stepping up to medium format

[abdul smith]

I have a question (or many)...i shoot primarily fashion (editorial), and am thinking of adding MF to my repertoire. I currently shoot digital,

using a canon 5D and 40D..i started with 35mm film, and am slowly working my way up..very recently i've fallen in love (again) with

polaroids and have been using them a lot on recent shoots, so i've purchased 2 old sx-70's, and modified them to take 600 film. While that

serves my instant gratification need, i think it speaks to my love for the film medium, and i'm convinced the only way i can get that and still

maintain some of the instant gratification that comes with digital is shooting medium format with a polaroid back..so i'm thinking of trading

in my 40D for a used MF camera (looking at a used mamiya 645 with an 80mm lens)...

 

so my question(s) are, how easy will it be for me, who has never used MF, to adapt to the format? would the above mentioned kit, and a

polaroid back be essentially all i need to get started?

 

quite honestly i'm relatively unlearned in MF shooting at all, so i'm also curious as to the stability of the format in the long run? i know old

school polaroids (like im currently shooting with my sx-70's) are discontinued, so they are in limited supply, and im curious if anyone is of

the opinion that going back into film is a mistake at this point?

 

also, does it make sense to dive into MF strictly with the sole intention of shooting polaroids?

 

just processing this all in my brain, and thought i'd seek some outside input.

 

thanks

 

-abdul

[zane1664879013]

> going back into film is a mistake at this point?

 

Going back to *Polaroid* film is a mistake, yes. It's going out of production!

 

Going to MF film is not a mistake, IMO. Film will be around a long time, so if you can afford film and development costs, and you have an interest in learning it, just do it! The only thing you lose is the instant gratification of Polaroid.

[abdul smith]

yes..the costs..a reminder why i got out of film in the first place (that and theres no way i could compete speedwise

shooting film vs. digital)

 

regarding the film, these are the ones listed as being acceptable with the 645

 

Polaroid Pack Film available (i.e., Polaroid 669, Pro 100, and Fuji 100FP)

 

so i'm assuming by the ** around polaroid, you mean those manufactured specifically by polaroid, which would mean that

for now, the Fuji film is still a safe bet to be around, at least in the immediate future?

 

or is all polaroid type film going away soon, regardless of manufacturer?

[ben_pater]

Polaroid is already out of production, but Fuji has an almost complet and cheaper list of alternatives.

 

Ben

[mark liddell]

Fuji 100FP is very nice and readily available.

[thirtyfive]

You gotta love Medium Format. I'm using 2 of the older style Mamiya 645 1000s without interchangeable backs. I love them to bits, they just remain 100% reliable all the time, the quality is fantastic and all I had to get used to was using one of them with a waist level finder, but even that gives such a 3D feel to what you see through the viewfinder. As long as they sell 120 film, i'll be using it.

[johnmarkpainter]

If you are shooting Fashion you should go all the way and get a Mamiya RZ or a Pentax 67.

If you really want polaroids with the Pentax you can get a spare Pentax body for less than $100 and dedicate it to polaroid.

 

If you use alot of fill flash you will want the "LS" Leaf Shutter lenses for the Pentax system.

 

jmp

[abdul smith]

whats the difference between the Pentax 67 and the mamiya 645, in terms of one being better for fashion (this is out of

genuine curiosity not being wise)

 

thanks

[thirtyfive]

Pentax is 6 X 7cm negs/slides and the Mamiya is 6 x 4.5cm negs/slides.

[brucecahn]

When I started in photography 120 was the normal size camera. 35mm was considered the new "miniature camera". 120 was used for most work, but it was a good idea to have a 35 as well for traveling light and for street shooting. As film got better, 35mm was used more often until it became the normal camera. But the differences are huge. Richer, less grainy, more informational, more beautiful prints are available with 120. My conclusion has been to use 8x10 whenever possible and when that is not practical, 5x7, 4x5, 6x6,or 35mm, always picking the maximum size possible in a given siituation. The Pentax 6x7 is a better choice in my opinion. I have had both cameras.

[johnmarkpainter]

Abdul,

 

The Film size advantage of the 6x7 is such a nice advantage.....

The Pentax 67 was the standard fashion camera (pre-digital).

 

Nice variety of lenses....handles like a huge 35mm camera.

Big film that enlarges well with minimal cropping.

 

jmp

[craig_supplee]

I like the RB or RZ67 as they have a revolving back, so you always hold the camera in one position. With the trigger handle on my RB, it is very hand holdable with either the WLF or the prism finder. Prism finder does get a wee bit heavy though. Just my 2 cents.