Best MF for hand held Street Photography?

[ron_l]

Hello - I am a passionate 35mm amateur who shoots 90% in B&W. I do

my own darkroom work, usually in 8x10. Currently I use my Nikon F3

for all of my shots. I am most interested in outdoor, urban scenes.

Streetscapes, unposed strangers, street performers...etc. The F3's

functionality is superb and the output is pretty good (the best I've

gotten with my albeit limited experience). But I lust after the

sharpness and contrast of MF prints. I have been pouring though the

archives and user groups trying to determine if it is possible to

successfully use a MF system for my type of photography which I know

is best suited to the 35mm format. But most of the discussion on MF

centers on studio/landscape work (for a good reason I realize). I

just feel like if I was able to gain a level of proficiency in using

a MF in this way, I might be able to produce some exciting images.

 

I want to begin renting some MF cameras and trying them out but I am

looking for some direction and input from the experienced users of

this forum on where to begin my search.

 

I originally wanted to use a 6x7 but I have not found one that looks

like I would be able to effectively handle it on the street. The

Pentax 67II seemed like an option but it doesn't sound like it

performs that well off of the tripod. Although at the 1/125-1/250

speeds I would try to be shooting, maybe the mirror slap would not be

an issue.

 

The Mamiya 7II looked like it was going to be the answer to my

dilemma (even though I thought is was going to be hard to overcome my

SLR bias against the RF viewfinder). That was until I started reading

all of the negative feedback from current M7 users and the problems

they have focusing. Since the lens I would be using most often, the

150mm (closest to my Nikon 85mm f1.4 which is my most frequent

mount), seems to give people the most problems, I don't think this is

the way to go.

 

I haven't found any of the 6x6's that seem easy enough to manuever

(Hassy, Rollei) but some of the 645 SLR's might work (Contax,

Pentax). I do know that I definitely want a meter in my prism.

 

From reading other Photo.net threads, I don't think I will be giving

up much image quality going from 6x7 to 645 since the vast majority

of my printing is 8x10 or 11x14.

 

I realize I will get better image quality if I upgrade my 35mm to

Leica but I don't think the improvement will be worth the cost.

 

SO.......that is where I am at. I'd appreciate any and all input. I

hope this whole exercise isn't a waste of time but if it is I'm sure

the users of this group will tell me. Thanks again!

[greg_jones1]

Well, I would recommend one of the autofocus 645 cameras, such as the Contax or Mamiya. I say this because they should be able to approach the automation and speed that you have grown to like with your Nikon. Certainly, the print quality at 8X10 and 11X14 should be superb-but that all depends on technique and your printing abilities.

[ala_shahin]

I would suggest that you consider using a TLR camera.

It has the classic 6x6 Format. The absense of the mirror

will produce less vibration when pressing the shutter so you will be able to shoot at slower shutter speeds. With waist level approach will give an edge in candid shoots as most people will not realize that you are shooting. It is compact compared to SLRs. Use a 400 black and white film and you don't have to worry about depth of field and the film lattiude will allow to shoot even without meter.

 

In addition to all that it is a much cheaper alternative than MF SLR.

 

Regards,

 

Ala Shahin

[leo]

An old plaubel veriwide is a 6x10 panoramic camera with a 47mm lens ( 35mm equivalent ~ 21mm ).It is very compact and with lots of depth of field , focusing is not necessary . Here's a link :http://people.smu.edu/rmonagha/mf/veriwide.html

[william_patterson]

Most street photographers use 35mm cameras because they are more flexible, smaller and less obtrusive than medium format cameras.

 

You said that you were using B&W film in a Nikon F3. This is a very good camera and I'll assume that you have one or more good lenses for it. It should be cabable of making very high quality images for the print sizes that you mention.

 

What film are you using? You mentioned that you thought that MF would increase the contrast. Since you are developing your own film, you an do that by simply increasing he development time. It takes a little bit of work to get the development time and ISO film speed correct when you start out.

 

I mainly shoot Ilford HP5+ film at ISO 320 and develop it with Ilford DD-X developer. This combination gives me beautiful negatives with nice tonality. Sure, MF images might look a little better, but the photos would be more difficult to make in MF.

 

You mentioned that you use an 85mm f/1.4 lens, which is a very good lens. Many street photographers use wide angle lenses, which can give much greater depth of field. I usually use a 28mm lens and have frequently gone out shooting with only a 50mm lens. If I take the 28 as the basic lens, then I also carry an 85mm lens.

 

So, in the end, I'll suggest that you try some different film (HP5+, FP4, etc) and experiment with the developing until you get the best negatives that you can. Of course, making proof sheets is important to see what you've got.

 

If, after all of this work, you want to try MF, then I say go ahead and do it.

 

Good luck.

[mark_hubbard]

I too am a fan of TLRs, but I think you would have more fun and success with a Bessa I with the Color Skopar lens. It does require that you estimate distance and either estimate exposure or carry a light meter, and the "viewfinder" is almost worthless except as the crudest of aiming tools, but the luscious, huge, sharp negatives it produces more than make up for its age and physical drawbacks, it folds to fit in a largish jacket pocket, and if you shop carefully, it shouldn't cost you more than $150 to $200. If I recall, the Color Skopar is a 90mm lens, so it will give you very nearly the same perspective you are used to (the 85mm), only it will cover several inches *around* the one-inch image you are used to in 35mm.

 

Two additional notes that might be of use to you: jumping to 150mm or higher to obtain the same "coverage" as in 35mm can be disastrous with street photography, because you have so much less depth of field to contend with. Also, the Mamiya 7 (which I love) seems to be VERY fussy about precise focus, even with the 80mm standard lens, which I expected to be more forgiving.

 

The problem with most MF cameras for street photography is their absurd size. The Rolleiflex is petite and featherweight in comparison to most, but you can easily spend $800 to $1200 or more for the models that were made toward the end of their production. The RB and RZ are great, but it's like aiming a mailbox at people. The Hasselblad makes you look too much like a professional photographer (or dentist who has lost his way), and is an invitation to a mugging. The Pentax 67 will make you look like a crime scene photographer and may dislocate your shoulder. The 645s are cute, but you wanted to step up, didn't you?

 

I hope these thoughts aren't too eccentric to be useful. I praise the day that someone on this forum pointed me towards the Bessa I and the tiny Perkeo II. Both are a lot of fun for not too much money.

 

Best wishes,

 

Mark Hubbard

[filibert_kraxner]

I would agree that an AF 645 system is probably your best choice because of the speed. Choose between the Mamiya and the Pentax, because the Contax is overpriced and quite heavy - this may get annoying if you have to haul it all over town. Personally, I use 35mm and a Pentax 67 and find it quite impossible to take candid shots because of the noise of the 67's mirror!(the 67II is a bit better). So I use 35mm for that. Your apprehension against using the 67 handheld is not justified. I do it all the time in bright light, but not on Velvia of course. Btw: be prepared to generate a whole lot more attention from onlookers with any MF SLR.

[kkeller]

I'll second the TLR suggestion. Get a $2-300 Yashica 124g or Minolta Autocord. They are sneaky, because of the viewing system, and light. You can compose excellent shots on the screen, and the leaf shutter is quiet and could be shot at 1/30. Work on zone focusing, and realize that depth of field with mf is much less than with 35mm (3 stops diff?), but you're not getting much dof with an 85 anyhow. You're better off with a 50 0r 35 if you can get closer. As a happy Pentax 67 owner and defender, I can testify this large, heavy, loud camera is not best used for street photography. In 35mm, have you considered the new Rollei 35? Should be great for the street. In mf you should also consider the Fuji fixed lense RF's.

[digitaldarrell]

<P>Check this out...<B>Medium Format In Your Pocket</B></p>

 

<A HREF="http://www.cleanimages.info/articles/MediumFormatInYourPocket/folders.htm">http://www.cleanimages.info/articles/MediumFormatInYourPocket/folders.htm</a>

 

<P>Thanks!<br>

Darrell Young<br>

<A HREF="www.cleanimages.info">www.cleanimages.info</A></p>

[joseph_tucker]

Another vote here for the old folders. Pick one with a good rep and in good condition, learn to scale focus and use fast film. The portabilty and simplicity, imho, outweigh any disadvantages and some of the better ones will fit in a zip-lock sandwich bag. The qualifier here is "in good condition". Buy one that's been recently serviced by an old pro or have it serviced and you will be rewarded with many happy outings. My favorites are the Perkeo II and Bessa 66 w/heliar. Oh yeah, metering?.. look inside any kodak film box! Good luck!Joe Tucker

[scott bacon]

I've had the Fujifilm GA645Zi for a few months now and I've been very happy with its performance. The 55-90mm lens is extremely sharp, it is very lightweight (less than 2 lbs.), the small built-in flash is surprisingly adequate, and it attracts less attention than my EOS 1n (it looks similar to many of the modern digital cameras which are common).

 

It does have its limitations, such as being a rangefinder there is no TLR and the lens is non-interchangable (and may be too short of a focal length for some street photography). But it definitely warrants consideration, IMHO.

[gary_frost1]

I would suggest you look at the fuji 645's. My favorite would be the

older manual focus with the 45mm wide lens. It's not any bigger than

your Nikon, and quiet. AF?, Zone Focus for street photography!

TLR's also have an appeal for not holding at eye level.

[djphoto]

The advantages of the TLR for streeet photography have already been enummerated, so I won't repeat them. But go to a library or used book store and look up books of photos by Robert Doisneau or Fritz Henle. Doisneau used a TLR for much of his work, and Henle used one exclusively. In fact, he was known as "Mr. Rollei." No one today is doing better work than these two did 40 years ago. You can join the TLR club for as little as $100 for a Yashica D.

[edsel_adams]

Id opt for a 645 SLR,Bronica,Mamiya,or Pentax.The first two mentioned use waist level VF's,handy when being unobtrusive on the streets.A short tele,or if you are rich,zoom,would work great.

[robert_landrigan]

I'll be the freak here and suggest a Kiev 60. It isn't the quietest

camera in the world, but it looks more like an old pentax rather

than a an interesting itewm to steal, and has served me quite

well as a street camera. I mainly shoot 400 and 3200 speed

ilford, and most with the stock 80mm wide open or at f4, and

while it's not as sharp as a hassy, the image quality is still very

good, and much easier to coax a good print out of than a 35mm

neg. Plus, at 200 bucks, you're not out alot of cash while you

figure out the new format.

[andrew_schank]

From the incredably varied answers, I think you can see there are many ways that different people get their medium format images.

 

I love the old folders, but they are very slow to operate, flare easily, and I tend to doubt you'd end up with images as good as those taken with your Nikon, especially trying to work quickly.

 

Any 2 1/4 SLR is going to draw more attention to you than you are used to with your Nikon. I have been stopped and asked what I am doing when I have had my Pentax 645 out, as it looks like a "professional" and this can cause concerns.

 

TLR's are great fun-especially the Rolleiflex ones form the late 1950's into the 1960's. People can master working quicky and invisibly with them to get superb images. I am not one of them, however, and find trying to focus and compose from the waste level quicky a real hit or miss proposition. I do use mine at outdoor parties sometimes, and I find people are less intimidated by the TLR than other cameras, and I have gotten some lovely candid portraits. I think its because your not pointing something at them at eye level.

 

One of the Fuji 645 Rangefinders may work. The AF cameras have great lenses, but do not focus well on moving subjects. People often have trouble getting them loaded correctly, so study the threads on Fuji GA645 loading if you go that route. Their older manual focus cameras are kind of hard to focus accurately, as the double image is wimpy. I know some people who just scale focus them to 10 feet, and then walk around looking for something interesting that's about 10 feet away. Sounds odd, but it can work well.

[tom_bowling1664874721]

The Rollei tlr is small enough that you can take it anywhere and as previousposters have pointed out, there is a psychological advantage of shooting at waist level. You seem less aggressive to the 'victim'. Another advantage of using a classic camera that people think they remember from their childhoods is that people are quite warm towards it... non-photographers like it as an object.

[david_henderson]

Just a thought. You seem happy with the 35mm camera and it's capabilities. It's the prints you want to improve. If you took your very best prints, had the negs drum-scanned and printed digitally, I feel sure that you'd get most of the sharpness, detail, and enlargeability you crave from your current camera. I know this isn't cheap, but then a MF SLR kit isn't a low cost solution either and whatever you end up with is going to be slower and offer less DOF than 35mm and with generally less sophisticated metering. Maybe something you could try before you write a big check.

[roger_michel]

let's review: you shoot primarily candid street photos. TLRs and MF slrs are too bulky. the M7 doesn't interest you becaue of difficulty focusing the 150mm, the lens you reckon you'd use the most. you are not terribly dissatisfied with your 35mm results, but want a bump in quality. dumping all this info into my supercomputer, the answer is: a new konica hexar rf, a new leica 90mm summicron asph. and a 35mm summicron asph. given your style of shooting, i think you may be rite to exclude largish MF cameras -- most street photography is shot in 35mm for good reason. the new leica asph. lenses are superb. i think you will notice a definite improvement over the nikon lenses. also important is that a rangefinder camera can provide sharper images due to its more accurate focus system AND the lack of mirror shake. the konica hexar is very good for street shooting because it has an auto mode for situations in which you may not have time to set exposure (or at least set it very accurately). it also has convenient compensation settings. off the tripod, the 35mm and 90mm will yield phenomenal results. i think the outfit i have proposed will suit your needs very nicely.

[mediumformat]

I'd also vote for any of the quality TLRs. Once you get accustomed to shooting at waist level on a large ground glass screen, you may start to use your F3 less and less. I found that after 6 months of using a TLR for all types of shooting (landscape on tripod, street, portraits), I find looking through tiny eye level viewfinders to be a hassle.

 

Most people either fall in love with TLRs or just never get comfortable with them, so only you can find that out. The price is right, the quality is amazing, and you will probably find that you become a better photographer because of a new way of "seeing" images, new techniques, and more time spent looking at your subjects rather than looking into a tiny viewfinder with a bunch of LEDs.

 

Enjoy the search.

[art_haykin]

Among 3 of many great street photographers, Weegee used a 4x5 Speed Graphic, Henri Cartier-Bresson a RF Leica, and DianeArbus a square format 120, often with flash, even in daylight.Personally, I prefer a good 35mm with a FAST lens.

[godfrey]

This topic has come up several times on the streetphotography

mailing list. Several folks on that list are using Rolleiflexes,

because they are quiet and unobtrusive in operation. I agree with

that principle as well.

 

However, for reasons of wanting exposure automation, a bit

more of an eye-level viewpoint and the benefit of modern lenses,

I recently acquired a Fuji GA645. I'm finding it a remarkable

picture taker: zone focused and set on Aperture Priority

automation, it is very very quiet in snapping the image and

makes just a little noise in winding on to the next frame

automatically. The lens is superb and the negatives show it.

 

I had at one time a Mamiya 1000S with eye-level prism. I never

found that to be a useful for street work as either the Fuji or the

Rolleiflex ... medium format SLRs, even 645s, just feel bulky and

slow operating to me, make a lot of noise. It's hard to be

unobtrusive with them.

 

I suspect that the Bronica RF645 might actually be a little better

than the Fuji GA645 for this effort as it does not have motorized

film transport and would allow you to choose between 45mm

and 65mm lenses while carrying a single body. The optical RF

is very confidence inspiring (although I find that focusing the Fuji

by zone and/or using the AF is just as accurate).

 

Medium format has shallower DoF than 35mm so moving to MF

for street work will change the way you work a bit. You have to

become more precise about your focusing and aperture

selection. The benefits are the beautiful tonal gradations and

image quality possible with the larger negative and pushing the

focal plane separation though DoF ... It's very seductive. :-)

 

Godfrey

[stephen_poe]

In my case I find that I am very comfortable with a Mamiya C330 - although the 80 and 105 are not my favorite lenses, I use them because of the DOF (135 is my all-round favorite). One thing that helps a lot is the use of the standard (simple, no cable release) version of the Mamiya "L" grip. Makes the camera much easier to hold and steadier. I like the Mamiya because you can use 220 film (less time out for film changing on the street - a sort of vulnerable moment), and folks seem to take much less notice/objection to the waist level stance of a TLR - and if you need more accurate focusing it is easy to flip up the auxillary lens. And it is quiet, and the one I use on the street is sort of old and funky looking - also a plus in case someone decides they really don't like me. And I guess that with the L grip it would make a pretty good defensive weapon as well (but never had to yet).

[pete_su]

Mamiya 6 rangefinder.

[vartan_grigorian1]

My attempts to use a Plaubel Makina 67 for casual photography have been only moderately sucessful. Although the lens (80mm f2.8)is reasonably fast by MF standards, depth of field wide open is obviously shallow. Shutter speeds less than 1/125 result in noticeably reduced sharpness although 1/60 s is just about okay if you're careful. Using 400 ISO film is usually preferable (not helped by UK weather admittedly). The point is that if you want to use MF, I would suggest sticking to 645 with shorter focal length lenses. Avoid old folders like the plague unless you just enjoy using old cameras. I don't get along with TLR's for handheld use, but they are an inexpensive way of trying out the idea (and you may like it).

 

Roger's suggestion to use a 35mm rangefinder is a perfectly reasonable (though expensive if you go down the Leica lens route, probably even more than MF)idea, but the F3 with prime, top of the line Nikkors is going to be close in quality (as you have already implied). I do think that a MF rangefinder can offer a more useful edge in terms of smoother gradation if not in sharpness (less crucial with the lower degree of enlargement)even when handheld in good light. In the right conditions it will deliver good 11x14's where 35 mm is stretched right to the limit. It is nowhere near as capable as 35mm in available light situations however. Note that the current MF RF cameras all seem to have f4 or slower lenses. I have considered the Bronica 645 (despite the long lens focussing problem), although I don't really want to sell my Plaubel for the moment. I did'nt really warm to the Mamiya 7 although the lenses are reputedly excellent. Don't dismiss it however. I have'nt looked at the Fuji 645 AF models but that may be another option. I did like the Pentax 645N that I handled, but I don't think its a good choice for this application.