Jump to content

Is it time to ditch medium format??


larry_s1

Recommended Posts

<p>Why stick with medium format film cameras?<br>

I have a Mamiya 645 ProTL with 4 lenses, backs, etc. As much as I have been reluctant to ditch my system but I think its time. I would sell those and get a D7000.<br>

Why? I was going to do a shoot in B&W but Kodak doesn’t make the B&W C41 film anymore. Two of my local labs do not even process film any more. And I get excellent portrait results (24x36) from my D70. There isnt much I can do in MF I cant in digital, I think.<br>

With the advances in digital why stick with film?<br>

The only advantage I can think of is very large blowups (3ftx4ft stuff).</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

<p>Do what works for you.<br>

Ilford's XP2 is still available, if you want to use chromogenic "B&W" film. But if you have no way to process it locally, and you are happy with the results you get from your D70, then do it. Personally I don't use C-41 B&W and I develop myself.<br>

You might ask yourself as well whether you even need to upgrade to the D7000 if you're getting excellent results with your D70. Given the used prices for MF gear now, I'd be surprised if you got enough for your Mamiya anyway.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Can't speak for others, but my answer is yes. I was working with 6x9 until Kodak stopped making my favorite film Ektachrome E200. I then bought a Canon EOS 5D Mk. II and found it amazing, certainly equal to 6x4.5 film in quality. I sold my MF gear (Fuji GW690III and Mamiya RB67) and now just shoot occasional 35 mm b+w for a nostalgic quality and 4x5 for high definition even with large prints. As soon as a tripod comes into play, I'd as soon shoot 4x5 as MF - it's no slower and the quality gain is great!</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I've just sold or am selling all my Bronica/Mamiya 7ii equipment. It had all sat in a cupboard for a couple of years and reluctantly I had to conclude that I was unlikely to use it again. I don't enjoy photography with dslrs any better, its just that the size/weight/ flexibility factors in combination with commercial pressures were just overwhelming. I offered to take a submission of 6x6 slides into one of my stock agencies last week and the editor told me they didn't even possess a loupe or a lightbox. They'd look at them if I scanned them all first, then paid for a drum/Imacon scan of all those they selected.</p>

<p>Equally I have to think about whats going to make me want to continue to travel and photograph in ten years time. A 13lb dslr /3 lens system? Or a MF slr that needs 5/6 lenses to offer the same flexibility and a pack weight of well over 20lb with bulk to match. If I could do everything I wanted with the Mamiya 7 it might have made a difference, but I can't. </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Well I am going to wait a while and see if that digital stuff ever catches on........remember 8 tracks. They were all the rage for a while, who has one now.<br>

:-)</p>

<p>I have a closet full of Hasselblads that I will never give away......so I will just keep on using them till they stop working.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p><strong><em>Why stick with medium format film cameras?</em></strong> Because you like them. If you want c41 B&W then shoot Ilford XP2. Why not process your own B&W? Easy peasy and cheap - although it sounds like you've already given up. Only 1 lab in my entire city of over 300,000 still processes film but that doesn't stop me from shooting it. I shoot digital as well, but I'm actually increasing the amount of film that I shoot. I've found that I miss holding the mass of gears, levers and glass of my older cameras and I love to see the images on film. I like having to wait to see the images and I find that I have to trust my skills and my equipment more rather than my computer. Heres a little test for you - take a look through the viewfinder of the D70 then take a look through the viewfinder of the 645. Which one do you like to look through better? IMO, I absolutely hate the D70 vf and I really love seeing the big image in my Mamiyaflex or RB or even the dingy little glass finder on my Zeiss Ercona. I shoot with what makes me want to continue shooting as a hobby and work to improve. I've finally decided that I don't need to shoot what I think customers expect or what everyone else is doing - if a customer likes my work, they'll hire me regardless of what equipment I use.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I'm not sure why I still shoot MF film...even to the point of collecting, lugging around, and occasionally hassling with my RZ67 instead of my 645AF. The workflow sucks, including having to wait 1-2 weeks for Walmart to develop my film, and then hassling with the lowly V500 scanner.</p>

<p>At best, I get a 30-40mp photo that I downsize to under the 12mp I get on my DSLR...to rarely print and usually keep on the screen. The sharpness is questionable, because the grain impacts my ability to sharpen, and my focusing was probably off in the first place.</p>

<p>BUT...I still get enough keepers (a higher percentage than with my DSLR) to keep me motivated. (Although I vascillate back and forth with each roll of results). In my case, I mainly shoot C-41 color, so I appreciate the highlight compression it affords me over digital (or slide film).<br>

<br />To complicate things further, I grabbed a 22mp digital back for my 645AF...so now I have a third option, in between DSLR and MF film. In many cases, it's no easier to use than film...but it kept me from buying a FF DSLR for a while.<br /><br /><br />Coincidentally, Best Buy wants to replace my A700 rather than fixing a minor niggle on it (???). So, it's possible that serendipity may deliver me an A77 in a few weeks, with its associated higher resolution (and TBD performance) over my MFDB. <br>

<br />If it puts the nail in the coffin of the MFDB, it's only a short leap of logic to argue the rest of the film gear should go. It'd free up a bunch of cash, for sure. :-)<br>

<br />So...we'll see...</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I was thinking that if digital can give me what I need, and it is more convenient, why shoot film?<br>

The issue is not if I like the feel of film cameras or smell of darkroom chemicals it is wheter MF film give me something I can’t get with digital.<br>

I think this discussion is less like typewriters vs. computers (clear winner even if some still type) but more akin to vinyl to CD’s.<br>

So the real question is what does MF do for me that digital can’t? It seems quality is there. Maybe not. What else is there?</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>One thought from me (as a Hassy to D700 converter a couple of years ago)...After some careful thought I figured out that the thing that made MF work for me was the larger viewing screen (compared to 35mm). I struggled with my Olympus 4/3rds but found that the D700 was ok as a substitite for the hassy because the viewfinder was larger and allowed me to compose OK. My D700/epson combo does better B&W that my MF outfit. However the colour isnt quite up to the same depth of saturation as Velvia/Cibachrome.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Is this another "wind them up" post?</p>

<p>Whatever floats your boat mate. I can't see how anybody can expect any reasonable or constructive answer to a question formulated like this on a board on the InterWebs.</p>

<p>In my view, this whole thread was a waste of time and server storage since it didn't add to or contribute to photography at large, more specifically using any kind of capture mechanics.</p>

<p>Now I leave it up to Q.G. to bite...:)</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>Why? I was going to do a shoot in B&W but Kodak doesn’t make the B&W C41 film anymore.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not correct as far as I can see: <a href="http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/bw400cn/main2.jhtml?pq-path=13402">http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/bw400cn/main2.jhtml?pq-path=13402</a></p>

<p>WtU post. Let's move on...</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I've picked up MF film within the past year. For me, it's a pleasure. I enjoy the whole process, from shooting to developing and printing. I'm not a pro and thus am only shooting for pleasure, so there's no pressure in any direction. I shoot B&W film and digital in color, and find them both satisfying creatively in different ways...it's not about print size, since I can't print any bigger than 8x10 with my enlarger.</p>

<p>I wouldn't do it if I weren't able to develop myself, however...my local shop charges $15/roll to develop 120 film, and that doesn't include prints.</p>

<p>I would have to agree with Tony about viewfinder size...I've shot my Hasselblad and then switched to my 7D and thought something was wrong with the screen, since the image was so small. That's not an insignificant factor, but is it worth it? Only you can say that for sure.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>IMO, going from an electronic shuttered 645 to a DSLR is a much easier transition than from a meterless WL shooter and larger formats. However, it's impossible to duplicate the experience of home brewed film development and printing, no matter the format. Maybe give it a shot before moving on?</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Yes. It is time for you to give up on MF. Personally, I will stay with it. I am currently working on a commission for a bank and am shooting MF, developing the film myself and doing large prints in my darkroom. I enjoy the process. I get the results I want, and my client demands, using MF film. If you don't, then move on. </p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I could go on and on and on and.......but its all been said before so, in your case it seems there is no reason to stay with MF. I dare say your digital camera is auto focus, has auto or semi auto exposure, you dont need to wind it on, reasonably light? has a very wide range of shutter speeds, doesnt need rolls of film stuffing in the back, fairly quick to use. Sell the MF film gear.<br>

Thats just my opinion of course but I was writing with a quill pen that I made from a swan feather earlier. (yes really).</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>Why stick with medium format film cameras?<br />I have a Mamiya 645 ProTL with 4 lenses, backs, etc. As much as I have been reluctant to ditch my system but I think its time. I would sell those and get a D7000.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If you think "its time", go on and don't even ask why. It would only make sense to ask the question if you could not decide if "it time".<br>

And if you conclude that "I get excellent portrait results (24x36) from my D70" and "There isnt much I can do in MF I cant in digital" we can also wonder if you buy the D7000 to fill that "minimal gap" or not, and why you don't stick with your D70.<br>

A lot of people don't think they "have to stick with film MF" but that they want to keep using both film and digital as they are just different media and means of expression. And even if they think that digital can deliver the goods for all or most of their professional needs.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>do people still shoot c41 black and white film? It is so easy and cheap to develop your own at home.</p>

<p>I love that whole <em>craft</em> of making a photograph from start to finish, I love having negatives and the fact that my great grandchildren should be able to shine some light through them and make a photograph, I love the dynamic range I get, with ag-x, that my digicams can only dream of, I love scanning my film, I love posting images shot on rollei pan 25 and reading comments like "cool black and white conversion, would like to see the colour version also", I love spending days in the dark room, I love my Olympus EM-2 with Panny 20mm pancake.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>It is odd that you posted this at this particular time because I have actually decided the other way around. I am dumping most of my 35mm stuff and keeping the medium format. As for digital, it is replacing most of the 35mm stuff but mostly for general photos. Serious photos are accomplished in medium format. Also hanging on to the large format.</p>

<p>PS: When I see posts like this it makes me think someone is trying to destabilize the market so the "sheep" will go selling their stuff and drive down prices and someone can then buy what they want cheaper.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I have a Mamiya 645 also, along with a Nikon F100 and Nikon D300. I love the convenience and lack of expense that comes from shooting with the D300. Nevertheless, I know some will disagree with me on this, but the colors and dynamic range that I get with film (in particular negative not slide) cannot be matched with the D300. I've got some film shots that almost look like digital HDR but they're single exposures. So for me, I may upgrade to a D700 (or it's successor) some day, but I'll keep the film cameras as well for what I consider to be the better quality images. I'll keep hoping that Kodak and Fuji and others continue to make and market film and someone out there will continue to develop it - and I'll give them my business.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Longevity of non-C41 B&W negatives is one advantage of film (MF or other). Who knows how digital media will survive or even be readable in the medium future (unless you continually copy from one archiving system to the other). The pleasure of film photography and printing on photgraphic emulsions is the other reason. Some prefer those prints (surface, paper weight, texture, tonality) to digital media, although the latter print quality is improving.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I think it is time for you to switch if you are not interested in the slower process of using MF. My suggestion is that you hold onto the Mamiya gear for a while after you have gone digital. This will allow the novelty of digital to wear off before you sell the MF stuff. Personally I kept my M645 stuff and use it occasionally - probably no more than 10-15 rolls a year (I shoot a lot more 35mm film and even larger format MF). <br>

I agree with David Bebbington on the Canon 5DII image quality - my 5DII produces images with a resolution equal to my M645 scanned on my Nikon 9000. When you go digital I would think hard about full frame - especially if you like wide angles and focus on image quality. I have only one APS-C body (the canon 7D - which is very highly regarded) and find that for landscapes, portraits etc... I always choose the full frame 5DII.<br>

I think the overall message is that you shoot film because you enjoy it - not for a performance advantage (large format excepted). I probably shoot 5-10 times as many images with digital as i do in all film formats. However, I would say the images I like are split about 50:50. I am not sure why but I find that many of my film shots are more "atmospheric" than my digital images.<br>

If you were shooting true black and white then I would be more cautious. The digital process does not yet produce the same results as a wet B&W process. However, as you observe you pretty much have to do B&W yourself - while there are places that will develop most will scan the image to print it. There is something about using an enlarger and photographic paper that gives B&W a quality printers have yet to match.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I thought about keeping the film cameras for "best" images , Then I got to thinking about how I'd actually do that. Nearly all my photography is on trips I make pretty specifically for that purpose. I'd have to take digital alone or take the digital system and one film system. Which would mean checking one of the systems if I'm on a plane, which I mostly am, or else I'd be carrying too much for me and potentially for the airlines hand-baggage limits. Which means checking two bags (which costs these days on many airlines), which means back to the clunky Pelican Case that I used to have to use in the aftermath of 9/11. Then when I get there I have to carry both systems unless I want to go back to my hotel every time I want to use film-which might just get on my nerves after the first couple of detours. Even when I work out of a car that doesn't mean that I photograph next to the car all the time, so when I walk away from the car I either have to carry both systems or be prepared to detour back to the car when I want to use film, or make a separate trip later with a film camera, which has an opportunity cost and a risk that conditions have changed. </p>

<p>So I couldn't think of a way to make it work without shrinking both film and digital systems considerably so I could have both all the time, and thats not really an option- a MF camera with one lens isn't going to get a lot of use from me- I'd rather take a photograph on the "wrong" medium than on the "right" medium but with the wrong lens. </p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>One thing I forgot to add - you may not want to sell your M645 lenses. I use mine on my EOS bodies as Tilt / Shift with a Mirex adaptor (about $400 inc shipping etc.. but possibly less these days as the Euro has fallen). You can also just buy a normal adaptor and just use them as regular lenses. <br>

This site has some reviews of MF lenses on DSLRs<br>

http://slrlensreview.com/web/mamiya-slr-lenses-158/standard-645-slr-lenses-160/474-mamiya-645-80mm-f28-lens-review.html<br>

And here is the link for Mirex<br>

http://www.mirex-adapter.de/tilt_shift_adapter.htm</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>David,</p>

<p>My solution to your problem is to travel with a Mamiya 7II and three lenses plus a digital camera. On earlier trips I carried my Nikon D700 and one zoom lens 24-200. On a recent trip I replaced the D700 with a P7000. All fits easily into a small bag (a sling bag) and I found I could carry it all day. I use the digital for snaps and color work and the MF for B&W serious work. It works for me. The only problem was I found my wife borrowing my P7000 on a regular basis. </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...