SQ-Ai

<p>Just bought the above camera with two 120 backs, lens wlf and metering prism really because I always wanted a medium format camera. I deally a 6by7 but wasn't sure about the bronica and the mamiya pro 2 seems a touch expensive. I'm wondering did I do the right thing is the quality better than my sony a900? havn't put any film through yet shame it's not possible to print slide film directly anymore would like some thoughts on the quality of this camera</p>

<p>The Bronica is a very capable camera, and the lenses are pretty good. The 'quality' is neither better nor worse than a DSLR. It is <em>different.</em> Film, including scanned film, has a different response to light than that of a digital sensor. You may prefer one over the other, but that only means that it is better in your eyes. Get a roll of Portra 400 or Ektar 100 and shoot your usual subjects. Have fun. Enjoy. Send the film to a lab like <a href="http://www.northcoastphoto.com/">North Coast Photo</a> or<a href="http://www.richardphotolab.com/"> Richard Photo Lab</a> and have them scan it. See what you think--it doesn't really matter what any one else thinks.</p>

<p>Its a great camera, congratulations. I second getting some good film and getting it scanned. (I would be inclined to use Provia 400x). One thing to know up front is that the normal scan size from labs is quite small (about 6 Mp). If you shoot a lot, a flatbed or dedicated scanner would give you much better results.</p>

<p>Have ordered some Fuji 160 not sure which NPS or NPN they only had one variety I think it was NPS will try slides later yes film certainly has a different look smoother I think and colour negative is easier to start with I forgot to mention in the package there was also a polaroid backso how expensive is that and is it necessary to use it?</p>

<p>Aside from Hasselblad, there's not much else in modern 6x6 SLR system cameras. I have an SQ-B and love it. PS and most of the older S lenses are first-rate. It's compact, well-made and not all that heavy. Its ergonomics are greatly improved with the speed winder grip. I'd also recommend getting a hand-held incident meter.</p>

<p>I used the Bronica SQAi as my main camera for more than a decade, and since then have used full frame DSLRs</p>

 

<ul>

<li>The camera you've bought is capable of producing excellent photographs. But there is a great deal of used MF equipment out there that hasn't been well maintained and is maybe not performing well and may be broken. If it's performing to its optimum it is a very fine camera. You need to start using it to find out whether your copy is a very fine camera or not. These days we buy cameras with the expectation that they work and will continue to work without attention. MF cameras were not made in vast quantities; they were made in the expectation that they'd be serviced from time to time and of course since they became very cheaply available used, this rarely happens. Buying MF cameras is very cheap today- but the repair of them isn't cheap, and for discontinued models is getting harder to find. </li>

<li>Whether the Bronica is as good or better than your Sony has a number of components. Is it going to be better at making a small image for the web- probably not. Is it capable of making a better 24" sq print- yes it is on the assumptions that the camera is in good condition; that you understand how to use it and achieve a perfectly exposed , properly focussed photograph; that you make or buy a scan capable of pulling out all the information , and make or have made a great print file. Finally that you find and use a printer ( either home or lab) that is managing their equipment well and able to make great prints from great input material. You can shorten that list a bit if you find a quality source of printing directly from colour negs without scanning. But the point remains that to realise the potential of your camera requires all the links in a fairly complex chain to be working really well. Having a good camera is in itself insufficient and there is a learning curve. </li>

<li>You can't resolve your question by comparing pixels. You can get more pixels from a film-scanned 6x6 film than you'll get from your Sony. But people used to say that all pixels were not created equal and that is right. You'll need to get a lot right in the lens/photography/scanning etc cycle to realise that potential. If you're using slide film that will include mastering some of the various means to use a film offering maybe 5 stops of dynamic range to photograph a scene that might extend to 7 or 8 stops and do it well. </li>

<li>You've bought a metering prism. Unless it one of the most modern spot metering types it is likely to be an averaging meter- nowhere near as flexible and sophisticated as what you're used to with a good dslr. Further you have no means to check (as you do with a dslr- whether you've nailed it and whether you need to keep trying. If you stick with colour neg film, which is very forgiving, that could well turn out fine. If you have ambitions to use slide film especially then certainly I used a spot/incident meter exclusively and reserved the metered prism as a sense-check on my spot-metering calculations. I would not expect to use an average meter to expose a difficult film like Velvia consistently well. I'm not convinced that the polaroid back is going to be of much use nowadays- but then I never used one- I used an accurate light-meter to avoid that cost , time and complexity.</li>

</ul>

<p>But if you stick with it , learn to use it right you could be en route to some fabulous photography.</p>

 

<p>I have a hand held meter already and used to shoot on slide film a lot I am hoping to go out and use the camera tomorrow as my film arrived in the post this morning. Is it better to scan negative film of this format or have it developed and printed in a lab assuming it is a good one though at the start I will be shooting ordinary subjects</p>

<p>I love my Bronica! I don't use it much, because its so expensive for me to get film developed - even to the point where I think about selling it, but when I use it I want to keep it.<br /><br />What's the difference between the SQ-A and SQ-Ai?</p>

<p>Daniel, the main difference is that the SQAi has TTL flash metering capability. Other differences are a redesigned folding winding crank, a double exposure indicator in the viewfinder, and an extended shutter speed range. Another minor difference is an electromagnetic shutter release button on the SQAi, which is slightly smoother in operation. One thing to bear in mind is that the SQA has a mechanical back up speed of 1/500th (fairly useless IMO) but the SQAi's shutter is entirely battery dependant and has no mechanical back up speed.</p>

<p>Scan and print vs develop & print. </p>

<p>You'll find the "scan" route a lot easier to find and of course you get the advantage both of showing the photographs on screen and potentially ( depending on how you buy) amending the scan to print as you want later rather than just accepting the original shot and the labs interpretation of it. Certainly at the pro- lab I used to use in London, there's not a big difference in cost between a develop and print (c 6") package from 120 and a develop and scan package. You can still get a develop and contact sheet service too from some labs. </p>

<p>But as I say not all labs offer this range of services and you may well find that your choice is constrained if you want this done locally rather than sending stuff away or driving to a pro-lab</p>

<p>You will need to recognise though that the scans that come along with "develop and scan" packages will not be of a size large enough to support a large print. </p>