Why bother with 35mm? (tongue-in-cheek)

[Thomas Bertilsson]

35mm as a format is great for me. I get the quality I desire up to about 20x24, which is as large as I'll go. Don't need medium format or larger for that. But what the little negative does for me is it makes me try harder when I print. Give me a nice 4x5 negative and it'll be relatively easy to make a beautiful 16x20. With 35mm it is much more difficult. That makes me a better printer and craftsman, and I really relish that challenge.

But of course it's important to enjoy what we do, so use whatever camera/format/film/equipment that works for you. End of story. No need to categorize things or rationalize among other photographers.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I sometimes carry my 35mm because it is easier to carry.

Jeff

 

[Doc W]

I shoot MF and LF, up to 8x10. I stopped shooting 35mm for all the reasons you gave but I was raised as a 35mm guy and I miss the spontaneity of the format. Sure, I could go to digital but I don't like to spend that much time on the computer. Recently, I have been thinking about hauling out the old analogue Canon and shooting some slide film.

Don't listen to the snobs. Shoot with whatever engages you creatively.

 

[Roger Cole]

what is "medium format?" :confused:

Bigger than 35mm, smaller than quarter plate, on roll film.

Life is already too damned fast. I shoot some fast moving stuff for memories but confess I don't really enjoy it. I like working more slowly and methodically, and ultimately I do this because I like it. Do what you like. (I do shoot some 35mm but way less now that I have both MF and 4x5 cameras, mainly slides for projection or low light stuff.)

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

I am doing what I am doing because I have extremelly tight budget and large stomach. I am buying forgotten treasures like zeiss ikon nettar , zeiss ikon box tengor , leica ps cameras and bolex 8 and 16mm cameras for single frame shot. They are not felt like a Kiev 88 and not looks like a 20mm anti tank rifle like 250mm soviet lens , but I am trying to manage.

 

[dorff]

Ah, which child would you give up? It's a bit of a Sophie's choice, actually. There are few things more pleasant to do than making photographs with a F100 or F5 and decent lenses. But there are few things more pleasant to see than a frame from a Pentax 6x7, even fewer than 4x5, 5x7 and beyond. I love the view through my Mamiyas' viewfinders. Life can be so tough, sometimes.

 

[darkosaric]

use whatever camera/format/film/equipment that works for you. End of story. No need to categorize things or rationalize among other photographers.

+1

Recently somebody here wrote that he has Leica, Hasselbald and I think big format: but whenever he shots with Leica - he gets best results (keeper negative I think he wrote). If some camera works for you and gives results that you like - this is more important than tonality or grain size in the print.

 

[andreios]

I like handling 35mm cameras. One can do almost anything with it. What I hate is squinting at the tiny negs in the darkroom.

I do not particularly enjoy carrying on my back tens of kilograms of camera gear. But to look at a well processed 8x10 negative (and contact print) might be close to the beatific vision.

 

[Sepia Hawk]

Thank you all for your interesting thoughts and comments. I personally think that the end result (the photograph) is the most important part, not the type of camera one uses to take it.

 

[Alan Klein]

I only use MF when I'm shooting film. My 35mm Nikon 6006 and Nikormat sit in the closet.

 

[Hatchetman]

Somebody here once made reference to shooting "flowers and sleeping cats." MF is great for that kind of thing! I guess then LF is great for shooting tree stumps and rocks.

 

[GarageBoy]

Because theres no medium format Nikon/Canons

 

[winger]

I shoot everything from 35mm to 4x5. I have a couple of 8x10 holders, but nothing to use them with (yet). I use whichever camera will get me what I want, if I know what that is before I pack the car. Frequently, what feels best is my ancient and honorable Pentax H1a and just cut loose. I don't love the smaller negs when I'm printing, but I can get good prints from them. Sometimes I take just as long to get a shot with 35mm as I would with a 4x5 and sometimes I use a 4x5 for snapshots.

If it's a camera, I'll use it.

 

[Jim Jones]

Like Bethe, I use whatever tool that is appropriate. Yesterday I drove the sedan 100 miles to a camera club meeting. Tomorrow I'll drive the pickup to an auction. Sometimes a cart behind a riding mower is more useful than either highway vehicle. It's that way with cameras. I can struggle to make big prints from small negatives or, at 81, struggle more to make big negatives at some locations.

 

[Snapshot]

I think 35mm is useful for up to x10 enlargements. As I rarely enlarge beyond that point, 35mm meets most of my analog photography needs. Combined with a large selection of fast lenses and higher capacity, makes it a versatile platform. With that said, I still love medium format.

 

[ntenny]

Somebody here once made reference to shooting "flowers and sleeping cats." MF is great for that kind of thing! I guess then LF is great for shooting tree stumps and rocks.

True enough!

You know, if you think about typical photos of cars, you notice something.
35mm: car in motion, maybe with the oval-wheels effect from a horizontal shutter.
MF: nice restored car parked at a public event.
LF: broken rusty hulk that will never move again.

All kiddin' aside, there are some really, really wonderfully engineered 35mm cameras. I'd shoot it more if I weren't restricted by space to contact printing; for me 35mm is basically limited to hybrid use.

-NT

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

Because I like 35mm film.

 

[cliveh]

I think 35mm is useful for up to x10 enlargements. As I rarely enlarge beyond that point, 35mm meets most of my analog photography needs. Combined with a large selection of fast lenses and higher capacity, makes it a versatile platform. With that said, I still love medium format.

Snapshot, just to go off topic for a minute, how did you get your avatar bike light to flash like that?

 

[miha]

For sentimental reasons.

 

[Truzi]

Snapshot, just to go off topic for a minute, how did you get your avatar bike light to flash like that?

Snapshot made an animated GIF. I've done it before with avatars on other forums I frequent. With only the headlight, it is quite subtle and clever.

 

[Snapshot]

Snapshot, just to go off topic for a minute, how did you get your avatar bike light to flash like that?

It's simply an animated GIF. I have an overlay that appears for a split second. I was queried about it years ago. APUG doesn't normally allow them but it was subtle enought for the powers that be to permit it.

 

[cliveh]

It's simply an animated GIF. I have an overlay that appears for a split second. I was queried about it years ago. APUG doesn't normally allow them but it was subtle enought for the powers that be to permit it.

Neat.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Snapshot, just to go off topic for a minute, how did you get your avatar bike light to flash like that?

There's a switch on the handlebar right next to the grip, or part of the grip. You press it with your thumb.

 

[Snapshot]

There's a switch on the handlebar right next to the grip, or part of the grip. You press it with your thumb.

Clever answer. Why didn't I think of that!

 

[Red Tractors]

Because I can't afford to burn through this much Tri-X in 120.

Because a K1000 or Nikon FM is unobtrusive, far less than my 4X5, although the 4X5 is a great conversation starter.

Because my mediocre skills equate equally well to the various formats.