

When there was film for every need, there was a whole roll format in between 120 and "miniature" 35 mm -- "small format" aka 127. The original 127 frame was 4x6(+) cm on 46 mm wide film, later 4x4 square was added and some cameras were made to use half the "full frame" to give 4x3 (which was pretty close to 828, and still bigger than the 24x36 frame of 35mm). So it used to be that if you wanted bigger film than 35 mm, you could get a 127 TLR (there are some really good ones) and have nearly double the image area, or a full frame (8 on a roll) and get nearly triple, barely smaller than 6x4.5, but in a camera that was literally a "Vest Pocket" fit. These cameras are all over, but the film is not -- try to buy 127 and you get two or three choices, at least one of them hand rolled. If I'm going to put up with that, and before I'll pay the prices, I'll cut down 120 and spool it myself (and get half again as many exposures, up to 24 in a half frame camera).

If you're new to film that doesn't come in a cassette, however, I'd recommend you stick with 120. I've got a Daiichi Zenobia, a scale focus 6x4.5 that fits in a pocket, 6x6 and 6x9 folders as well (one of my favorites is a Voigtlander Rollfilmkamera, from the late 1920s, a 620 TLR (same film, different spool, easily rerolled or in some cameras you can feed from a 120 roll with the spool flanges trimmed). But if it came down to only being able to keep one camera, I'd have to think long and hard between my Speed Graphic (an Anniversary model with conversion Graflok back and Kalart rangefinder, working focal plane shutter, but a little ugly cosmetically) and my RB67. The Speed is lighter, but the RB is quicker and easier to operate, quicker to change lenses (and doesn't require 15-30 minutes to recalibrate the RF, because SLR), and doesn't require a darkroom if I run out of loaded film holders.

For a beginner to medium format, however, something like a Zenobia or Mamiya Six (folder) would be the best choices. Compact enough to fit a coat pocket (even a suit coat), very capable lens, the Mamiya (at least the version I have, there are several) has dual format, 6x6 and 6x4.5 (with captive masks, so they won't have vanished in the sixty-plus years since the camera was made), plus coupled rangefinder, and focuses by moving the film plane rather than the lens or one element of the lens (as many folders do). Keep one folder, that Mamiya Six would win (but I'd be sorry to see the Rollfilmkamera go).
 

Two23

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
660
Location
South Dakota
Format
8x10 Format
Really need more info as there is a wide range of camera systems. Do you really need interchangeable lenses or are you just looking try it out? Will you be using a tripod or not? Compact or doesn't matter?

I'm going to assume you just want something simple and not a lot of money to try. For hand held and fairly fast shooting I suggest an older Rolleiflex with Tessar f3.5 lens, Rolleicord, or Mamiya C30, Yashicamat 124G. If you'll use a tripod then Bessa RF with Skopar or Heliar lens. I like this camera because it shoots 6x9. Another thought is a Fujica Super-6. It has a rangefinder, great coated lens and is 6x6. I would stick with cameras that either have a range finder or you focus on ground glass (like the TLR Rolleiflex etc.) The older cameras without a range finder are "scale" focus, that is you guess. It's harder to get a sharp photo from them. The Pentax 67 and RB/RZ67 are very large and heavy and are best used on a tripod. They have also gotten increasingly expensive. A Bronica GS-1 outfit is on ebay for $550 which looks like a good deal on a more modern system with a meter and easy focus. Bronica has always been underpriced in my opinion. I owned a Bronica ETRSi 645 system for a number of years and loved it. I see the ETRS 645 format system (camera body, exposure/prism, film back, lens) sells for $400-$600 on ebay. These aren't pocketable but they are modern and easy to use.


Kent in SD
 
Last edited:

Besk

Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
584
Location
Southern USA
Format
Multi Format
One camera not mentioned, I believe, is the miniature Crown Graphic (or Century Graphic.) Get one with a Grafok back and you will have a very versatile camera with not much money.
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,369
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
Bob Eskridge said:
One camera not mentioned, I believe, is the miniature Crown Graphic (or Century Graphic.) Get one with a Grafok back and you will have a very versatile camera with not much money.
Click to expand...

Still a very bulky solution for medium format. I would recommend a number of tlrs, folders, or range finder cameras first.
 

btaylor

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
2,254
Location
Los Angeles
Format
Large Format
Bob Eskridge said:
One camera not mentioned, I believe, is the miniature Crown Graphic (or Century Graphic.) Get one with a Grafok back and you will have a very versatile camera with not much money.
Click to expand...
Yes, that was my first medium format camera. I shot 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 sheet film with the great Ektar lens. I really got to like 6x9, it’s a lot of film real estate. Along those lines I recently picked up a Mamiya Press camera on this forum for less than $100. They are a real bargain. As a longtime Rolleicord user I have to agree with all the TLR love around here, they work really well and can be inexpensive. For some reason I recently felt compelled to purchase another ‘cord- it was a redundant purchase and I sold it on to a member here, for under $200. The Bronicas, Hasselblads and RZ’s are great, but for a couple of hundred $ you can find some great MF picture taking machines.
 

abruzzi

Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2018
Messages
3,066
Location
New Mexico, USA
Format
Large Format
yeah, I think the medium format press cameras are the hidden gems that aren't "discovered" yet. The Horseman VHR system is a bit bulky (but then no is the RB...) but its still easy to find most of the bits together for a powerful 6x9 rangefinder system with a dozen standard lenses, and due to its large format technical camera heritage, can go full view camera with many other lenses. I know the Mamiya Press also can be a great system, and is super cheap. Unfortunately, they are more complicated than your average camera and while great for an experienced photographer moving up to medium format, they're probably a challenge for someone without that kind of experience.
 

Deleted member 88956

For a first MF with great handling and image quality Pentax 645 (original first version) would be the one for me. It is as compact as it gets, metering is great, screen is bright, lenses are top shelf. Handles like a larger 35mm but huge negative by comparison and still 15 frames on a roll. No need to think of different finders as it has one integrated. Only film inserts (vs. interchangeable backs) which is really not as negative as it might seem, yet makes design more durable.

Folders can be fine cameras, but cheap means just OK. To get a good one would not be less expensive than a number of MF SLRs. They are smaller, but I'd first take one for a ride before committing, it is not to everyone's style of shooting.
 

Alan Edward Klein

Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2017
Messages
9,473
Location
New Jersey formerly NYC
Format
Multi Format
I've found that 6x7 scans do look cleaner with less grain than 35mm. 4x5 looks even better. I used a V600 but now use a V850 which looks better. You can see all types of scans on my Flickr page for comparison. They're all labeled with which scanner I used and what type of film.
 

Alex Benjamin

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 8, 2018
Messages
2,480
Location
Montreal
Format
Multi Format
spl said:
I am looking for recommendations for an inexpensive medium format camera for occasional use when spectacular scenes present themselves
Click to expand...

To the OP: If you don't state what your max budget is, you'll end up with a 15-page-long thread in which every single model of medium format camera ever made is mentioned.
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,369
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
Alex Benjamin said:
To the OP: If you don't state what your max budget is, you'll end up with a 15-page-long thread in which every single model of medium format camera ever made is mentioned.
Click to expand...

Then when you buy a camera, it really does not matter which one, everyone will tell you that you made the worst decision of your life and you should have bought their own special favorite.
 

removedacct1

Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Messages
1,875
Location
97333
Format
Large Format
Alex Benjamin said:
To the OP: If you don't state what your max budget is, you'll end up with a 15-page-long thread in which every single model of medium format camera ever made is mentioned.
Click to expand...

Yup.
Perhaps the OP would take a moment to tell us what "inexpensive" means to them? Then we can hone in on something to fit their needs and budget. If they're looking at a Holga, that tells me they're probably looking for "cheap". If that's the case, spending $300 for a Japanese TLR may even be too much.

I recently bought a Kodak Special Six-20 (6x9 folder) with the Anastigmat Special f4.5 lens for $25 (plus $5 for shipping), and after a bit of servicing it is perfectly capable of making decent photographs. Example made on Tri-X processed in Pyrocat HD: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51671168929_42ce8d67e9_k.jpg
 

Alex Benjamin

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 8, 2018
Messages
2,480
Location
Montreal
Format
Multi Format
paulbarden said:
I recently bought a Kodak Special Six-20 (6x9 folder) with the Anastigmat Special f4.5 lens for $25 (plus $5 for shipping), and after a bit of servicing it is perfectly capable of making decent photographs.
Click to expand...

Not surprised. I haven't met a medium-format camera I didn't like, and I haven't met a medium format I didn't like. SLRs, TLRs, folders, they were extremely well-crafted instruments and most were built to last.

OP, 6x6, 6x4.5, 6x7 and 6x9 are all interesting formats - and trust me, you'll quickly want more than just one. After that, choice really comes down to how much you are willing to pay.
 

Donald Qualls

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
12,301
Location
North Carolina
Format
Multi Format
Alex Benjamin said:
choice really comes down to how much you are willing to pay.
Click to expand...

This is truth.

My first medium format (after the box cameras of my childhood) was a Kodak Reflex II -- pretty classic TLR, with a slightly unusual lens, automatic frame counter, and Fresnel field lens in the viewfinder (makes it brighter). I traded it for a Rollei 35 when the shutter started to get slow (just needed clean/lube/adjust, but I was 15). I bought another one 18 years ago, not quite thirty years after that trade. The only downsides to these are the 620 requirement (mine will feed from a trimmed 120 spool, but requires 620 for takeup) and the ASA flash sync connector (there are adapters to PC, but they're not easy to find when you want one). In between, I've had a bunch of folders in every 120 format, lots of solid body cameras (including one, a Bencini Koroll 24s, that gets 24 frames on a roll), box cameras, "consumer" cameras (Kodaks, mostly), one other TLR (a Seagull aka Hai Ou) -- and recently bought another example of one of the folders I traded away, a Moskva 5. Heck, I've even got two Holgas and a Debonair (Holga-like camera from Film Photography Project). That to say, I had a BUNCH of them before buying my RB67 -- but I'm damned glad I did.

With a steady hand, you can get very good images from a Brownie Hawkeye Flash or Ansco Shur-Shot -- but the more adjustability and versatility you add, the more you can do with it. And the less popular or well known a camera is, the less it's likely to cost you (relative to what it can do).
 

mmerig

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Messages
212
Location
Teton Valley
Format
Medium Format

Same here regarding 2 by 3's. The 2 by 3 Crowns are a little harder to find than the Speeds, but they are lighter and most of the lenses have shutters anyway. Format can be adjusted using different roll-film backs. I remove the rangefinder to save space and weight, and often change lenses so the RF becomes impractical. The optical graflex viewfinders (the ones that slide into the bracket on top of the camera) are worth having -- more accurate than the wire-frame sport finders. If you bargain-hunt the cameras can be bought fairly cheap. The graflok backs take rollfilm backs and sheet-film holders (double sided or Grafmatics).

As others mentioned, the choice depends on what you want to use it for.

If you want portability (like in a pocket), a folder is the way to go, but many have "peep-hole" viewfinders, and the lens-bellows can block part of the view. If making landscape/distant shots, zone focusing is more than good enough. For street-shooting, I guess TLR with a waist-level finder is a good choice. For rapid, selective focusing with wide apertures an SLR is a better choice, but a TLR will do almost as well. .

Some like the square format, but unless you print square, there is always waste of film. The 6 by 7 goes well with 8 by 10 paper, but the negatives from a given roll are awkward to keep together in plastic negative sleeves.

For flexibility and relatively low prices (especially for lenses), the 2 by 3 Graphics or similar (e.g., Busch Pressman) are a good choice. The down-side to the B-P's are that they are hard to use wide-angle lenses with (=< 65 mm) , and they don't have graflok backs (but they can be fitted with one). Some B-P's use screws to hold the lens boards, so switching lenses in the field is finicky. They tend to be much cheaper than the Graphics and the better, more compact folders.
 

Alan Edward Klein

Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2017
Messages
9,473
Location
New Jersey formerly NYC
Format
Multi Format
why are 6x7 negatives difficult to keep in negative sleeves? Are you using the larger sheets for 6x7?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…