Off Topic: Do Any of You Also Include a Med. Format in Your Kit?

[chris_chen]

Does anyone besides me carry along a MF camera as part of your regular travel kit?

 

<p>

 

I do, it's the famous hasselblad SWC CT*, which BTW Hassy DID NOT improve in its latest new release!!!

 

<p>

 

Seems that the design is so good that it can't be improved on.

 

<p>

 

This was first designed in 1954! So, "old" lens design is not necessarily obsolete.

 

<p>

 

It does have a steep learning curve, though.

 

<p>

 

I'm keeping ALL of my chrome lenses, thank you.

[john_molloy3]

it was a trip to thailand last june with a rollei 6008i that made me

buy a leica. it was too big and noisy and generally unwieldy. the

results i got were good, but who knows what else i missed because of

it). i think if i were to do it again i would try the 6x6 mamiya

rangefinders. but i try to use one camera-to keep it simple.

[bobtodrick]

I don't use it often, but I have a Rolleicord Vb that I use for

portraits when I know I'm going big. I chose this model because the

Xenar lens seems to have much the same character as my early Leica

glass, and I find I can intermingle prints and retain cohesion of

look.

[jay_.]

I do have a Hasselblad outfit consisting of 2 503CX bodies, 40CFE,

50FLE, 80CF, 150CF and a 2xMutar and I use it whenever I am shooting

mainly landscapes and long hikes are not required. I used to use an

M4+21/3.4 along with the Blad before I bought the 40CFE, and I

usually bring my Minilux just in case I want to do some casual

shooting. I've also been known to tote my Rolleiflex along with a

specialized 35mm wildlife outfit just in case a landscape pops up.

But under no circumstances would I carry both 35 and MF at the same

time...with backups and all it would be just too much gear to carry

and keep track of, let alone the confusion at shooting time. BTW the

905SWC is supposed to have better internal antireflection treatment

in the lens, as well as an improved shutter mainspring a la CFi

lenses. I debated long and hard on the SWC vs 40FLE issue...until I

actually tried them both. Optically I couldn't see any advantage to

the Biogon (I don't do architecture or interiors with it)and the

distorting, inaccurate finder and/or fussing with a GG back was just

*way* more trouble, not to mention it doesn't have TTL flash.

[jackflesher]

Chris: It depends on the kind of traveling I'm doing... I used to

do foreign travel everywhere with either a Mamiya 645 Pro with

multiple backs, or two Mamiya 7's. I would then add my 4x5

for "domestic" travel. Now I use my Leicas almost exclusively for

foreign travel, and add my Contax 645 for domestic destinations. (I

sold the Mamiya 645 and 7's a few years back, and just recently got

the C 645, and rarely bother with 4x5 any more)

 

<p>

 

Now, regarding your SWC... I am curious about your comment that the

new one wasn't an improvement -- everybody I know that upgraded

claims it was -- can you expand on that for me? I have been looking

for an MF ultrawide (with better optics and much more compact than

the 35 for the Contax) and the SWCM is one on my radar -- and I

cannot justify the cost of the new version. I have also considered

another M7 with the 43 attached, and in fact I wish I had kept that

combo as it had superb optics -- it also has the bennefit of being

Leica-like; a Plaubel "pro-shift"; and even a Linhof 612 with the 58

or 65 on it.

 

<p>

 

I would apprecitae your and others comments on this.

 

<p>

 

Thanks,

[robert_marvin]

My normal travel kit consists of 2 screw mount Leicas with 6

lenses. I'll usually also carry a Rolleiflex TLR or (less frequently)

a Kodak Medalist II. When I'm out shooting, I'll carry either the

Leica kit or thye MF camera (most often with a tripod, for

landscapes, w/MF). NEVER both--my back couldn't take it!

[chris_chen]

Jack,

 

The comment of not being able to improve performance comes from

Hasselblad themselves, specifically Kornelius Fleischer (sp?); it's

on their web-site. It is also within Photo.net MF forum. It seems

Hassy went to enviro-friendly processes to produce glass that did not

involve lead or arsenic. While true, Hassy claims a better/stronger

shutter and anti-reflectant internal surfaces, OPTICALLY, it wasn't

improved:

 

<p>

 

Lower central performance in return for better edge performance. If

I remember correctly.

 

<p>

 

As to price: I use the version previous to the CF (which I also have)

because I find it a slightly more compact all metal construction; and

it has a self timer for under $2000. It is one cool camera.

[charles_mason]

??The older SW has a self timer? Didn't know that.

[jackflesher]

Chris: Thanks!

 

<p>

 

Jay: How do you filter the FLE, specifically with SND's? This is

similar to one big issue I have with the 35 for my Contax; it takes

E95 filters...

[Robin Smith]

I have an old Hasselblad 500CM with 50, 80 and 150 chrome lenses (2

are T*). It is a great camera, but I do not carry it with my Leica if

I can help it. It gets too confusing. Great camera, but processing is

always an issue as is printing with MF, so I use it much less than I

thought I would when I got it. I use it for weddings, landscapes and

"arty" pictures. I would like the SWC. I too am not convinced there

are any really substantial differences between the old T* lenses and

the current set whatever Zeiss/Hasselblad say. (FLE is maybe an

exception) but obviously I have not exhaustively tested them. A

beautiful camera that takes wondeful pictures. I virtually always use

mine on a tripod or monopod, so it is a different ballgame to the

Leica.

 

<p>

 

There is much less to say about many MF optics as most of the Zeiss or

Mamiya designs are reasonably old. I assume there is not sufficient

demand for them to be updated optically speaking, given the numbers

sold.

[jeremy_thomas]

I carry a Rolleiflex 2.8F in addition to my leica kit (m4-p w/ 35

summicron asph + 50 summicron dual range; R6.9 w. 90mm summicron). I

use the TLR for portraits and scenes where i'm not in as much of a

hurry. I have a lot of fun using the Rolleiflex, and it is a key part

of my kit (although i need to use it more). I also like having it

along because i like the option of composing in a square where

appropriate. Additionally, when I get a flash, flash sinc at 1/500

will be another benefit of using the rolleiflex.

 

<p>

 

jeremyT

<a href="http://www.lifeinblue.com">www.lifeinblue.com</a>

[chris_chen4]

I've successfully used a Super Ikonta B as a medium format traveling

companion (it's now being CLA'ed). Bertele's 21mm Biogon design is a

indeed a classic. I occasionally carry around a "mini SWC"

outfit--the original 21/4.5 CZ Biogon (c.1955) semi-permanently

mounted on 1 of my Contax IIa's--but have yet to master the superwide

<A HREF="

http://not.contaxg.com/files/0017/27mhptrumpeters_.jpg">viewpoint</A>.

[ben_hughes]

Chris:

 

<p>

 

While I don't travel with MF gear, I do use it occasionally. My

choices are the Pentax 67 with 55mm, 105mm and 200mm

lenses and a Rolleiflex 3.5E with the Planar lens. The Pentax

makes great big 6x7cm negs and is noisy and heavy. The Rollei

makes great big 6x6cm negs, is light, quiet and not conducive to

action. I just sold my Hassy 500C/M.

My actual travel kit is a Nikon FM2n w/28 and 50mm Lenses. I

have travelled in Britain with my M6 and a 35mm 'Cron., but I was

too careful with it.

Good question, by the way.

 

<p>

 

Ben

[kaiblanke]

I sometimes take myonly Leica-rival with me, a chinese camera 'great

wall DF-4'. Why Leica-rival ? Because it has a sturdiness that

reminds you of leica, about the same age and most important, accepts

leica screw mount lenses !!!

<br>

Unfortunately the lens-to-film distance is quite different, so the

only distance you might find an original Leica lens useful is that of

some cm.

<br>

It is quite an odd-looking 6x6 SLR (including a 645 mask), with a

coated 90/3.5 lens that I got very cheap (35$). Still takes nice

pictures and forces you to work very careful:

<img src="http://www.photo.net/photodb/image-display?

photo_id=413700&size=md">

[chris_chen]

It's in my small bag w/M6 & 35 or 50 'cron, so I meter w/M6 and shoot

with both. The front flap of the bag holds my Minolte Flashmeter

III. I carry an M3 with the 35 or 50 that is not on the M6 in a

separate bag solo, and occasionally the 90 TE in my pocket, that's it.

 

<p>

 

I have the 21 SA, but it gets less-and-less use. I would use it more

if I can find that darn rear cap. Basically, it's "welded" to my M4

for that reason, and doesn't get carried.

[leonid]

I am proud to say that I am one of the few people on earth who uses a

graflex xlsw ( with pistol grip and sport finder ! ) . If I could

afford it , I would get the plaubel makina pro shift as a

replacement .

[john_fleetwood]

A $60 Yashica D TLR is my MF travel camera. It has an old Gossen

Pilot meter in the shoe. Kind of clunky, but it is light and takes

nice photos. Love those big square negatives.

[f._william_baker]

Besides my Leica M's, I always carry my Rolei 2.8F Planar TLR. It

takes up a lot less room than my Hasselblad and is certainly more

quiet and is razor sharp. F. William Baker

[godfrey]

I occasionally carry a medium format camera along with my

other gear in a travel kit. No longer an SLR, sometimes a

Rolleiflex TLR, a Super Ikonta folder or a Fuji GA645.

 

<p>

 

I'd love a Hassy SuperWide, have always wanted one. Love that

lens.

 

<p>

 

Godfrey

[karl_georg_wolf]

Had a ROLLEIFLEX SL 66 SE (with only a 80 mm lens) for the last 5

years alongside my LEICA gear. After usinng it less and less I sold

it two weeks ago. So far without regretting it at all. But I do not

need my photography to make my living. Professional equipment should

inclide larger format cameras. And digital by now I´am afraid.

 

<p>

 

Best wishes

[andy_piper2]

Someday...!

 

<p>

 

I haven't used MF since I went to digital darkroom - no scanner. Even a

$60 Yashica-D would cost me $3060 - since I'd also have to buy a

scanner that handles 6x6. 8^(

 

<p>

 

Sold my last MF - Kowa and 3 lenses - to get my first pro-grade inkjet

printer.

 

<p>

 

Once I get the Leica/35mm system stabilized I'll look into it. Probably

I'll end up with a Rollei TLR - but possibly a not-too-recent SWC if I

can find one for $2000 or so.

[fred_ouyang]

I used Rolleiflex3.5F quite often when I lived in New York. It's much

quieter than my M2, most of time I can aim at people directly without

being noticed with the waist level finder and quieter shutter. The

problem is it's size and the square format, also hard to make it exact

level when doing grab shot. Even with lens hood on, I got flare

problem often.

I don't do it any more, Leica M is a more convenient tool for weekend

amateurs like me, especially in California. For resolution, just take

a look of Salgado's work, enlargement to 30 or 36 is not an issue for

35mm film.

[mike dixon]

I use a Pentax 645 system in addition to Leicas (and a few other

things), but I tend to leave it at home unless I have good reason to

believe I'll use it. I don't have a "regular travel kit"--my expected

needs tend to dictate what I carry.

[gary_yeowell]

I shoot in the main with either a Hasselblad 500cm and three lenses,

60/100/180 or a Mamiya 7 and two lenses, 43 & 65 and sometimes all

together with maybe an M6 or two as well, just depends on the

assignment. I certainly agree with comments on the quality of the SWC

Hassy having owned 3 of them but don,t rule out the Mamiya 7 with

43mm as it,s actually at least the equal optically with an extra cm!!

There is a difference in colour rendition however, but both are great.

[steve_b.2]

1955-era Rolleiflex TLR with a great 75mm f/3.5 Xenar lens. I also

use the 35mm adapter called the Rolleikin.