When to choose Medium Format.

Brian Legge · Nov 20, 2010

Any time I'm going to shoot at a slower pace (less optional automation), take fewer shots (cost/fewer frames per film), won't be disruptive (an Olympus 35RD is much less noticeable or quiet than many MF cameras), won't be short on light (I don't have a f/1.4 MF lens), etc.

Even if I'm shooting mostly with 35mm, I'll often take a small folding MF camera or TLR with me in case good situations to use either come up. I like the larger negatives DOF options. I don't have a large format camera so the choice is just 35mm or MF at the moment.

Tuan · Nov 21, 2010

when? Anytime I can. MF is my new standard. I never leave the house without it.

Lorenzo_from_Venice · Nov 21, 2010

It's curious, every time I want to reply to a post, the poster just before me had already stated my POV.

so... : go MF everytime you can.

MF slr aren't much bulkier than a "good" 35mm (ex: Canon T90) with a handful of accessories.

35mm (for me) comes in handy only for the quite good collection on lenses, filters and dedicated flashlights I have for it.

jvo · Nov 21, 2010

lxdude said:
Top-Cat,
I do believe "Afghan Girl" was taken with a 105mm/2.5 Nikkor.

check out afghan girls' predecessor by photographer larry burrows.

Brian Legge · Nov 21, 2010

Lorenzo, what MF slr are you talking about?

My SQA takes up more space and is more difficult to carry around than my F4s, particularly if I want to take a second lens. Aside from rangefinders, what MF slrs are significantly smaller?

Edit: Simple answer, 645 ones.

Top-Cat · Nov 21, 2010

now that I finally got myself access to a negative scanner, and learned how to strip the camera down (using manual winder instead of motorized and waist level viewfinder instead of pentaprism) - as well as a good wide angle lens (I personally think wide angle is most suited for non-specific walk around use) I can see how MF is more of an alternative.

I kept forgetting how much better it can be sometimes to use a waist-level finder.

Lorenzo_from_Venice · Nov 22, 2010

Brian Legge said:
what MF slrs are significantly smaller?

Edit: Simple answer, 645 ones.

Well... you are right.
But given my camera bag, I could put inside

- my ( ) Eos 30D with vertical grip, flashgun, and 2 extra lenses

or

- my ( ) ETR-Si (645 MF) with quick grip, sekonic meter, 2 or 3 filters and a handful of film rolls

so (to me) it's the same to carry around a DSLR or a MF SLR (apart for the joy of shooting film....).

Q.G. · Nov 22, 2010

Brian Legge said:
Lorenzo, what MF slr are you talking about?

My SQA takes up more space and is more difficult to carry around than my F4s, particularly if I want to take a second lens. Aside from rangefinders, what MF slrs are significantly smaller?

Edit: Simple answer, 645 ones.

Hasselblads (yes, it's me again... )
Seriously, Hasselblad 6x6 SLR cameras are not bigger than 6x4.5 SLRs.

Wilcoxson David L. · Nov 23, 2010

Now days I'm a hobbiest only. I have 35mm, MF and LF equipment and love them all, but my normal go to gear is my MF. I have both a Rolleiflex and an RB-67 and unless I get an itch to use something else, they get the lions share of use. I like the Rollei because it's not too large and doesn't weigh like the RB so when I want to travel light, that's my choice. That said, normally I put all my cameras on a tripod when I go shooting so weight is not that big of a deal. It really just depends what strikes my fancy when I decide to go out and shoot. I don't use my 35mm or LF equipment as much as I would like. I don't use my 35mm kit because my MF equipment is just so much better in IQ, and I don't have an excuse for not using my LF kit. It weighs about the same as the RB and I carry it in a regular backpack so the weight isn't really an issue. Anyway, for me,transitioning from small to medium to large format has always been seamless. I've never noticed any difference seeing the image or having the camera get in the way of my composition because of size. It's really a matter of how much image quality I want or need. Cheers.

Ole · Nov 23, 2010

I use MF when, for some reason, a tripod is impractical. Or for snapshots when I'm out shooting LF; I have a MF folder in my 8x10" kit bag.

It might be a small compact folder, or a ETRS kit with 40, 50, 75, 105, 150 and 250mm lenses plus macrotubes and teleconverter, speed grip, AE prism and four backs. But if I bring all that, I might just as well save some weight and take a Speed Graphic and a pocket-full of barrel lenses?

What determines format choise for me is just as much the number of exposures I plan to make: Less than 10 - LF. 10-50 - MF. More than 50 - 35mm (or DSLR, don't tell anyone! )

BrianL · Nov 23, 2010

I never figured it out myself. Of all my cameras I've found I tend to go between MF and 35mm more on whim than panning. I do tend to take the 35mm rangefinder out more often as it goes into my jacket pocket and therefore is easier as a daily carrier right now. That said, I carry my ETRS when going to a more specific place where I might get in some shooting of more than a casual nature. Now admittedly, I do not get away from 35mm even then as I carry a 35mm back when I go out with the ETRS. I tend to use the backs in lieu of the lenses. I use a 40mm lens as a standard lens. With the 120 back it effectively has an angle of a 28mm on 35mm so I get the 2 focal lengths carrying less weight as well as economizing. I'm not sure how long I'll continue to do this as recently, I've dusted off my Rolleiflex T and will be getting it serviced. As it weighs less than the ETRS with the WLF I can see it as a daily carrier though it is too large for a pocket obviously.

haplo602 · Nov 24, 2010

Since the ETRSi is my only camera, I have no choice But the basic kit (body+back+wlf+75/f2.8) is quite portable and fits into a small camera bag (not much bigger than DSLR+kit lens).

I've learned to take it almost everywhere, even if I don't get the change to take it out of the bag. A camera you don't have with you when a picture presents itself is the worst one in the world

Marizu · Nov 24, 2010

Reasons that I choose MF would be:
1. I enjoy the relationship with my subjects/world when using a waist level finder.
2. I can load exchangeable backs with different film stocks (vs 35mm).
3. I only have to shoot 10-15 frames before I can develop them and see my images.
4. I can spot good/bad negs quickly and easily without having to make prints/scans (particularly 6x7).
5. Mamiya 645 Super with WLF isn't much heavier than a battery grip 35mm SLR.
6. Subject isn't moving too fast and won't take endless shots to get right.
7. I am not tied to a tripod.

Thingy said:
The Mamiya 645s are heavy when one is used to conventional 35mm cameras, but lightweight compared to large format equipment.

This is very true but I find that the metered prism finder is actually pretty heavy. Stick on the WLF and it becomes much lighter. The bulk is then only slightly larger than 35mm but the weight isn't much more.
Somehow the weight of a Sekonic doesn't count when it's on your belt

I generally prefer the contemplation associated with shooting large format but being tripod bound and carrying the extra weight are the limiting factors, there.

olleorama · Nov 24, 2010

My favourite everyday camera is my Hexar AF. Compared to it's MF equivalent (or at least closest to) the Fuji GA645w, there isn't much difference. If I had the dough, I would easily buy it. Comparing bronica rf645 (or mamiya 6/7) to a Leica Mx, well, then the difference isn't huge either (well, maybe a bit huge with the mamiya). MF doesn't have to be obtrusive, tripod-bound or cumbersome to schlep around. It's the whole mirror assembly thing of MF slr that keeps the MF-hard-to-use-and-carry-myth alive.

olleorama · Nov 24, 2010

Small PS. Rf and Vf mf can of course be huge too! took a quick comparison shot between two almost-contemporaries. The sharp but akward Canon A35F (smallest RF I own, my rollei 35 is not a RF) and the brilliant mamiya super 23 (biggest RF and MF camera I own):

36cm2 · Nov 24, 2010

MF for 75% of my work. Perkeo II for travel/carry around. Hasselblad for most serious work. Rolleiflex when I'm feeling nostalgic.

35mm for kids, quick family shots. F100 when I know I'm shooting. Olympus XA in my pocket going to work.

LF - when I'm really out to photograph (usually at 5a.m. on my own). This is as much therapy as photography.

For me, MF has the best balance of technical potential to ease-of-use. I'd have to say, though, that my Perkeo folder has produced more keepers than anything lately. It's just so easy to take along and use.

When to choose Medium Format.

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency