Shouldn't a medium format folder give the same IQ as an SLR?

[DREW WILEY]

Might as well throw non-folding MF Rangefinders into the mix too. Those eliminate the oft lack of scissor extension accuracy of older folders, yet still weigh less than SLR's. But only SLR's make real sense with long lenses, if you happen to gravitate toward that. The whole question to begin with seems like an apples versus oranges comparison, so might as well throw in a few pears too.

 

[Helge]

Might as well throw non-folding MF Rangefinders into the mix too. Those eliminate the oft lack of scissor extension accuracy of older folders, yet still weigh less than SLR's. But only SLR's make real sense with long lenses, if you happen to gravitate toward that. The whole question to begin with seems like an apples versus oranges comparison, so might as well throw in a few pears too.

True. But the trouble with MF SLRs and tele lenses even short ones is that they are:
- Expensive (the lenses)
- Large and heavy
- Almost per default needs a tripod for the format to really make sense. Otherwise shake will kill the sharpness.
- Is more difficult to focus right and fast, because of dimness of finder and relative slowness of glass combined with higher of precision requirement due to the larger and scarcer format.
All of the above can be overcome of course.
But it’s still not as easy and precise as just having a normal lens.

 

[warden]

A Mamiya 6 or 7 with a good representative of their glass might have that bump up in image quality you are wondering about. The lens pops out some I think, so not a folder.

Showing my ignorance here - I always thought if a camera had bellows, it was a folder. Because the bellows "folded" in on themselves to make the camera compact when not in use.

 

[Sirius Glass]

True. But the trouble with MF SLRs and tele lenses even short ones is that they are:
- Expensive (the lenses)
- Large and heavy
- Almost per default needs a tripod for the format to really make sense. Otherwise shake will kill the sharpness.
- Is more difficult to focus right and fast, because of dimness of finder and relative slowness of glass combined with higher of precision requirement due to the larger and scarcer format.
All of the above can be overcome of course.
But it’s still not as easy and precise as just having a normal lens.

The Hasselblad C 500mm lens and the 2XE Extender with the Hasselblad C 500mm lens requires mounting on at tripod, because the swing weight is too heavy and too hard to hold steady at 1/500 second.

 

[Paul Howell]

I shoot my Kowa SL66 or Super with the 250 on a tripod, cant imagine handheld 500mm. Not to mention the shallow depth of field.

 

[250swb]

I think 120 folders are a nice idea, I have seven or eight of various makes, mostly 6x9. And it's interesting exploring which have the best lenses and to go on the hunt. And they do make very sharp photos (the best ones). But ultimately they aren't cameras I'd use everyday, most need a rangefinder in the cold-shoe, not a big deal but focusing becomes a three stage job, rangefinder, set the lens, compose. Then when you compose it's a tiny image usually with fuzzy edges. Or just guesstimate focus distance, but you want it for the excellent lens and then just guess the focus, doesn't make sense. And the there is wear and tear, floppy front standards, old creaky cracked bellows (these can usually be replaced), some cameras even smell funny. I think I've done some of my very best photos with a folding camera mounted on a tripod to get every micron of quality from it. But I still end up carrying as much gear around as normal because I don't trust it and feel happier with a backup, in which case I may as well just carry a bomb proof Fuji MF rangefinder instead. They are addictive, but in many ways like a vintage car collection, there is always something that needs to be fixed.

 

[Down Under]

Leaving aside the convenience and versatility factors that come w/ an SLR, shouldn't a folder give IQ that's essentially the same as a bigger SLR? Or have I overlooked something?

Momus, a a matter of interest to me (and I'm sure others), could you define what you mean by "IQ"?

I read this term bandied about rather a lot, but I've not found any definition for it I could go with.

This may spur on a lot of further discussion about the merits of 35mm/MF against MF/35mm, and avoid a lot of merely comparing apples to oranges.

So far this thread had many good comments and I look forward to many more. Thanks!!

 

[DREW WILEY]

Helge - My own MF SLR system is Pentax 6X7. Yes, compared to 35mm these are somewhat heavy, and not ideal for handheld holding with long lenses at least. Tripod recommended much of the time (not always - they're excellent for shooting from an airplane, for example). And the optics are superb, very bright with large maximum f-stops in several cases, and often less expensive than current 35mm equivalents. Focus is generally easier and faster than with 35mm because there is a bigger screen.

But for handheld use where a wide-normal perspective is suitable, or greater portability with tripod usage, I use a "Texas Leica" Fuji 6X9 RF. But anything med format is a "mini-cam" to me. I'm addicted to 8x10 and 4X5 formats too. It's all relative.

 

[Vaughn]

Showing my ignorance here - I always thought if a camera had bellows, it was a folder. Because the bellows "folded" in on themselves to make the camera compact when not in use.

Actually, the Mamiya 7 may not pop out , I must have been thinking of another. The Rollei TLR has more of a metal 'bellows' -- more like sleeves, probably, they slide, rather than fold. The Rollei SL66 has bellows...but certainly not a folder!

 

[MattKing]

Showing my ignorance here - I always thought if a camera had bellows, it was a folder. Because the bellows "folded" in on themselves to make the camera compact when not in use.

This definition would mean that the Mamiya C330 and RB67 would be classified as folders - I don't think that is what is meant by the term.
I think of folders as cameras where one part of the camera - such as the part where the focusing rails are - folds in on the rest of the camera to close it and provide a smaller package for transit.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I think an RB67 is classified as a battleship anchor. Not a fun thing to hang around your neck or stuff in a coat pocket like a folder. Modern folders include the Fuji GF670 and the equivalent Voightlander Bessa iii model. I can't personally think of any others. I haven't bothered to look up when Makinas were last made.

 

[MattKing]

Until I reluctantly sold mine, my RB67 was set up so I could easily switch to hand-held use by switching to a smaller kit and bag.
And the C330 and an extra lens is positively portable.
But compared to my Baby Bessa - yes they are larger.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I think an RB67 is classified as a battleship anchor. Not a fun thing to hang around your neck or stuff in a coat pocket like a folder. Modern folders include the Fuji GF670 and the equivalent Voightlander Bessa iii model. I can't personally think of any others. I haven't bothered to look up when Makinas were last made.

Hasselblad V series are small and lighter. Much easier to use.

 

[Helge]

Hasselblad V series are small and lighter. Much easier to use.

It’s still a large box to drag around. With an extra lens and magazine it becomes a project.
The “V” or sixties prime type bodies, betray their surveillance camera origins.
The original Handkammer was meant for mounting in a harness on the plane or resting on the fuselage of the aircraft. Never for handholding.
Granted the Hasselblad is smaller but the formfactor and problems with ergonomics persist.
Hasselblad shines in the studio or in the field on a tripod. But it’s merely useable handheld.
Street shooting and candid in general with a Hasselblad is a nightmare.

 

[Sirius Glass]

It’s still a large box to drag around. With an extra lens and magazine it becomes a project.
The “V” or sixties prime type bodies, betray their surveillance camera origins.
The original Handkammer was meant for mounting in a harness on the plane or resting on the fuselage of the aircraft. Never for handholding.
Granted the Hasselblad is smaller but the formfactor and problems with ergonomics persist.
Hasselblad shines in the studio or in the field on a tripod. But it’s merely useable handheld.
Street shooting and candid in general with a Hasselblad is a nightmare.

I find the Hasselblad very handhold able and I very rarely use it on the tripod. I can and have used it for street shooting and candid photography hand held. It fits very well in my hand. While I found that the RB67 is much more to hold and is like handling the WWII Leopard tank, The RB67 requires a tripod to use for much of its use.

I have never had the opportunity to need or use the Handkammer for mounting a Hasselblad in a harness on the car or plane or resting on the fuselage of the aircraft or tank.

Your hyperbole is very badly overextended or is it that you did not buy one when it was less expense in the past? Seems like there are plenty of sour grapes to go around.

 

[Helge]

I find the Hasselblad very handhold able and I very rarely use it on the tripod. I can and have used it for street shooting and candid photography hand held. It fits very well in my hand. While I found that the RB67 is much more to hold and is like handling the WWII Leopard tank, The RB67 requires a tripod to use for much of its use.

I have never had the opportunity to need or use the Handkammer for mounting a Hasselblad in a harness on the car or plane or resting on the fuselage of the aircraft or tank.

Your hyperbole is very badly overextended or is it that you did not buy one when it was less expense in the past? Seems like there are plenty of sour grapes to go around.

I don’t say too much about what I own to not create a googleable pickup list for any local Wet Bandits. But I assure you, I have held and used a Hasselblad.
The Handkammer is a camera. It’s to the Hasselblad as the V2 is to the Saturn V, in the camera world.
A Hassy with normal lens is fine as a handheld experience. But then you might just as well use a good TLR and get a much nicer shooting experience.

 

[Bronson Dugnutt]

I don’t say too much about what I own to not create a googleable pickup list for any local Wet Bandits. But I assure you, I have held and used a Hasselblad.
The Handkammer is a camera. It’s to the Hasselblad as the V2 is to the Saturn, in the camera world.
A Hassy with normal lens is fine as a handheld experience. But then you might just as well use a good TLR and get a much nicer shooting experience.

(credit: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/2...-and-Fruit-Bowl-Oil-Painting.jpg?v=1561043726)

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Yes, I must admit the Mamiya 7 has fantastic lenses, some of the best I've ever used. But I much prefer the square to 6x7.

that's why they made a Mamiya 6;similar great glass but square negs.

 

[Helge]

(credit: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/2...-and-Fruit-Bowl-Oil-Painting.jpg?v=1561043726)

Ok. Out of curiosity you got me to react. WTF is that supposed to mean‽

 

[Helge]

that's why they made a Mamiya 6;similar great glass but square negs.

Only in reverse order.
Never really got 6x7.
It was always a strange little halfway house between 6x6 and 6x9.
Comes with a sliver more resolution. And with a lot of disadvantages:
Slower heavier glass.
Less frames per roll. An almost obligation to use the format now you insisted.
At least with 6x9 you get a good chunk of real estate in return for the trouble.

 

[Donald Qualls]

No, my RB67 is definitely not a folder. And there is no way those lenses or anything vaguely like them could be mounted on a folding camera; the closest you could come is something like a press camera with the lens on a board or bayonet mount so you can quickly and easily dismount the lens to fold the camera.

OTOH, now I've gotten used to mine, and gotten the left side handle (with trigger release), I don't find it hard to hand hold with the 50 mm or 90 mm I have. Still won't try it with the 250 mm (I've done it, with strap and waist level finder, and the side handle would help a little more, but it's a stunt, not something I'd attempt for a day's outing).

 

[Arthurwg]

that's why they made a Mamiya 6;similar great glass but square negs.

That's why I have the Mamiya 6 as well.

 

[Arthurwg]

It’s still a large box to drag around. With an extra lens and magazine it becomes a project.
The “V” or sixties prime type bodies, betray their surveillance camera origins.
The original Handkammer was meant for mounting in a harness on the plane or resting on the fuselage of the aircraft. Never for handholding.
Granted the Hasselblad is smaller but the formfactor and problems with ergonomics persist.
Hasselblad shines in the studio or in the field on a tripod. But it’s merely useable handheld.
Street shooting and candid in general with a Hasselblad is a nightmare.

Not sure this is correct. I mostly handhold my Hasselblad, albeit with a 60mm lens. Works perfectly and no problem with ergonomics. When I want something for street work and travel I use the SWC, which is smaller and more compact.

 

[warden]

This definition would mean that the Mamiya C330 and RB67 would be classified as folders - I don't think that is what is meant by the term.
I think of folders as cameras where one part of the camera - such as the part where the focusing rails are - folds in on the rest of the camera to close it and provide a smaller package for transit.

Makes sense. I have an old Brownie Autographic that belonged to a family member back in the day that fits that description. It can still produce surprisingly good negatives for its age. The folding process is a pain but the carry size is quite small.

 

[Luckless]

I think an RB67 is classified as a battleship anchor. Not a fun thing to hang around your neck or stuff in a coat pocket like a folder.

It isn't THAT bad, and I find it fairly fun to lug around. Saves on silly things like gym memberships.

Putting the 500mm lens on it did remind me just how much time I've spent behind a desk and relaxing on my couch for the last two years, but that's beside the point.

@Sirius Glass as I a Hasselblad owner let me tell you, another Hasselblad owner, that I suspect you never used your Hasselblad. It is by far the least-handholdable medium format camera I've used or owned.

What cameras are you comparing it to? I've handled several Hasselblads over the years, but the price tag has kept me from running film through one for real. However they didn't seem 'bad' for a waist level finder camera cradled to my chest. I find that style more 'hand holdable' than range finders or SLRs held up to my face. Assuming a hedge or something isn't in the way. Not a great setup for photographing over a crowd either.