Overwhelmed by choice and in need of expert advise!

Hi

 

I've been wanting to buy an SLR medium format film camera for ages but am totally overwhelmed by conflicting reviews and advise.

 

I'd settled on the Mamiya RZ67 Pro IID because I'd understood that there were digital backs available (whilst my primary interest in

film it seemed sensible to invest in a camera that could both) however I read on this forum that the backs don't produce a full frame

image.

 

So - I'm back to square one - I'm looking on eBay and there's so much choice and price differences.

 

Can anyone give me some advice about buying a good solid and flexible starter camera. I'm looking to spend around £600, but would

consider spending more if it's necessary.

 

Any advice really welcome.

 

Many thanks

'good solid and flexible starter camera'

 

It's hard to beat a Mamiya C330 - it's an honest-to-God pro system camera that's readily available for a few hundred quid, with a range of lenses and accessories to satisfy almost every need. Nothing against the RZ67 (my Pro II is one of my favourite walkabout cameras) but the initial cost is higher; and the RB series are wonderful but rather heavy.

 

As for full-frame digital backs - they don't yet exist for 6x6 and larger, and are barely there for 645.

<p>A few things to consider before you start looking. The camera itself is cheap, even if you buy a Hasselblad. Lenses cost a lot of money. Digital backs for medium format cameras cost HUGE amounts of money. In order of magnitude, to give some idea, the camera body is maybe $300, lenses can be $500-2000 each. Digital backs are $10,000-$30,000. If you want to stat cheap and shoot film, it does not matter very much whether or not you can add a digital back later. If you are going to buy several lenses then it may well be sensible to get into a system that can take a digital back. The biggest digital backs made today are a bit smaller than 6x4.5cm film. So if you are sure to get into digital, it may be better to get a 6x4.5 or at most 6x6 camera, with removable backs. Also think about what are you going to photograph. Mamiya 67 is a BIG and heavy camera. It is good for studio use but not practical to be carried around shooting landscapes, and certainly not for any kind of action outdoors. 6x4.5 cameras are much more suitable for that, some even have autofocusing and behave very much like normal 35mm SLRs. 6x6 is a compromise between the two.</p>

<p>I have been shooting medium format for a long time but I recently have been impressed with a very cheap medium format camera that uses relatively cheap Zeiss lenses that give stunning quality. The Pentacon 6 can be had for less than 300 USD with an 80mm Zeiss Biometar, which is just another name for a Zeiss Planar. It is a great lens with 8or9 aperture blades giving great bokeh. There are several other Zeiss lenses available for the camera. I really think it might be the best deal in MF.</p>

Thanks for the replies - I think I should totally forget digital backs - they're along way out of my league and ur would be

many years before I could get one.

 

Mamiya c330, I agree they're a gear camera, I gave a very old one but am looking for a single lens option.

 

Weight - now that's an important consideration. I would be using it outside the studio so wouldn't want something too

cumbersome.

<p>I know that you want a 'cheap' system but I don't see a lot of point in spending time and money building up a system which is not best for you. If you want a good SLR system, then the RZ should be at the top of the list in terms of image quality for the buck. If you have given up on digital options then why not go with your first choice?</p>

<p>An RZ is a good starter and good bodies are out there fairly cheaply.If you are not going digital get an RZ Pro which has been amateur used. The standard 110 is very good and the 180 or 250 w or w-n are plentiful with many bargains in mint condition. As a wide angle the pre-uld 50mm lenses are very good stopped down a bit and relatively cheap. Plenty of UK sellers on ebay. To save weight avoid the otherwise excellent prism and use the waist level finder. For getting closer get a number 1 or 2 tube (ensure it is not the RB tube as this lacks the electronics). A spare back will be very useful- stick to 120 and avoid 220 because of film availability. I suggest a bulb release for tripod use as this is both cheaper than the electronic, not mechanically linked like a cable and screws into the lens release for mirror up. A fairly large backpack would hold this outfit together with shades, meter spare battery and film. I and a few other landscapers find it entirely practical out of a studio.</p>

<p>An RZ is a good starter and good bodies are out there fairly cheaply.If you are not going digital get an RZ Pro which has been amateur used. The standard 110 is very good and the 180 or 250 w or w-n are plentiful with many bargains in mint condition. As a wide angle the pre-uld 50mm lenses are very good stopped down a bit and relatively cheap. Plenty of UK sellers on ebay. To save weight avoid the otherwise excellent prism and use the waist level finder. For getting closer get a number 1 or 2 tube (ensure it is not the RB tube as this lacks the electronics). A spare back will be very useful- stick to 120 and avoid 220 because of film availability. I suggest a bulb release for tripod use as this is both cheaper than the electronic, not mechanically linked like a cable and screws into the lens release for mirror up. A fairly large backpack would hold this outfit together with shades, meter spare battery and film. I and a few other landscapers find it entirely practical out of a studio.</p>

<p>My own choice of MF SLR is the Mamiya RB67.</p>

<p><strong>Pentax 645N</strong> - If you don't mind eye level shooting & <em>fantastic </em>lenses. All at a very <em>reasonable</em> price.<br>

Cheers!<br>

G</p>

<p>As with most systems, the camera is just the tip of the iceberg, expenditure wise. <br /> The following is a quick example of a few things you will need, or want to acquire in a fairly short order. <br /> Others may debate the prices I have listed, but by the time you include shipping,<br /> and average high-ball vs low-ball, these prices are fairly realistic for a three lens kit.<br /> Prices for mostly used equipment, in U.S. Dollars.<br /> A good mono-pod................$100.00<br /> A decent "L grip"..................$ 60.00<br /> RZ Pro body, w/WLF<br /> and a 120 back......................$300.00<br /> A 90mm, 110mm, or 127mm<br /> Standard prime lens..............$275.00<br /> A 180mm Tele........................$175.00<br /> A 50mm or 65mm Wide........$350.00<br /> A second back,<br /> and a Polaroid back.................$125.00<br /> A few Filters, and<br /> maybe a compendium shade...$150.00<br /> A Med-Large Backpack............$175.00<br /> Assorted Misc. Widgets.............$ 90.00<br /> Total...................................$2,000.00</p>

<p>645 is cheaper than 6x7 or 6x6. Most of the price is in lenses not bodies. For an easy to use SLR like system the Mamiya M645 and pentad 645 are hard to beat (I am sure the Bronicas are also good but I have never used them). The bigger 6x7 type formats - especially the Mamiya RZ and RB are great cameras (I used to use the RZ - now replaced with an even bigger Fuji GX680) but very big and heavy so they are best used on a tripod. If you want the larger image and portability the 6x6 format is a good option (hassy or Bronica). I would not worry about digital as MF digital is very expensive and most sensors are not full frame. I suggest that you look at the price of lenses on KEH.com to get a good idea of what you are buying into. If you plan to use it like an SLR then as I say 645 is probably the way to go (Mamiya and Pentax unless you can afford Contax or Rollei - by the way MF is fine so save you money and avoid the AF bodies - unless you can afford the Contax!). If you want studio and tripod use then an RZ is a great camera but as you will see the lens are much more expensive than the M645. Finally a Hassleblad is a great compromise - larger image but still portable and handheld. The drawback of Hassy (for me as a casual MF user) is the price of wide angle lenses.</p>

<p>Thanks SO much for the responses! Really helpful of everyone.<br>

Coincidentally - someone just emailed to say they are selling Mamiya 645 with Mamiya sekor 2.8 lens 80mm, Mamiya sekor 3.5 150mm lens, plus power grip for £350.<br>

Does that sound good value?<br>

thanks</p>

<p>I am 75 years old. I have been using the rb67 longer than I care to think about. It allows me to produce antastic color negative or transparitive photos.<br>

Yes the film is getting more expensive but although I also have a canon 20d the camers I prefer is without a doubt the Mamiya.<br>

All other things aside, for medium format imagery you CANNOT surpass the rb67.</p>

<p>I am 75 years old. I have been using the rb67 longer than I care to think about. It allows me to produce fantastic color negative or transpancy photos.<br>

Yes the film is getting more expensive but although I also have a canon 20d the camers I prefer is without a doubt the Mamiya.<br>

All other things aside, for medium format imagery you CANNOT surpass the rb67.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>the camera body is maybe $300, lenses can be $500-2000 each. Digital backs are $10,000-$30,000</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This is where the large price differences between marques and models become acutely apparent. Ikka's prices are valid for Zeiss (Hasselblad/Contax/Rollei) lenses, but for Mamiya 645, Pentax 645 Bronica ETRSi, or Pentacon Six lenses, I'd knock that range <em>way </em>back down: $100-300 for most lenses apart from the specialist ones. The camera bodies can similarly be had for as little as $100 (depending on the age of the model...bear in mind that there have been a few generations of most of these cameras). And used digital backs, for the cameras which can take them, start at around $2000, not $10000 - but perhaps he was not referring to used ones.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Coincidentally - someone just emailed to say they are selling Mamiya 645 with Mamiya sekor 2.8 lens 80mm, Mamiya sekor 3.5 150mm lens, plus power grip for £350.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That sounds pretty good, depending on which Mamiya 645 body it is (like I said, there are different generations, and different capabilities even within a generation). Also what finder is included? Which model power grip? Which film back/insert? (120 good, 220 not much use). Which focusing screen? Are the lenses "C" or "N" type? When a camera is so modular, there are choices for all of these components, so the seller needs to specify which ones you'd be getting. If you can find out, let us know and we'll pass judgement "with the gimlet eye of a canon lawyer", as my country's prime minister said in a rather famous recent speech.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I'm not sure how anyone can advise you unless you say what kind of photography you do. If you do portraits, you really need a camera with a leaf shutter. If you do close-ups, you need an SLR. If you do slow shutter speeds, you need a mirror lock-up or pre-release.</p>

<p>my 0.2cents worth; an RB67 Pro S and an Epson V750 or better scanner. Most phones take good digital snapshots nowadays.</p>

<p>I suggest getting a Fuji GA645 camera. Around $500SD, they come with either wide angle, normal, or zoom lenses. Super sharp lenses, much like Leica or Zeiss, and very accurate autofocus sytems. You will love them, can shoot all the MF film you want with super results, and should you ever want to sell it, you will get what you paid for it. It will keep you from spending a fortune on lenses, backs, etc. and you will experience the joy of MF.<br>

I have all 3 Fuji variants, as well as a Contax 645 with multiple lenses. I use the Fuji 10x as often as the Contax, due to its light weight, portability, and easy use. </p>

<p>Don't forget the Pentax 6x7 series. Big, but not as ungainly as the RB or the RZ. Handles like a steroid-fed 35mm (I find I can hand hold mine with good results). Sharp lenses. Built like a tank. Takes both 120 and 220 film. Some definite issues with camera vibration at certain slow-ish shutter speeds (from the big mirror slapping), but it's fairly easy to work around that.</p>

<p>SCot: Why is a leaf shutter better for portraits? Alan</p>