MF/35mm quandry, opinions welcome

[marke_gilbert]

This may ramble, so I thank you in advance...

<P> Awhile ago, I decided to try medium format, and was completely

won over with it. In the past year or so, partially through dumb

luck, partially through my own obsessive/twisted frugality, I have

managed to put together a pretty extensive Hasselblad system at

literally almost no cost. (Buying large kits, and selling pieces

off, to pay for the entire purchase).

<p> Ive managed to amass a couple bodies, 60CF,80CF,150CF lenses, a

903swc, bellows, and backs. Even found a Nikon 8000LS refurb scanner

for a song.

<P>Ive found myself grabbing the MF gear anytime Im thinking the

shot is important, and only using the 35mm gear for snapshot type

stuff.

<P>Im thinking of selling off some of my 35mm gear to pick up a

Hasselblad 30mm, but I just cant seem to shake the "But what if I

need it/ just in case" mentality.

<P> As it stands, I have an EOS 1VHs, 16-35L, 50 1.4, 100 macro, and

135mm f2L and a contax G2 kit-- 2 bodies, 21,28,35,45,90, and the 35-

70.-- Since I started medium format, the G2's have gotten more use

that the EOS system, and when Ive used the EOS, its primarily

becuase of the fill flash capability.

<P>My work has shifted more and more away from street/candid type

shots, and more to slower paced shooting..BUT I have also booked a

couple weddings for this summer.

<P>Anybody made the jump to a primarily MF system, and not looked

back? Or made the jump and run into issues that made you regret it?

<P>Ive already tried the digital thing, and just dont like the

grainless look.

<P>Any opinions welcome.

<P>Thanks

[LenMarriott]

Marke, I'm somewhat in the same boat. I have a Bronica SQ Ai system that I purchased new to do weddings, which I have ceased doing for a number of reasons, and so am now stuck with the system because the bottom has fallen out of the used camera market & I won't take the loss. (I believe this qualifies as a true 'White Elephant':) I also have a Minolta MD system which I find I use more because it is easier to tote around and more versitile for the type of hobbiest photography I now do. My suggestion would be to take some masking tape or attach a dated tag to each piece of equipment you own, remove the tag if you use it, and after 6 months or a year (you pick a time) sell all the stuff that still has tags on it. With two Hasselblad bodies & an assortment of lenses & flashes you are loaded for bear( for the wedding work). Good luck. Best, LM.

[calvin_lee]

Mark,

 

I, too, tend to use larger film formats when taking pictures of things or people that I will want to make enlargements from. I used to have over $12,000 dollars worth of Canon EOS & Contax C/Y & N 35mm SLR equipment, in addition to my Hasselblad 503CW & Rolleiflex 2.8F medium format, & Tachihara large format equipment. I have since sold off all of the Canon & Contax equipment on eb*y and now use an Olympus E-1 digital SLR for most of the things that I used to use the 35mm gear for.

 

But that is not to say that I am now completely devoid of any 35mm equipment. I kept a Mamiya NC1000 camera with 50mm f/1.4, 28mm f/2.8, 35mm f/2.8, 135mm f/2.8, & 200mm f/4 CS lenses for those times when I want to shoot slides or TMAX. All in mint condition. And all of that 35mm gear is only worth about $275, so I am not really hurting my pocketbook much by keeping it. Bottom line is that if you are not really using your 35mm gear much these days, it is probably better to sell most of it off now, while you can still get a better return on them. I have a feeling that the values of high-end 35mm gear will only continue to drop over the next couple of years.

[chris_markiewicz]

Marke - if I can ask you a quick question. I am now where you once were - I have only 35mm gear and am seriously looking at trying mf. I'm curious to know why you were completely won over by it. Please share you experiences and observations.

thanks for your time.

chris

[larry_menzin]

I did pretty much the same, but probably spent more than you did. The catalyst for me was finding a cheap 16MP digital back and then buying Hasselblad gear to use it with.

 

What I decided to do was pare down my 35mm collection to keep a "lifeline" configuration for 35mm shooting. There are some occasions where using the 35mm is more convenient (I use my 553ELX only on a tripod). My final configuration will be a 35mm body (digital) and about four lenses.

[frank_philcox1]

If you are able to get a reasonable sum for the EOS stuff - sell it. If not keep it. Your EOS line up is nice and it is not a duplicate of your G2 - SLR v. rangefinder - each have their own place. Bottom line: keep the EOS - when you get older you may want to get a whopping telephoto to shoot birds - can't do that with a Blad or a G2.

[charles_lipton]

Can I have first dibs on the 16-35mm and 135mm Lenses? Oh, and maybe even the 50mm f1.4....hehehe

 

Thanks.

Chuck..

[silvereye]

Interesting....

I shoot both formats and for differing reasons. I recently bought a Contax 645 outfit for landscape and book work, as well as formal portraiture. Personally I would keep them both, and make what you have work for you. Here's why... They are both different and each dictates a different approach to the subject. 35 encourages a spontaneous approach to the subject and has immediacy; MF encourages a more deliberate approach, and suits those times when the statemant you want to make is more formal one. I began my wedding career shooting on a Bronica GS-1 and later switched to 35mm.

My clients do not want to sit around while I fiddle with the gear- they are looking for a documentary approach, and they want me to fit seamlessly into their day( check my website www.silvereye.co.nz if you want). for that reason 35 rocks!

If I want to produce a contemplative landscape with beautiful tonalities and exquisite detail, the 645 rules( LF would be even nicer!). it is a format that encourages this kind of deliberate approach.

A further thought... you have some of the(if not the) best 35mm gear in the world; think of the $$$ dive you are going to take selling it! Think of the pain of having to replace it. If the processing bills are killing you, get a 10D and have fun!

and what are you going to do if that wedding client wants it shot doco-style on 35? You're really screwed then!

[david_henderson]

I've shot less than 100 frames with 35mm since I first turned to 6x6 early in 1997. I gave my old Eos system - dating from '92- to one of my daughters who occasionally uses it.

 

But you know this question will relate to the sort of photography you do not just whether MF photography really grabs at you. I don't do street, portraits, weddings, family shots (my wife does enough of those for all of us). Virtually all the photography I do is at least as well suited to MF as to 35mm. Budget matters too- like a lot of people I sometimes have to carry a system further than I'd like, operate without a tripod, and so on. As an alternative to reverting to 35mm I've elected to use a MF rangefinder for these needs- and of course that gives me access to large rectangles and panoramics too, at a cost.

 

I can't recall missing 35mm at all- though I probably find close up work more of an issue with MF.

[red_buckner]

Marke, I can't think of a worse time to sell 35mm equipment than now. Hold onto your stuff until the market settles down. You would have to sell it at stomach-turning losses.

[erik scanhancer]

Marke,

 

It depends on what purpose your photography has to serve.

When looking at my own situation: I use 35mm for those

customers where MF would be overkill. Some want me to do

cheap, garbage-style pics for fast and single time use. So they

can have it. It's a matter of economics. I might even be willing to

go digital for those, if they were willing to pay for the extra cost of

extreme devaluation of the chipcams. (At the moment I have my

films scanned & corrected on a Noritsu minilab and put to disc,

which is a method loved by my 35mm clients: faster, cheaper

and mostly even better than the chipcam - Photoshop route.)

 

For my personal photography I never even consider 35mm

anymore. MF is small enough already. Demanding customers

will always be served with MF too, of course.

 

So you should wonder: do I have (or forsee) customers who will

need 35mm junk pics, or can I just follow my heart's desire

because I do not depend on anyone else for my photography

choices? If the latter is the case you might consider dumping

your 35mm gear. And as another writer mentioned: get a

rangefinder MF camera for what used to be your typical 35mm

shooting scope.

[marke_gilbert]

Red, Etc.. Im not at all concerned about the resale of the 35mm-- I acquired it in the same fashion as the Hasselblad stuff- like I said, obsessive frugality. There is no way I would take a loss.

<P>Chris,

<P> The first chrome I scanned in MF at 4000dpi, and put into photoshop stunned me-- I kept having to increase, and increase the magnification to get to the point I was used to working at with 35mm--there is no comparing the tonality to 35mm.

[david_m]

To read this thread you would think 35mm is all but dead and 35mm cameras worthless! Yes, medium format is great and gives better quality but with 35mm you can get 36 shots on a roll and many more with bulk backs. And you have motor drives and a host of other equipment that is only available for MF at enormous cost. Shift lenses or zooms for 35mm for example cost a lot less than for MF. 35mm is much less expensive and much more versatile. I wont be selling my Pentax MX's or Nikon F's now or maybe ever.

[maylon_roberts]

I sold my EOS 1 system to help pay for my RZ67 lineup (RZ67, 2 backs, 3 lenses...) Afterwards, I missed the ability to get things developed cheaply and quickly with my 35mm so i ended up buying a good used manual-focus Nikon system (F3HP + 28mm, 50mm, 135mm) for around $500. So now I have both 6x7 and 35mm and am happy with it. Everyone should have both.

[hugh_sakols]

I've slowly moved to exclusively 6x6 for landscape and nature photography so that I can get incredible projections and to make larger prints (12x12 and 12x18). I must admit that I really miss using my Nikon F100 as a landscape set-up. I worked just as slowly composing with the 35mm but bracketed a lot more. If I get to the point that I'm sure that I won't be printing over 8x12, I'll go back to 35mm. I'm certainly not going to get rid of my 35mm set-up.

[audun_sjoeseth1]

In 2002 I sold my Nikon and some lenses to get a new 501CM-kit. Happy!

 

In 2003 I bought a large Hasselblad kit, and sold what I didn't need. Happy!

 

But gradually I missed 135 for some purpose (and also plan to go digital with Canon), so i bougt an EF200/2.8L tele, EF1.4xII converter, EOS-1N and a EF35/2. (sold some more in 6x6). I kept (and will keep) a small 6x6-kit with CF-FLE50/4 and CFi100mm/3.5, prism, tubes etc (plan to get a 1.4XE for the 100mm). Happy!