Do you push when you shoot 6x7?

I have just beginning to use medium format Pentax67II and I am liking it so much.

Sharpness, details, everthing is so beautiful!

 

Currently I am using Fuji Presto 400 ( rated ISO320@ Rodinal 1:25) .

I shoot night scenes a lot when I use 135.

I was thinking of pushing ISO400 to 1600 or maybe 3200 with Pentax 67.

 

I was just wondering if any one of you guys out there push films when you shoot medium format.

Is it worth to push medium format?

Should I stay at ISO400 for medium format and push only when I shoot 135?

 

Thank you!

"Pushing" is an exposure issue and is totally independent of the film format. Push if and when you must to get a good exposure.

I almost never push film. It inevitably reduces the quality of the result, quality which is the reason for shooting medium (or

larger) format to begin with.

 

Of course, somewhat reduced quality can sometimes be preferable to getting no shot. In that case, I shoot Delta 3200 rated at

1600 in Xtol straight; or 400TX at ~1250 in Diafine.

Hmm, I agree with Brian. It depends on what you're looking for when you're pushing the film - what is the "worth" that you're measuring?

 

Pushing 6x7 is better than 35mm if you're talking about grain-less-ness since the grain would be smaller as it is magnified less. If you like grain... buy an even slower film and push it further?

 

You might want to check this website out. This person is a local hobbyist in Singapore who takes pushing to a whole new level... http://filmdevelopment.blogspot.com/2008/06/extreme-film-pushing.html

I take it you are shooting handheld to need more speed? If you need speed I second use of 400TX at ~1250 in Diafine, saved my backside at a few weddings back in the day. I would stay away from iso 3200 films since the grain is obtrusive even 'pulled' to EI1600.

 

If I need that kind of speed I will use a full frame dslr where 1600 is not an issue.

i push whatever film im using whenever i feel like it, regardless of format. its just a piece of film, make it do what you want it to do!!

Mark has just said about what I was going to say... Tri-X 400 @ 1250 in Diafine gives an honest speed boost, that is to say it has shadow detail. :-) And Tri-X Pro 320 (shot at EI 1000 for Diafine) works very well and comes in 220 length rolls.

 

In my experience, color neg films (to include chromogenic B&W) don't push well at all, and indeed thrive on a half-stop or more extra exposure.

I dont understand why you would push for night shots. I only push when my subjects are moving in very low light.

Ballet performances for example. For night landscapes I shoot the slowest film I can find - 100 speed or tungsten

slides for color (64 ISO).

When I use a big, heavy, slow, complicated, expensive 67 camera instead of a quick 'n easy 35mm or digital

shooter I suffer

the pain because I want picture quality.

 

When I put that camera on a tripod for every shot instead of breezing about in a care free hand held way I accept

the slowness because I want image quality.

 

When I burn big expensive pieces of film and only get 10 shots per roll I accept the financial sting because I

want image quality.

 

There is no way I'm going to throw away all those hard won gains by pushing film where it does not want to go.

Ok so I'm in a horribly lit situation and I want the best image quality. I am handholding my cameras, and I have a 35mm

and a medium format camera. I have tri-x 400 in both formats and I need to push it to 3200. Which should I chose?

Assuming I only have film equipment.

Good question Benjamin Hicks! I've been there and I reckon the answer is premium 35mm equipment with the fastest lens you can get.

 

Years ago I tried the Canon 7 with the f 0.95 lens and also a Leica M3 with a Noctilux f 1.0 in really bad light with TX 400. The TX was pushed to 3200 by developing it in D-76 diluted 1+3 without agitation for a day (24 hours!) except for a 30 second shake at the beginning. Overall the Leica/Noctilux combination was slightly better.

 

The decisive advantage of the 35mm gear apart from 4 stops extra lens speed was the number of exposures available. Every worthwhile subject got a minimum of six essentially identical exposures on the basis that one of them would show less camera shake. A 67 roll film camera only gives 10 shots per load; not enough to let Lady Luck deliver you the occasional sharp frame.

I can see your point. I usually have my 90mm or 127mm 3.5 on medium format gear, and I just recently bought the canon

50mm 1.8 (before that my largest aperture was 3.5 on my 35mm gear so I didn't have any extra stops with the 35mm). I

usually carry both, as I don't mind lugging around my RB67. I love to use it whether on a tripod or not. I wish I had the

money for the 1.2 or a completely new to me leica system with a 0.95. I guess only in my dreams for now, and I will have

to wait until I become rich or set aside enough money. Maybe by then canon will put out a 0.90. We can only hope.