Where do I start on medium format?

Aristophanes · Mar 25, 2011

I should add that I was also leaving budget space for the inevitable (gasp!) Epson V700. Not quite there yet as I want to see what the local lab can do for me. The whole point of MF to me at least is to print LARGE. It's getting to the print stage that's my problem right now and a darkroom is not in the cards for me as I am convinced that for the 30-40 rolls of 120 per year I will print maybe 20 8x10 and 2-3 larger for my walls, the rest archival memories on 4x5 prints. So I am pretty sure I'll need to wet scan my b&w's and send to the printer. Once I'm part-way into digital, I can crop. I've also dusted off my 35mm Minolta, Olympus and Pentax gear and have shot Ektar and Portra and have really enjoyed the results my local mini-lab has offered straight up on 4x6, all without me being in front of the computer. Someone else does the dirty work. So the time I spend shooting casuals with 35mm frees up time for MF scans. I win, I lose. I still shoot a lot of digital, but I feel more balanced now. It's getting to MF prints that I wrestle with more than anything and caused my re-think about Hasselblad or bust!

Cheers.

joshh · Mar 30, 2011

postalman said:
on FF digital I exist almost entirely on my sigma 50/1.4 and canon 135/2L, so realistically I'd need a 80 and 200/250. And it's that last lens that is just too darn expensive.

I made this leap recently too, and I think it's important to remember what you're trying to accomplish. You're looking for a new experience, right? Do you really need to reproduce what you have on your 35mm system? Just get into MF film with whatever system you choose and a normal lens. You've got a lot to learn before you need to worry about a second lens. I think you'll be surprised how using a WLF, square format, and $$$ with every shutter press will change how you use your gear. You have the 35mm Canon 135/2L if you need something longer.

Good luck!

Josh

film_man · Mar 31, 2011

postalman said:
Yeah, I've thought long and hard about doing it that way (etrs though). The problem is that I really want to get to square format and the etrs isn't compatible with the sq.

And when an sq starter kit is the same price as a 500cm/503cx/2000fcm starter kit, it seems like an obvious choice to get the 2000fcm. But you're absolutely right about the lenses, and on FF digital I exist almost entirely on my sigma 50/1.4 and canon 135/2L, so realistically I'd need a 80 and 200/250. And it's that last lens that is just too darn expensive. So it's down to a choice of solid and widely available, but expensive to upgrade or rare but cheap to upgrade, both costing about the same price. And I still haven't even seen let alone handled an sq.

But the etrs is 1/3 the price of either sq or 2000

Actually the 250/5.6CT* is one of the "cheaper" Hasselblad lenses, if you don't mind the CT* style lenses.

One thing you need to consider is that the 135L on a digital Canon is very usable handheld and as a walkaround lens. A 250 on a Hasselblad is not, it is heavy, long and the slow aperture means you'll be using it on a tripod a lot more. At least that's my experience and I find it tricky to use with a waist level finder, the weight and size and heavy focusing make it tricky to keep the camera steady (I can work it much better with the 90deg prism). You may find that where you'd use the 135L you will now use a 150/180 on your square camera.

The focal lengths between 6x6 and 135/digital don't work out quite as you'd expect, the square makes the 80 look wider than you'd expect. Also, if you look at the horizontal coverage of the 250 on 6x6, the equivalent lens for Canon would be 180mm. The actual equivalent of the 135L in 6x6 is 180mm. By the way, the 180mm is more expensive than the 250. Ha!

Anyway, if you want a square camera get a square camera. Don't get a ETRS based on price and then decide to get rid of it because it doesn't do what you want. Have patience, look for a good deal and save a bit more and you'll find what you want.

Gaga · Mar 31, 2011

I have a Bronica SQ Ai. It's a really nice camera. You can get hold of the SQ series quite cheap, but as mentioned before they have been discontinued. If you really want to get in medium format and are completely sure about it. Go for a Hasselblad 500CM. Or another hasselblad. They are a superb camera by all accounts. There are comparisons online between the Bronica SQ Ai and 500Cm. Both have their ups and downs. They produce pretty much the same images. One of the main advantages to getting a blad is the lenses and you can get them fixed quite easily if they break, unlike bronicas.

vpwphoto · Mar 31, 2011

I'd stay away from the 2000 series cameras... they were troublesome and in the shop a lot when new.
I am a Blad man and haven't given a thought to them in 15 years.
As for repair... I bet a repair would be the same as just buying another body now days.... I don't think my Blad repair man even bothers with the 2000's.

vpwphoto · Mar 31, 2011

postalman said:
2000FCM that was being serviced before being put on the shelf for sale.

This should be your warning.

postalman · Mar 31, 2011

Does that mean the "M" in the 2000FCM doesn't actually mean much? I read it as opening the shutter when the back is removed to conceal it from damage. Definitely not interested in a 2000FC without such a feature. Are they prone to other damage that the 500 isn't?

(unless someone has a 200 series they don't want any more that I could maybe take away for them?)

edit: I interpreted the guy in the shop telling me it was going for repair to just mean a CLA before sale like all good stores should do. There was a little tiny bump in the shutter curtain and I want to see if it is still there after the service before deciding anything. He was asking $1200 for body, 80/2.8 cf and A12 w/ waist level. seems a bit high but comes with a warranty.

CGW · Mar 31, 2011

postalman said:
Does that mean the "M" in the 2000FCM doesn't actually mean much? I read it as opening the shutter when the back is removed to conceal it from damage. Definitely not interested in a 2000FC without such a feature. Are they prone to other damage that the 500 isn't?

(unless someone has a 200 series they don't want any more that I could maybe take away for them?)

edit: I interpreted the guy in the shop telling me it was going for repair to just mean a CLA before sale like all good stores should do. There was a little tiny bump in the shutter curtain and I want to see if it is still there after the service before deciding anything. He was asking $1200 for body, 80/2.8 cf and A12 w/ waist level. seems a bit high but comes with a warranty.

You might think about this one. Perhaps still available? I'd discuss price given the 220 back:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Sirius Glass · Mar 31, 2011

vpwphoto said:
I'd stay away from the 2000 series cameras... they were troublesome and in the shop a lot when new.
I am a Blad man and haven't given a thought to them in 15 years.
As for repair... I bet a repair would be the same as just buying another body now days.... I don't think my Blad repair man even bothers with the 2000's.

* 2 !

Steve

postalman · Apr 2, 2011

Dead Link Removed
missed it by 4 days. poo. The guy said it sold instantly. A 201f+back+2 lenses (whatever they were) for $100 sold as an antique "because it used film" - I'll bet it sold instantly!

...that or I dodged a scam

should I reply saying "I'm not surprised it went quickly" and tell him what it was actually worth?
edit: I did. I'm jealous of whoever took this guy to the cleaners (I wanted it to be me).

My search continues!

Sirius Glass · Apr 2, 2011

postalman said:
Dead Link Removed
missed it by 4 days. poo. The guy said it sold instantly. A 201f+back+2 lenses (whatever they were) for $100 sold as an antique "because it used film" - I'll bet it sold instantly!

...that or I dodged a scam

should I reply saying "I'm not surprised it went quickly" and tell him what it was actually worth?
edit: I did. I'm jealous of whoever took this guy to the cleaners (I wanted it to be me)

A while ago I pointed out that every time I had an experience like that, a better situation arose that I acted on. After I posted that others reported similar experiences.

Your time will come!

Steve

ArtTwisted · Apr 2, 2011

yashica mat, small, fun, light, looks amazing. Tough to focus in low light is my only complaint, and poor performance wide open on atleast my model, the yashicamat from 57 I believe.

postalman · Apr 2, 2011

How reputable is lpfoto in Sweden? They have one for auction in a few weeks time with a fairly good expected price, but shipping to Aus may be a killer.

(and hands off! I saw it first)

lxdude · Apr 2, 2011

CGW said:
Why bother? Unless you have the even-harder-to-find masked pano focus screen, you're guessing.

It's not masked-just scribed with lines for pano and 24x36.

lxdude · Apr 2, 2011

CGW said:
Just any place? Right...

No, 12mm above horizontal centerline and 12mm below. A 6" thin metal rule works well as a guide. I have the pano back, so no verticals for 24x36. Easier for me to use than the busier 35mm combo screen.

vpwphoto · Apr 4, 2011

Sorry if I rained on this parade... 500's aren't that rare.... bide your time and you will find a good one.
Where are you on this planet? There was a decent one here on APUG last week.

postalman · Apr 4, 2011

yeah, I thought long and hard about that one but I think that if I'm going to be patient I may as well wait for something with a focal plane shutter. I would like the extra shutter speed but I'd also really like to try multi exposure since that's something that I can't do properly with digital (I don't like doing anything in photoshop beyond tweaking levels).

The 500 series is a few too many compromises for someone who is not in a hurry to buy. I'll get a 2000fcm/w or a 201 unless the 500c/m is < $500 or something ridiculous.

Where do I start on medium format?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency