william_tuovinen Posted May 3, 2008 Share Posted May 3, 2008 Steve of course your right, ",box with the semiconductor is just a thing?" its not, its an amazing little tool that in many ways kicks the pants off film, I just like to know in someways at least my equipment is inadequate like me. I do shoot both almost equally. I only joke about the soul to cover up the lack of mine. Hasselblad too heavy for journalism? While the light meter issue is very true unless you're talking 200's, last time I checked most pro DSLRs weigh in and take up a similar amount of space to a Hassy. Though I wouldn't consider it a fast performer in the field like his 5D. Then again Joakim wasn't taking that Pentax 6x7 into combat zones or on presidential details. Paul you have some good answers here, though we haven't heard a suggested budget yet from you. I'll stick by the Yashica and Mamiya TLR recommendation for the lower budget option if you just want to spend a month cranking some rolls through to try. All the above mentioned cameras are good and as you know film camera prices have never been better for allot of this good stuff. It seems though that he is very familiar with his cameras and film and as you mentioned, a master of available light. Your right to observe that film probably isn't his secret. Good luck and good shooting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stwrtertbsratbs5 Posted May 3, 2008 Share Posted May 3, 2008 Rangefinders are fine for environmental portraits, but they generally don't focus close enough for tight head shots. I actually prefer environmental shots, so I use a Mamiya 7 II. Not an economical choice, however. Fuji made a nice little p&s 645. Inexpensive, easy to use, and excellent lens. Not as quiet as a manual rangefinder, but the results are nice. More info here: http://www.dantestella.com/technical/ga645.html The SLR choices will be a bit noisy because of the mirror. This may be a problem if you prefer stealth. Lots of good choices in 645, and prices are pretty low. I'd suggest, as have others, a TLR for your needs. The Minolta Autocord is very nice - lever focus, solid build, and a superb lens. It's a fantastic bargain, but factor in a CLA from someone like Paul Ebel. You could also look for a Ricoh Diacord or a Zeiss Ikoflex (a bit over-engneered with locks, but nice Tessar lens). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_schwartz6 Posted May 3, 2008 Share Posted May 3, 2008 I own a Mamiya 7ii, Rollei 6008, and Hasselblad 500 C/M. The real differences, IMHO, are in the breadth of the system. The Hasselblad has others beat hands down on the wealth of USEFUL system components. Of course, more expensive than the others, but used, as another respondent has said, the 500C/M kit with 80mm lens should be about $1000, perhaps even less. Then you have something you can build upon for years to come. Another thing to think about -- in ten years, there will probably not be anyone around to fix my Rollei, but I am sure someone will be able to fix my Hasselblad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huntrbll Posted May 3, 2008 Share Posted May 3, 2008 If your interest is portraits AND photojournalism, I think that would rule out the TLRs, as well as the RB67 and most larger cameras. If you are going to shoot both, I think that limits you to the 645s with some kind of internal metering. I have used the Mamiya 645, and it is a good system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_flanigan1 Posted May 3, 2008 Share Posted May 3, 2008 When MF started is was a childs format; ie the Brownie format. Later in the 1930's it became a TLR format; a radical machine for sports. Later it came mainstream for newswork; the Medalist of WW2; then more common for portraits. I used a TLR in High School to shoot sports; or an Exakta slr. Later with a wedding chap we used a TLR for candids; and the 4x5 for formals. Before the instamatic/kodapak came out about 1963; the Brownie format was used by the masses for everyday shots with box cameras. With 220 at about 1965 one could shoot without reloading as much with weddings. After instamatics became mainstream the general public dropped their box cameras and MF became more for advanced amateurs and pros. For B&W usage MF makes a fine negative; for color work many of us have seen our local labs die of over a decade ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_flanigan1 Posted May 3, 2008 Share Posted May 3, 2008 There are so many types of Medium Format cameras around to choose from; having a few to play with and focus with goes along way towards making a choice of camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now