Why do you shoot MF?

Steve Smith · Feb 28, 2011

Athiril said:
And it's not always the weakest link.

You're right. In reality it isn't always the weakest link... but it should be.

What I mean by that is that if you are using top quality lenses and film and your focus and exposure is perfect then the scanner is probably the weakest part of the process.

Steve.

warden · Feb 28, 2011

Actually I don't use MF. But I'm going to.

I bought a Holga last year and while the camera and image quality are pretty terrible I can see what's going to happen when I replace it with a quality system. That's a whopper of a negative. I can't wait.

I'm going through the shopping/comparisons for MF gear now, weighing 6X4.5 vs 6X6 vs 6X7 and all that, and after a few weeks of thinking I'm starting to narrow down the choices. I don't plan on printing all that large (8X10 is big enough probably) but the extra resolving power will be fun.

pgomena · Feb 28, 2011

I find dealing with focus, aperture and shutter speed in the field infinitely superior to dealing with the hundred or so "options and features" of a digital camera's software. I like the feel of a roll of 120 film in my hand. I like having a negative as a physical manifestation of my experience in the field. Digital is quick and convenient. Film 3, digital 1.

Peter Gomena

tkamiya · Feb 28, 2011

cny3123 said:
Does anyone else have any opinions on the Pentax 645 A/N vs the Mamiya Pro/ProTL's

I have a Mamiya 645Pro.

I like the Mamiya system because they are modular. When something breaks (which happened to me), I can just swap out the component and I'm up and running again. Also, when certain shooting style requires prism type finder or WLF, you can swap it out to suit your needs. You can carry multiple film back and swap mid roll as well.

Pentax system, on the other hand, I believe is a auto focus. Winder is built-in too. If you desire that, it's good. You also don't need to worry about components or compatibility issues because you don't have anything to add or attach.

They are plenty available in used market both on classified section here and KEH. I think prices are pretty competitive if you are looking at similarly equipped gears.

Please keep in mind, both systems are high-priced professional gears when they were new. So, either one you choose, you can't go wrong. It's just a matter of preference and likes and dislikes.

cny3123 · Feb 28, 2011

Thanks tkamiya. I think I prefer the modular components to the Pentax as a personal preference. Also for what I would mostly be shooting in MF, autofocus and winder wouldn't be necessary. Sounds pretty clear the Mamiya may be the better choice here.

lxdude · Feb 28, 2011

I suggest you check out the Bronica ETR-Si. Very inexpensive these days. Fully modular. It has leaf shutter lenses, and the quietest mirror action of the ETR series. No focal plane shutter means quieter and less vibration. Like other leaf shutter cameras it does not have an instant return mirror, but that's not really the issue it might seem to be. I have two of them, with a wide array of lenses., finders, etc. I personally like the lens bokeh better than the samples I've seen from the Mamiya. Just another option to consider.

Laurent · Feb 28, 2011

There are many reasons for me to shoot MF. The first is an happy accident : out of GAS, and unable to find a cheap rangefinder, I bought a Yashica Mat 124. I enjoyed this camera so much that it soon became my most used camera, until it failed. I then acquired a Rolleiflex, which took it's place.

More reasonably, the main point for MF for me is because of the control it gives me over my photography, the very high quality negatives I get (both in sharpness and tones) for the least hassle (my Rolleiflex makes me able to shoot handheld at 1/15 and still get sharp pictures). It's also my lightest camera (even my Hasselblad is lighter than my EOS 3).

Short rolls are also an advantage (it's more than usual to shoot a roll in a few hours, so I get the results quickly), at least for me (I stopped operating my ES3 like a machine gun some years ago).

naeroscatu · Feb 28, 2011

I started shooting MF shortly after I got my first 35mm camera some 25+ years ago. At that time the only MF available on that market was the Seagull TLR (made in China). I was lucky to get a good working camera and the results blew me away (I'm referring to the 120 film compared to 35mm). I got hooked on MF and many years later I bought a 500 C/M, a Rolleicord III and a Yashica TLR. What a delight is to shoot these great mechanical marvels.

T-grain · Feb 28, 2011

I like to shoot MF because I am too lazy to use LF
but yes, I really prefer the square format over 2:3 aspect ratio of 35mm, let alone the superb quality of 6x6 slides! and 12 exposures are just right for a short sunday trip not too much as with 36 exp.
let me something else to share: I got a temptation to buy a DSLR some half a year ago, but soon realized the only acceptable option for me would be a full frame one (5D or so), since these "cropped craps" are just a piece of junk IMHO (just test the finder alone)
but then, I thought to myself: are you crazy spending 2000+eur in a piece which will be rarely used!
so I decided to buy another 6x6 (beside my yashica 124)-and I got a Rollei SLR, two lenses and prism finder, and still saved a lot of money (1000+eur) for film and developing (at my shooting rate, than should be enough for some 5 years!)
and the MOST important thought-I could probably never get such a superb camera if we were still living in a film-only age (would be still highly priced)
so I can just say: thank you infinitely digi-jerks, for getting so insanely crazy on digi crap, so the prices fell so low to allow us to buy such magnificent machines for change money!

tkamiya · Feb 28, 2011

Now, you've done it!! You've asked WHICH medium format camera! In two days, list of suggested cameras will cover the entire MF spectrum from Holga to Hasselblad....

cny3123 · Feb 28, 2011

tkamiya said:
Now, you've done it!! You've asked WHICH medium format camera! In two days, list of suggested cameras will cover the entire MF spectrum from Holga to Hasselblad....

haha, well I did constrain it to just a couple cameras

As far as Bronica goes, one major turn off at least in my mind is that they are not in production anymore what so ever. I think the Mamiya for myself seems like a reasonable choice, the 80mm f/1.9 interests me for available light, and also I can get the leaf shutter lenses for flash sync speed.

dugrant153 · Mar 1, 2011

As a note, I just picked up a Bronica ETRS and it's a skookum medium format camera. Mine comes with the speed grip and the 150mm F3.5 lens and I have to say... I love how it's so modular. If the body breaks, I just buy a new body part, not a whole new camera! Love it!

And the reason I picked one up is to go full out on the 120 film format. I think for me the look of Ilford Delta 3200 on 120 film was much cleaner and more detailed than 35mm film. Just a result of physics, I guess. Anyways, this look just worked better for me. So now I'm going 120 route.

Steve Smith · Mar 1, 2011

The problem with asking which MF camera to get is that of all the choices, they are all good. It would be best to handle them all if possible.

In theory there shouldn't be much difference between a Mamiya 645 and a Bronica ETRS. I have an ETRS and my father bought a Mamiya. I have only used the Mamiya once but I prefer it to the ETRS. I can't say why though. It just feels better.

Steve.

thegman · Mar 1, 2011

If someone wants to make a test so an A850 out-resolves 120 film, then I guess that's possible, but similarly, I can show you an example here of 35mm film out-resolving a Canon 5D:

http://www.twinlenslife.com/2011/01/digital-vs-film-canon-5d-mark-ii-vs.html

That's 35mm film out-resolving 21MP, scanned with a Fuji Frontier, which is common minilab equipment, not a drum scanner. So if 35mm film can do at least as well as a Canon 5D, I think MF film (6x7), with over 4 times the film area, can very, very, VERY easily out resolve a 5D or an A850.

I shoot a Hasselblad, and scan on an Epson V700 flatbed, it out-resolves pretty much any digital camera under $30k, and I expect ones over $30k too.

So, is there still a benefit over digital? In terms of quality, of course. In terms of value for money, that's really up the person concerned. It's expensive to shoot a lot, but cheaper to get started in. Kind of like having a mortgage, it's more expensive in the long run, but has the convenience of lowish regular payments.

perkeleellinen · Mar 1, 2011

I shoot medium format because Fuji Reala is no longer being imported into the UK in 35mm. For me, 120 is overkill. I never print bigger than 10x8, I have no interest in selling photos and no interest in microscopic hunts for grain. I dislike medium format cameras in general because of their size, weight, and expense, but I love Reala - so I'll play the cards I've been dealt. In general, though, I think people should spend more time putting their energies into their art rather than chasing 'quality'.

film_man · Mar 1, 2011

perkeleellinen said:
I shoot medium format because Fuji Reala is no longer being imported into the UK in 35mm. For me, 120 is overkill. I never print bigger than 10x8, I have no interest in selling photos and no interest in microscopic hunts for grain. I dislike medium format cameras in general because of their size, weight, and expense, but I love Reala - so I'll play the cards I've been dealt. In general, though, I think people should spend more time putting their energies into their art rather than chasing 'quality'.

I shoot both 35mm and 120. I shoot pretty much the same films on both formats. I much prefer the look of 120, not because of lower grain or whatever "quality" may be argued is there due to the larger negative but because the look of 120 is very different to 135. I find 35mm always too contrasty and harsh looking, compared to 120 which is, in my personal opinion, sharp-yet-gentle looking.

Can't explain it with words really, but if I look at a shot with a 50mm lens on 35mm film and a shoot with a 80mm on 120, same framing, same lighting, I find 120 to be more pleasing, with softer changes between high and low contrast areas and finer colour gradations, resulting in what appears more comfortable to my eyes.

And yes, I'd so much prefer if I could have a 120 6x6 camera weighing the nothing that my EOS 300 is.

perkeleellinen · Mar 1, 2011

film_man said:
Can't explain it with words really, but if I look at a shot with a 50mm lens on 35mm film and a shoot with a 80mm on 120, same framing, same lighting, I find 120 to be more pleasing, with softer changes between high and low contrast areas and finer colour gradations, resulting in what appears more comfortable to my eyes.

It is interesting what you say here. Is it because of the smaller degree of magnification needed to produce the same size print?

thegman · Mar 1, 2011

perkeleellinen said:
I shoot medium format because Fuji Reala is no longer being imported into the UK in 35mm. For me, 120 is overkill. I never print bigger than 10x8, I have no interest in selling photos and no interest in microscopic hunts for grain. I dislike medium format cameras in general because of their size, weight, and expense, but I love Reala - so I'll play the cards I've been dealt. In general, though, I think people should spend more time putting their energies into their art rather than chasing 'quality'.

http://www.firstcall-photographic.co.uk/ seem to have Reala in 35mm.

But if you really love it, why not import a load yourself, if you can see yourself using for a long time, just buy in bulk and save a fortune.

perkeleellinen · Mar 1, 2011

thegman said:
http://www.firstcall-photographic.co.uk/ seem to have Reala in 35mm.

But if you really love it, why not import a load yourself, if you can see yourself using for a long time, just buy in bulk and save a fortune.

There's a lot of Reala around still, I've got 20-30 rolls stashed. The move into MF was really about looking into the future, but of course there's no guarantee that Reala will still be around in 120 in the future. Perhaps a better strategy would be to freeze 100 rolls...

film_man · Mar 1, 2011

perkeleellinen said:
It is interesting what you say here. Is it because of the smaller degree of magnification needed to produce the same size print?

Not sure of the reasons behind it but this is one of them. Somebody else can perhaps explain all the technicalities behind it.

darkosaric · Mar 1, 2011

I shoot MF because it gives me square format (love hate relationship, me and square format ), and also sometimes I want holga / diana look.

Jesse Taylor · Mar 1, 2011

i shoot medium format because of the x-sync advantage over 35mm. i mainly shoot skateboarding, so it's crucial for high ambient shots if i'm using flashes... and when i'm not, i'm able to shoot with 1/2000 at f/2 with my hasselblad. it's the only way to freeze action using natural light with this format.

if i'm shooting portraits or street stuff with my mamiya 7 it's great being able to use all shutter speeds with flash... one less thing to mess up!

i can shoot higher speed film, or push process slow film, and not worry so much about grain since i don't make large prints.

it makes great conversation when people ask what you're shooting, another easy way to ask a stranger for a portrait.

i didn't 'move up' to medium format though, i still shoot 35mm as well. it's great having the right tool for the right situation.

cny3123 · Mar 1, 2011

Jesse, very cool! Never thought about that, I am a skate photographer as well and that would be an awesome advantage!

What I have always done is stop down the aperture to f/11 or more during bright daylight situations. Or just shoot natural light with a fast shutter speed.

And btw! Great skate shots, was checking out your website!

I have recently been working with a clothing company for skate clothes and we just started up a blog but haven't been working with it too much lately. Bad weather really ruins a lot of skate sessions. www.junesb.wordpress.com

keithwms · Mar 1, 2011

Note that the new 55, 80, and 110 mm f/2.8 Mamiya leaf shutter lenses synch to 1/1600!!! And there are several inexpensive oldies that synch to reasonably high speeds too. This is a big part of the reason why wedding photogs like them too- you can use fill flash in broad daylight.

http://www.mamiya-usa.com/

You can adapt quite a few MF leaf shutter lenses to 35mm as well.

ntenny · Mar 1, 2011

keithwms said:
You can adapt quite a few MF leaf shutter lenses to 35mm as well.

How do you manage the two shutters? Put the body on B and lock the shutter open, then fire the lens shutter with a separate trigger of some kind? I'd like to know more about this.

-NT

Why do you shoot MF?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency