Your favorite 120 Format?

[Slixtiesix]

Back to top!

 

[Moopheus]

There are no bad formats, only bad compositions, and bad compositions are your fault, not the camera's. I mean, most common film formats are 1:1, 2:3, 3:4, 4:5, 5:7, or 6:7 (with, of course, less common wide formats). There's no reason good photos can't be made with any of them; obviously, many have been. I like being able to switch them up depending on what I feel like doing that day.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Previously I reported 6x6 as my favorite. That's still true- I love me some squares- but I'm also having a lot of fun with 6x12 in my Lomo Belair now.

 

[megzdad81]

OK, I like 120 mm in various formats but I'm getting suspicious about its future when I can't find a supplier of NEW 120 format cameras ...

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I have a habit, good or bad of looking into my viewfinder out to the edges when I compose my shot. And when I print my images, I rarely crop. When I shoot with 2 1/4 square nor 6x7, I compose accordingly. When I decided 30 years ago whether to invest in a Hasselblad system or Mamiya RZ, I decided to go with Mamiya RZ for commercial work. My rationale was that most commercial work would be either vertical or horizontal. If I shot 6x6, the image would be cropped wasting film area. When I assisted commercial shooters, they'd shoot Polaroids and draw on it to match the layout of the ad or magazine article.

 

[Slixtiesix]

OK, I like 120 mm in various formats but I'm getting suspicious about its future when I can't find a supplier of NEW 120 format cameras ...

I don´t worry. Many of the cameras around today will still be good for decades of amateur use.

 

[neilt3]

I don´t worry. Many of the cameras around today will still be good for decades of amateur use.

And now with the advantage that we amateurs can finally afford one !

 

[DREW WILEY]

Many of them will still be good for decades of PRO use. Most modern medium format gear was seriously built to begin with. And a few expensive are still essentially current. 120 gear I bought forty years ago will outlast me, and I'm still picking up used gear that I expect to last the duration. Most
of these film camera systems are probably going to outlast multiple purchases of allegedly superior digital gear, either mechanically or via how rapidly software goes obsolete. Let's face it, when it comes to the manufacturing standpoint, the faster things need to be replaced, the more money
can be made. That might sound cynical, but is is true across a much broader swatch of manufacturing than just imaging. Right now you can go out and acquire a really beautiful set of serious medium or large format gear for less than the cost of the latest cute plasticky DLSR or idiotic designer Smartphone.

 

[NJH]

6x6 square, because with a non-square format I frequently catch myself trying to fit the format over the confines of the subject. But with a square format I more often find myself trying to arrange the subject to fit within the confines of the format.

I understand cropping after the fact in the darkroom. I just enjoy a more self-disciplined approach at the camera.

Ken

This is a very good observation. I recently got into a Bronica SQB outfit and the square format is indeed liberating at the image capture end of things. Having said that I nearly always end up wanting to crop the results afterwards so I am also shooting an ETRSi outfit, lucky all this equipment is dirt cheap these days. I do enjoy 6x6 and waist level viewfinder more but haven't decided yet which gives me better results.

 

[JohnArs]

I voted for 6x7 and 6x12, even I have also two 6x6 but prefer the two others most of the time!

 

[Theo Sulphate]

I voted 6x8 even though my cameras are 6x6, 6x7, and 6x9.

Least favorite is 6x6. Most of the time it annoys me to fit my subjects into that format. 6x7 and 6x9 are much better for me - but not quite perfect. Hence 6x8.

 

[john_s]

I love viewing through my 6x6. After using 35mm cameras the view is really breathtaking. The square format became popular partly because waist level finder cameras are not nice to use turned around 90 degrees. With a prism finder there's no problem, but it makes for a heavier and more expensive body. However I rarely print without a little cropping, even if the print is nearly square but not quite.

 

[RichardJack]

All formats are fine. It depends on your application. When I shot weddings in film I found 6x6 to be the easiest to use because I didn't have to rotate the body for horizontal or vertical. I also liked giving my customers 5x5" proofs. Many 10x10's made their way into their albums. For landscape photography I use 6x7. The format is better suited for 16x20's. I've always wanted one of the larger MF formats like the 6x8 & 6x9, the results I've seen from them are amazing. However, I've never had much use for 645, it was not that much better than my 35mm equipment using a fine grain film.

BTW: My urologist uses a Nikon D810 and the murals in his office are as good as those taken with a 4x5. I stay as far away from proctologists as I can.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Never, never turn your back on one!

 

[baachitraka]

 

[Slixtiesix]

Would like to bring that to the top again, may we´ll see some more votes...

 

[Sirius Glass]

OK then, can I vote more than once for the same thing?

 

[Slixtiesix]

If it was up to me, you certainly could :-D But Seriously, we have more than 80.000 members, with 1200 members online this very moment and only 578 votes yet. Or are most APUG members only shooting 35mm and LF? Btw, do we have a poll on that question already?

 

[dpurdy]

If the poll was least favorite my vote would be 645.

 

[baachitraka]

That's very high turn out I think.

 

[Sirius Glass]

If the poll was least favorite my vote would be 645.

That would get my vote too the the least favorite format.

 

[moto-uno]

^ After 5 weeks in Asia , carrying my Bronica Etrs with 2 lens , I wouldn't have wanted for anything else than 645 . So There !
Peter

 

[moto-uno]

View attachment 167611

 

[moto-uno]

Another from my favorite travel camera. Peter

 

[cooltouch]

About five years ago, when I was in the market for a medium format system camera, I was looking at various formats, but 6x6 was tops on my list. I was most interested in Bronica's SQAi because of its features and affordability -- plus I'd used one years before, working as an assistant for a wedding photographer. But while I was shopping around for a good deal on an SQAi, I ran across an incredible deal on an ETRSi outfit that I just couldn't pass up. I reasoned that, most of the time I'd be cropping a 6x6 anyway to something close to 6x4.5, so I went ahead and jumped onthe ETRSi deal. Honestly, I haven't regretted the move -- at all. Most of my photography work is outdoors stuff and the ETRSi, with the speed grip E, ends up handling like a largish 35mm, so it was easy to adapt to. And one of the things I like best about the ETRSi is it is a true system camera, with interchangeable backs, finders, lenses, even motor/winder options. And the ETRSi (along with the SQAi) features TTL flash exposure with the Metz SCA300 module and supported flashes.

But there's a certain appeal that a large negative has and anyway, I've wanted one for ages, so about a year ago, I finally bought a Pentax 67 and bought a few lenses to go with it. It's a totally different animal from the Bronica, but I love it. So, in terms of lens interchangeability, I have two systems that I can work with now, plus I also have a few others in 6x6 and 6x9 that are fixed lens cameras, so I have the bases pretty well covered. It's nice having a choice.

ETRSi, 75mm f/2.8, Portra 160: