Anyone still put a TLR in the camera bag?

[terry_rory]

Does anyone still use a TLR for any part of a wedding shoot?

And if not, does any use a 6x6 with just one 'normal', prime lens

only (80mm or therabouts) for any part of a wedding shoot?

 

It strikes me that having had a few years experience of using TLRs

(Rolleicord VBs and a Yashica 124G) it may be nice to slip a loaded

TLR and a couple of spare rolls of Portra 400 NC in the bag to

supplement the days output. They are relatively compact and easy to

use and I am OK at incident light reading. With a decent 400 film -

with bags of latitude - in a good Rolleiflex 2.8f or 3.5f and the

ability to synch flash at any speed.... well, you all know what I

mean.

 

It wasn't that many decades ago (at least here in England) that the

wedding photographer would turn up with 1 TLR, 1 meter (maybe), 1

flash and 1 tripod. I have seen many (older) albums where it is

evident that little more than 1 roll was used! However, the quality

of the pics often just jumps off the page or the wall.

 

Someone on another thread said something that reminded me of how

nice the square format was to work with when I had my Rolleicords.

 

Has anyone here ever done a wedding or social event ONLY in 6x6 or

even just with a TLR?

 

Thanks.

[terry_rory]

Don't worry, I am not planning on some 'back to basics', minimilist, 1950s wedding photographer 're-enactment' service.

 

But if anyone was that 1950s photographer with one TLR and all B&W film, I would love to hear about it.

[al_kaplan1]

Back in the 60's and 70's I shot hundreds of weddings with a Minolta Autocord and then a Rolleiflex, and you're right, everybody used to just carry one camera and one flash! After I bought a Hasselblad 500-C I still carried a TLR as back-up and for use when the loud THWAP!!! of the 'blad would be distracting like during available light shots on a tripod during the ceremony.

 

Back in those ancient times nobody much worried about the shadow from a side mounted flash on a bracket, the flash had enough power to shoot at f/8 or f/11 at 10 feet with film speeds of 100 or less, and we mostly just used the open frame sportsfinder in the hood, guess focussing and setting the distance on the focussing knob. You learned to avoid cutting off heads, and the exposures were often more consistant than any auto flash will give you today. What set you apart from the amateur shooters was that big ol' medium format rig and the power pack from your flash hanging off your shoulder. A complete wedding was generally about 8 to 10 rolls (96 to 120 frames). A big advantage of a TLR or rangefinder camera is that you actually can see the picture while the shutter is exposing the film, unlike the mirror blackout with an SLR. You got pretty good at seeing closed eyes or strange expressions when the flash went off so you knew when another frame needed to be exposed, and there was less need to shoot a bunch of film "just to be safe".

 

If you're shooting film, and there's still a lab around you that does a good job with 120 film, then it would be worthwhile to consider using it for the posed formal shots where a 16x20 or larger print sale might be a possibility.

[al_kaplan1]

Hey Trevor, when I first got into it some of the "old timers" were still buying cases of flash bulbs and shooting 4x5 film in a Crown Graphic or Busch Pressman! Other "more modern" types had scaled back to 2.25x3.25 Century Graphics with a knob wind 8 exposure 120 back.

[terry_rory]

There is a local lab that does excellent 120 work on C41, E6 and B&W and do a lot of work for local pros. I used them when I had my last Rolleicord a couple of years ago and got some very nice 8"x8" and 12"x12" prints from them. (The CD scans were very good and in TIFF format but only about 1800x1800 pixels. Good enough for 'proofing' purposes or small prints.)

[terry_rory]

Hmmm. Maybe I will get a 1950s style suit cut for me and invest in a Fedora hat! (to shade the viewfinder you understand) And actually offer the 'retro' type service!

 

Maybe turn up in a 1950s car? Charge people in Guineas rather than GB pounds? (A Guinea was 21 shillings rather than the 20 shillings in a pound and only 'posh' items or services were charged in Guineas. Sort of archaic but true up until GB currency decimilisation in 1970)

[fotografz]

Yes, Trevor, I've exercised a "Back to the Future" notion by shooting with a Hasselblad or a

Mamiya 7II. Sorry, not quite a TLR, but 6X6 using film which you mentioned also.

 

I went back because I hate computer processing all the redundant shots like the

procession, and endless family groupings which rarely make the album. I just shoot those

on MF film and dump them off at the lab for proofs.

 

In the process, I came to rekindle the love of the look you get with the 6X6 neg even when

scanned. I just bought another 503CW body for back-up, so I guess I'm committed to this

approach. Next thing you know, I'll be back in my darkroom ; -)

 

A 'Blad and 80/2.8 works really well for most shots like the processionals and full length

or waist up portraits.

[bill_clark___minnetonka_mi]

Yes I carry a Rolleiflex as a security blanket. It will work if all else fails! I will take it out, time permitting, just to get some grins from people at a wedding. But then when they see the images they love them! My wife says the camera is a chick magnet as I'm always having young ladies talk to me whenever I use it. I say to her, not to worry it's the camera not me!

 

Back in the late 60's when I was doing my undergraduate work I used a Graflex 4/5 for photography I did for the College. I even did sports photography with it. Get excited at a game and forget to put the dark slide back into the frame every once in a while.

 

The Rolleiflex I carry was built in 1951. Flash ahead 54 years and think what cameras today will still be working and used in 2059? Oh well, I won't be around to find out!

 

I like the TLR's but today folks want a different type of photography that is quite difficult to accomplish if I used a Rollei as my main camera. Wonderful mechanical devices!

[bill_clark___minnetonka_mi]

Al,

 

I had to lick the metal end of the flashbulb for the Graflex to ensure it would fire!

[andrew_kendall]

Last year I did my brother-in-law's wedding with a Mamiya C330f, only the second wedding I've done. For weeks beforehand not only did I scour ebay to get a few accessories, like a prism finder and wide angle lens, but I rehearsed procedures like it was military training! The C330 has got so many little mechanisms and so much potential for getting locked up and you standing there thinking: 'why won't the shutter click?'

 

On the day things went well, and of course the shutter is very quiet, although wind-on is noisier. Undoubtedly the huge beast had presence - it still looks pretty professional. Later everyone was impressed with the 8" square prints, including me.

 

Flushed with success, my wife allowed me to buy a Bronica SQ, which was nice but clunkier. Thing is, I've got my third wedding to shoot in May, and I've done a complete about turn, sold the TLR and splashed out on a Nikon D70, partly for it's techno-wizardry and high flash sync (1/500th), but also to exclude the risk of a lab losing my images. But I wish somebody would make an affordable square format DSLR, then you wouldn't have to reorient the camera/flash position, a problem exacerbated if you use a tripod.

[picturesque]

Until 2002, I shot all my weddings with a Mamiya C330f system. Then I switched to Hasselblad. Most supplemented by 35mm for PJ stuff but some just with the TLR. I had all the lenses for the Mamiya except the 250mm because it was all so cheap compared to everything else. You'd be surprised how much PJ style can be gotten with the TLR/medium format. Just takes a little more effort and anticipating the moment. The great thing about a TLR is that you see the flash going off (or not going off), more blinks than you see with an SLR, plus there is no shutter/focus/whatever lag at all. Many weddings in the "olden days" were photographed with the 80mm only--entirely possible, but I used my 55mm wide angle a lot. No reason why you couldn't use it during a wedding, especially for formals and portraits.

[pavelp]

Just this coming weekend I will be shooting a convention. I will use 35mm AF-SLR for the main camera (coward, I know) but I will have my C330s with me for group portraits (most likely using 105mm/3.5DS lens (unless I need something more wideanglish).

 

I was never happy with the resolution of 35mm for group portraits (not enough detail in faces) and 6x6 negative is a huge improvement. Also, the retro look of the camera attracts attention and people smile more.

 

I used C330s for candids before (usually with Baier 45deg prism and 80mm/f2.8S lens) and it's not really anymore difficult than using manual focus SLR (if you are familiar with incident light reading).

 

On a side note, consider printing selected pictures in square format and also some sepia toned. It can be a good spice-up in the collection (especially if you can select some pictures that look "timeless").

[todd frederick]

Until only a few years ago, I regularly used two Mamiya TLR's at weddings, mainly for formals, often with a prism finder. I used 35mm for receptions. Digital has changed that for me now, however I still have a very nice Yashica 124 with the sharp Yashinon lens, and would not hesitate to use it if needed. Fast film loading is much easier with the Mamiya, however. I like the square format and the ability to get an easy low angle with a TLR. Very quiet also.

[andy m.]

Only last year at a friend's wedding in Wales, the photographer used a Mamiya 330 TLR on a tripod and nothing else, save for a handheld Sunpak hammerhead flash for fill-in and a rather large creative filter set (he did have one backup body).

 

I couldn't fault the album (all colour print shots) for image quality or for the nice formal portraits and group shots that he captured- maybe 20 images. In the U.K. the >100 image photojournalist style isn't the only game in town it seems ;-)

 

BTW, no one blinked an eye or even realized that the photog's approach was maybe a little old fashioned (by some standards).

 

The TLR approach is probably best suited to formal shots. I would be much happier with 35mm (or digital) for the quick-fire approach. After all, I would not relish changing film every 12 shots if shooting over 100 frames under pressure. I would class covering a wedding as a pressure situation.

[picturesque]

Andy--it's true you can't shoot PJ style as easily with a TLR, but you can, with a little effort and good anticipation and zone focusing skills. With the later Mamiya TLRs, you have the option of 24 shots or 220 film. As for changing film, you get used to it and get very fast at it. It's simpler than changing film in a Hasselblad back, for instance. I used to average 10-15 rolls of 220 film per wedding (also shot 35mm as well).

[johnmarkpainter]

Trevor,

 

My Rollei is considerably quieter than my Leicas. I put it on a Tripod and shoot side-stage

with it whilst shooting Wider and Longer with 35mm or Digi.

 

Hasselblad SWC is fun as well (and quiet).

[matt_needham]

I mainly use a Hasselblad 500c/m teamed up with a couple of 35mm SLRs for most of my weddings, but I carry a Rolleiflex 3.5E planar as a back up medium format camera. I occasionally use it for group shots and at the reception; the only thing holding me back is that I prefer something with a lens a bit longer (like 150mm) at weddings.

 

Sometimes I break out my Norita 6x6 SLR for low light/no flash weddings; it's standard 80mm lens is f/2 and is as sharp as the Zeiss 80mm planar on the Hassy.

[matt_needham]

I also just remembered that I have a wedding in October with a vintage theme, and I told them I could do it with vintage cameras (I was thinking of the Rollei) if they would like.

[patrick_lockwood]

I used to bring one, but the C330 is manual focusing, and I don't trust my eyes anymore, so I got a Fuji GA 645 Zi.

 

 

I still have the TLR rig, with 2 blacks, one chrome, if anyone is interested. I used it for only the formals.

 

In this day and age of candid style shooting, I don't think the TLR is very practical, though I'm sure it could be done. In low light, you would have to bring a video light for focusing, though.

 

 

Patrick

[rich_deferrari1]

I never went anywhere without a c330 in my bag and a blad in hand . And -another blad in the trunk. They are great cameras -workhorses. Capable of great enlargements. I shot many a side by side comparison under controlled testing/studio conditions when I was a technical photographic specialist. In an 8x10 -I defy anyone to tell the difference between blad and c330 under AVERAGE conditions. {no strong flare/backlighting,wide open or shut down. I have shot over 1500 weddings -split between blad and c330. That is about all I have ever used {Kowa super 66/Bronica S2a a bit} Relax -a 21/4 with 80 is all many folks need to shoot a wedding and cover it adequately. Best regards -RichD