Guide me to the right format

[ben -- new york]

I'm an avid amateur/sometimes freelancer working in 35mm and finally ready, fiscally and mentally, to

upgrade to MF. I long dreamed of MF, then got excited about a D2X, then realized that what I wanted was

image quality, not 8 FPS of digital, and redirected back to MF.

 

I've read all the comparisons between the different cameras that I'm interested in.

 

What I could use is some expert advice to help me move from the general, universally applicable, but

essentially mediocre 35mm to the realm of big negatives and help me figure out what types of cameras I

should consider for what I do.

 

I shoot mostly people- street and editorial, and little fashion which i want to do more of, and very rarely,

nudes. Im not a big landscape guy although I want a platform that will be acceptable at making a nice

landscape picture. This is lowest on my list, however.

 

Immediately I was drawn to the versatility of the Mamiya645 AF (and its sleek ad campaigns- im a

designer by trade..) I like the faster lens options, the AF, the ability to go from polaroid to film to digital if

(I ever win the lotto). I also like the compact lines of the Mamiya 7 and the huge negative, although the

lenses seem to be worshipped, they are expensive, rangefinder seems to be more of a hassle, and there

are less options (no multiple backs, etc) Ive also heard tons about the Hassy's and the classic rollieflexes..

 

So the question is, what TYPE of camera system would best suit me? is 6x4.5 the best for someone who

likes to shoot people (people who may or may not be moving)? Can that sort of thing be done with a 6x7

like the pentax or the Mamiya 7, etc? or should I look at something else?

 

Thanks for your advice and feedback.

 

Best,

Ben

[dougmiles]

Ben, you might look more closely at the MF rangefinder options. Certainly there're limitations in lens selection, lens speed, macro, etc that are the province of the SLR. I have 4 Pentax 67 cameras, obviously love the system, but this is not the camera for street photos or environmental portraits (except with a more formal approach). Rather conspicuous.

 

I've been doing a "people at work" kind of environmental portrait project for a few years, and have found the Bronica RF645 and the various Fuji 645's pretty close to ideal. The Fuji zoom model's lens is too slow I think, and I've not tried their older folder, but in general this group is small and light enough to carry as you might a 35mm rig, fast into action for spontaneous shots. The f/4 lenses are ok if you go with Fuji 800 ISO film, which is really a decent tradeoff for this purpose with lovely results.

 

I tend to go back and forth with the Bronica and the Fuji GA645Wi, the latter being auto/motor AF/AE everything but focuses closer and has built-in framelines with parallax correction for its 45mm wide angle lens. The Bronica of course has interchangeable lenses, is maybe the best 645 RF cam ever made, very solidly built, and has a nice crisp rangefinder. Inconsipicuous to carry about too, over a shoulder.

 

Something to ponder, hopefull. Good luck!

[nolan_ross]

Difficult questions to examine and to deal with. Since you were thinking of the D2X it sounds that you have the means to purchase something very nice, but still why jump into something with a lot of money when you have not tested the waters. You did not say if you were going to develop the film yourself, or have the lab go straight to prints or scan the negatives and then make prints or photographs from the scans. Those are all important pieces of the MF world. I think the best format to start with is the 6x4.5 because it fits the normal picture sizes the best. If scanning you wind up with a smaller scan size in which to work with in photoshop. Large scans of 20MB to 100MB+ take a good computer to process the workload. Lab service for you MF negs is important and hopefully there are a few options available to you in your area.

I think that you should first re-think the D2X or D200. Camera's of this type are the future of imaging. They are more versatile than a medium format and are capable of great image quality. But if you are going to proceed with the medium format then I would find a place to check out a Mamiya 645AF and the Pentax 645N. Either of those two camera's would work well for you in getting started in the Medium Format world. The 645 is an excellent negative size, capable of making brilliant photographs from small to pretty large in size. Also when shooting this image size you get a few extra shots on a roll of 120 or 220 film over the 6x7 image size. One last note and that is the Mamiya 7II is a rangefinder. Close up photography and the use of filters is a problem with this camera. The lenses I believe are f4 and I always have found a lens of f2.8 is better to use. The two camera's that I mentioned would be a better choice.

Both companies are still in business but who knows for how long. I don't keep tabs on who is going out of business next but medium format is fading away and so are the companies that make them.

I use the Mamiya 645 Pro TL and love it. It is a manual focus camera, it is bulky and heavy but it does what I need and that is mostly scenics and family/friends portraits. I use it on a tripod but you can hold it like a giant 35mm camera. Image quality is much nicer than my 35mm camera's. It makes the bulk and slowness of the camera worth it. Either camera would be a lot of fun to have and use and I am sure you will learn to make fantastic images with your new camera. Good Luck.

[peter_evans4]

<p><em>I shoot mostly people- street and editorial, and little fashion which i want to do more of, and very rarely, nudes.</em></p><p>I suggest that you keep using 35mm for the first of these if "street" means what I think it means and unless/until you have a very good reason not to use 35mm. Remember that "essentially mediocre 35mm" has been good enough for Cartier-Bresson, Erwitt, etc. (and that film emulsions have improved): of course some people are less than enthralled by their work but I don't think I've ever heard "If only the <em>resolution</em> were better!" (or similar).</p><p>Most people's success rate in "street" photography is low, and even if your bank balance allows you to keep feeding film to a 6x7 (or above), you shouldn't rely on 220 being around for much longer and you won't want the bother of feeding 120 to such a camera. Also, the bigger the frame, the longer the lens; the longer the lens, the shallower the depth of field; and the shallower the depth of field, the higher the failure rate is likely to be.</p>

[jean-louis llech]

Ben,<br>

welcome to the "medium format club", its distressed members and one of the main eternal questions which is the suject of your post : which format for me ?<p>

 

The first question you will have to ask is : square or rectangular ?<br>

If you decide that square format is not for you, it will be a "giant leap" for you. (maybe not the best one, IMO). But framing and composing in square format is totally different from the usual rectangular two-thirds composition. In square format, you have a "circular" approach, close to the lenses image <u>circle</u> sight. Changing from 2:3 - 24x36 to 2:3 - 6x9, or to 4�x6 or 6x7 is in my opinion less difficult that changing from 24x36 to 6x6.<p>

 

Second, the camera viewing system. Three are available : single lens reflex (SLR), twin-lens reflex (TLR) and rangefinder (RF).<br>

- Single lens reflex and twin lens reflex are very close. The main difference (out of the number of lenses :>)) is the mirror. A SLR, like a 35mm, has a hinged mirror, but of course a larger one. And you will have sometimes to use the mirror lock-up (MLU) function, to avoid shakes. As a handheld 3 kg camera is sometimes difficult to use at low speeds, some MF SLR are at their best on a sturdy tripod.<p>

 

- Twin lens reflex are much lighter, ever-ready, and easy to use. But all are in square format, and if we except the Mamiya C330, all have a fixed lens. A VERY expensive solution, almost a joke, would be 3 TLR : one 50mm wide angle, one 80mm normal and one 150mm tele lens. This solution exists by Rolleiflex, but is very very expensive.<br>

Sighting through a focusing hood "by the top" is completely different. It is close to the contemplative philosophy of groundglass composition with large format cameras. No more 12 fps, no automatic bracketing, no 6x36 frames a day. But you will learn patience, concentration and image composition.<br>

It is more discrete and much less "aggressive" than "aiming and firing" with a SLR and a prism. It allows a better and easier image composition, insofar as a 6x6 focusing screen offers a very large field.<br>

A rectangular 4�x6, 6x7 or 6x9 SLR is quite awkward to use in "portrait" position. The viewing hood must be turned sideways, which is totally unpractical. Thus, you have to use either a prism (which is heavy and expensive if equipped with a TTL light metering system), or, like on Mamiya RB/RZ, an excellent revolving back, but which contributes to the weight and bulkyness of the camera.<br>

That is an important advantage of square format SLRs and TLRs.<p>

 

- With rangefinders, a majority of the MF SLR problems disappear : much less weight, easy to use handheld, and several <u>great</u> lenses.<br>

The counterpart is rangefinder viewing and composing, sometimes difficult for some photographers. With many RF cameras and lenses, you will often have a part of the lens in the sight. No interchangeable backs, and a relatively limited range of lenses, even if some of them are great ones. Forget long focal lengths, (in 6x7 over 150mm), and close photography, which is rather limited with RF cameras.<br>

But with wide angle, normal and short tele lenses, if you can accept a non-TTL sight, and a sometimes inaccurate light metering system (because non-TTL), the RF cameras are second to none for street photography. The best IMO is the Mamiya 7 II, with fabulous lenses, like the 43mm.<br>

To counterbalance the lack of removable magazines, some photographers use to have two cameras, one loaded in BW, the second with color film, or 2 BW or color films with different sensibilities. Forget Polaroid backs, because even if the system exists ($1100 NPC Polaroid "Proback"), it needs a dedicated camera, as the back is not easily removeable.<p>

 

Now, about versatility : no camera is totally multi-purpose. I have been using all formats from 35mm to 4x5" for several years. Changing from 135 to 4�x6 is quite easy, as 645 cameras are relatively lightweight, and can be handeld as a beefed-up 24x36 camera. (Don't forget that a prism is quite obligatory).<br>

But, my deepest regret is the small difference of size between them : negative size is only 2.7 times larger than 35mm.<p>

 

While using a medium format camera with 120/220 negatives, if you decide to use rectangular format, why not having the largest (non-panoramic) format like 6x9 ? I use this format on a LF camera, and the negatives are impressive, IMO much more than the 6x7 format. I belong to this minority of photographers who don't like the so-called "ideal format", as the 6x7 was nicknamed. Too square for me. Of course, it's only a personal opinion, and I prefer either 6x6 or 6x9.<p>

 

If you like street photography, several systems may be excluded, because they are bulky, or very heavy : Mamiya RB/RZ, Fuji GX 680, and to a lesser extent, Pentax 6x7.<br>

But these systems are among the best ones for studio, portrait and nudes photography. "No camera is totally multi-purpose".<br>

 

If you agree to take the square format into account, several systems are available. Hasselblad 500s, Rollei 6000s or SL66, Bronica 6x6 and of course the twin lens reflex, Rolleiflex and Mamiya 330 (the only TLR with interchangeable lenses).<br>

I will not tell you : "buy THIS model". Each photographer has <u>his</u> camera, the one I prefer is the one that you will hate. I prefer to give you some elements of reflexion, a kind of methodology to approach the problem of choice.<br>

A last suggestion : if you can, try several cameras, make some photos with them. If you are interested by two or three of them, try to rent them for an afternoon or a couple of days. You will very rapidly understand if a camera is made for you. Just before, download and read the users manuals of the cameras which interest you, read them, study them, you will also quickly understand their advantages and drawbacks.<br>

Hope this helps.

[troyammons]

You really need to rent a few cameras. MF cameras are all drastically different but.........

 

> I shoot mostly people- street and editorial,

 

Rnagefinder. Fuji 645 with AF and AE. If you have more time to focus and more $ for the system and want more rez, a mamiya 7

 

and little fashion which i want to do more of, and very rarely, nudes.

 

SLR camera. Probably 90% of the pros are either using a pentax 67II or a Mamiya RZ67. A mamiya 645 or a pentax 645nII would be nice for AF but a smaller neg.

 

Im not a big landscape guy although I want a platform that will be acceptable at making a nice landscape picture. This is lowest on my list, however.

 

Mamiya 7 or one of the big 690 Fujis.

[chuck_pere]

Also unless you are doing traditional wet darkroom you will need to figure out how to get prints made. Medium format scanning options for best image quality are all expensive. And if you don't do your best here you may as well stick with a very good digital camera. It may give as good image quality as medium format film and a cheap scanner. And with a lot less trouble.

[paul_neuthaler]

Ben, get yourself a clean Hasselblad 500CM, an acute-matte screen, an 80mm 1:2.8 Planar, a 220 back & a sunshade & be creative -- you can crop almost any size & have the finest resolution & fabulous versatility IMHO!<div></div>

[paul_neuthaler]

. . .& keep on doing it!

[zml]

No matter which system you pick, if you go for pro-caliber stuff it is going to add up to some serious $$$ so get your feet wet first and rent a few systems for a wekend or two and play with various options. Chances are that 4.5x6 will look smallish - in more than one way - when compared to 6x7.

 

And "for now" get a low-end Rolleiflex TLR. Or a cheap TLR (Mamiya C330 - they go for peanuts now) and get a feel of MF film. Then make an investment in a high/higher-end system.

[pico_digoliardi]

I consider the 645 format "Half-Frame MF" and except for a tiny Super Ikonta folder I keep in the car, I have no use for the format.

 

David Vestal wrote decades ago, "You can crop the square anywhere". He's right, of course.

 

If your intention is to make the leap beyond full-frame DSLRs, then 645 is not it. You have to go larger to be certain.

 

Remember that Hasselblad has a 645 back if you really want that format from time-to-time, although it is a horizontal, not vertical for the 'blad. (Say, if you come about the 645 back that Hasselblad made in the vertical format, let us know. It is rare because it was strange in that it limited one to 12 exposures.)

[troyammons]

I agree with above on scanners. If you use an Epson scanner its almost like dropping a format depending on how sharp your lenses are. A nikon 8000 or 9000 should do the trick.

[paulhu54]

I have both the Mamiya 645AF, 645AFD, and the Hasselblad 503CW. I prefer to use the Mamiya AF due to the automatic metering and auto focus when shooting people and things that are moving. When I shoot nature and landscape, and things that are static, then I use my Hasselblad 50CW(everything manual). This is just a personal choice. If you are doing assignment work that requires quick action and re-action on your part, such as photo journalism, then 35mm SLR or 35mm DSLR AF is much faster than MF AF.

[erik scanhancer]

Ben,

 

You have already gotten some very good answers above. Looking at what you are doing

now and what you want to do and also seeing what you think you'll like about the Mamiya

645AF I would like to plug my own favourite camera here: Rollei 6008AF. It has everything

you are asking for plus more.

 

Since you are a designer you will probably love the versatility of the square format since

you can crop any useful shape out of it at the design stage. A square is the second best

choice after a circle, which is supposed to be the perfect shape according to classic

Renaissance designers. Who I am to disagree with guys like Leonardo DaVinci?

 

Instead of showing you a picture of a camera, I'd like to present you a picture made WITH

a camera. This shot was made under (very low) available light, hand-held and without a

prism finder. I was on holiday in Norway and bumped into this kid in the streets of Oslo.

He was immediately willing to pose for me when he saw I was obviously not an amateur

photog. I think it's a nice example of a picture on the crossroad of street and fashion.<div></div>

[johnmarkpainter]

Ben,

 

THINK CAREFULLY before spending a lot of money on a Medium Format system. I really

love Film (Leica, Hassy, Graflex) and have a lot of Darkroom experience.

 

You can pick up a Hasselblad kit very cheap right now. Tons of them on eBay.

 

If you are shooting for Clients...they are getting used to Digital. Shooting for yourself? Do

whatever you want.

[h._p.]

Another vote for square. I'm using a Rooleiflex TLR and a Hasselblad outfit. Total cost to date is under 1,000 GBP spread over several years. There is so much cheap gear out there, I could probably shave 25% off that if I was starting now. The Rollei is great for reportage and the 'Blad for everything else. Whatever you get - enjoy yourself!

 

:-)))<div></div>

[vahe_sahakian]

"You can pick up a Hasselblad kit very cheap right now. Tons of them on eBay."

 

I was most excited about digital revolution, everyone, I was told was dumping their analog gear, selling them for peanuts.

Well, not really, when it comes to quality equipment, to sell, you must give them away for nothing, but to buy, you end up paying big $$$. That has been my experience so far.

 

Vahe

[ben -- new york]

Thanks for the great responses.

 

As far as 35mm- very true about Bresson and the great photojournalists of our time. No

doubt that the photog makes the picture, not the film size and not the camera. Still, after

all these years, I cant count how many pictures with which I was thrilled about the

composition, content, and execution, but let down by the lack of sharpness- even

shooting ASA 50. I like big, rich prints

 

I am shooting for myself, but also for clients (portraits for publishing/magazine- want to

break into fashion). right now when working with clients I scan my negs on a 5400 dpi

scanner, edit in photoshop and deliver as TIFF on CD. For myself, I like to make big prints

at the darkroom. If I had an EPSON 7600, maybe that would change... I have access to

plenty of film labs and I'll invest in a good MF scanner once I make the jump.

 

I hear all the feedback about digital, and believe me, Im looking at the DSLR offerings very

seriously since I once fancied myself a photojournalist. And yet, Im not going on

newspaper assignments- I like looking for the sudden portrait, more casually, so I must

re-evaluate.. Ive seen some awesome DSLR results- the canon 1D and D2X (im a nikon

guy). still, im more impressed with the average results of an MF negative. from 35mm to

DSLR, Its easy to see the improvement. but do the DSLRs really trump even 645? They

seem not to.

 

So I'll be off to the camera store(s) to rent some of the gear you all recommended above.

 

Thanks a lot for the feedback. if you have any more, keep sending it.

 

Best

Ben

[ben -- new york]

Jean-Louis-

 

I just re-read your post and I really appreciate the level of detail. You reminded me that no

one camera can do everything- and when it comes to investing this much money, it's easy

to lose sight of that fact. I will consider this when renting these cameras.

 

Merci-- vous m'aidez bien!

 

Ben

[anupam]

Erik, that is an awesome shot. Would love to see more of your work.

 

-A

[wayne_crider4]

"I shoot mostly people- street and editorial, and little fashion which i want to do more of, and very rarely, nudes. Im not a big landscape guy although I want a platform that will be acceptable at making a nice landscape picture. This is lowest on my list, however."

 

All reasonably fast shooting type of subject matter and certainly not often ones that would include the use of a tripod. If you have found 35mm lacking at ISO50, you ought to try it on a good tripod with mirror lockup and a good solvent/acutance developer depending on your inclination; And having your experience in digital, what actually was the problem with sharpness? MF is about tonal qualities to me more then sharpness, especially if shooting portraits. It also opens up the possibilies of using different developers and regimes to create particular nuances in subject matter beyond the 35mm frame in larger prints. I say make your own personal choices and regret your mistakes like everyone else, and learn your earned lessons concerning the medium format. Once you've made a few you'll realize that there is really no perfect system that isn't bested by another in some way.

[harvey_edelstein1]

Ben I shoot the same type of things as you and have a lot of varied gear. I don't have a Pentax 645 yet but I have the Pentax 6x7. I think for you the Pentax 645n is best for you.

 

Pentax 6x7 big, heavy, fairly fast lenses, well constructed, but is no street camera since once you have it arround your waist or bring it up to eye level everyone is looking at you.

 

Mamiya 7 lots like it as street camera but it doesn't focus close and since it has slow lenses OOF is not blurred like 35mm. Also, again its hard to get just head shots.

 

Mamiya tlr I have it and its a great tripod camera because of its weight and ergonomics.

 

Bronica 645 RF is a nice camera that has no lenses longer than 100mm and even that lens was discontinued because the VF finder has a short base and focuses inacurately wide open.

 

Mamiya 645 ok but not build as nice as Pentax 645.

 

My choice is Pentax 645n for street and portrait. Has fast lenses, zooms, good metering and flash ttl. Nice handling with good ergonomic grip. Lenses are both excellent and cheap and the bodies and lenses are rugged yet light. The cameras are not so large as to be conspicuous in the street and can focus close enough for head shots.

Also, if Pentax ever ships the digital version all the lenses will have an upgrade path to digital. Also, Pentax 6x7 lenses can be used via adapter on P645 for added lens choices.

 

Anything else for what you want to do is either too big, slow, doesn't focus to head shots, or iffy on focusing accuracy.

[erik scanhancer]

"Erik, that is an awesome shot. Would love to see more of your work."

 

Anupam,

 

Thank you for the compliment! Sorry if I disappoint you, but there isn't much of my work

online. You might have a look at my Scanhancer website for some general samples, but I

have to say that those pictures are not very representative for my more personal work,

which I value most. I tried to keep a "neutral" selection.

 

Seeing your portfolio, you might be interested in this one:

 

http://www.scanhancer.com/index.php?art=18&men=18

 

Ben, all the MF shots you see on that website are made with the Rollei 6008i, by the way.

"No camera is totally multi-purpose." While this is naturally true the Rollei 6008 comes

awfully close to being totally multi-purpose. Nine out of ten it's my camera of choice,

while I have quite an arsenal of other options at my disposal. You want some more

technical arguments for this camera? Read this thread (scroll down to my last comment

there):

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005CAK

 

Want to see a catalogue?

 

http://www.rollei.com/files/Prospekt6008AF-i2%20e.pdf

 

Oh Anupam, I just see I have posted another B&W pic in this thread:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00GpeS<div></div>

[johnmarkpainter]

Ben,

 

You're a Nikon guy? There is a new 10mp Nikon being announced in a few weeks... What I

did: I have a Nikon D200 and a nice kit of 1960's Nippon Kogaku lenses (converted to AI).

 

I still have my Leica and Hasselblad kits as well as a Graflex Crown Graphic 4x5. I use

them when they are the right tools. I use my D200 when it is the right tool.

 

Attempting to get ONE Medium Format camera for all of your uses is going to be trouble.

[paul_neuthaler]

Erik, was the kid killed when the buildings fell on him?