The decision to move forward or not with MF format? Opinions?

[doug elick]

<p>Photography as a hobby for me ebbs and flows. I haven't had a camera in hand for at least a year now and the Medium Format gear even longer. I'm experiencing something of a creative rebirth and am pondering the wisdom of plunking cash into my "analog" equipment (I still don't own a DSLR).<br>

My modest MF collection includes a Rolleicord IV, a C330F with a Black Super180, 80mm and jammed black 55mm. I've had aspirations to try 6x7 or 6x9 (or heck even LF, 5x7), but am concerned that moving forward with this niche of photography, especially in today's financial climate might not be a sound idea.<br>

Prices for used equipment have never been better and the wet (monochrome) darkroom is where my heart lies, but I can't shake nagging thoughts about the availability of film, chemicals, processing (in some cases) and skilled repair technicians. All my gear is due for a good CLA; how long will the expertice to take care of these old gems still be around? Every time I stumble across and emulsion that really suits my eye and finally begin to master it, it vanishes (Verichrome Pan? I'm still looking for a film that grabs me like VP did)<br>

We just moved into our 1895 vintage home last May; my condenser head Omega B8 quietly sits in the corner and most of my gear is still hibernating in boxes. Do I go for broke, snarf up available gear when the deals present themselves and enjoy the wet workflow while it lasts or do I follow the logical path and go digital? Of course this is a highly subjective question, but I'd appreciate your thoughts. This is a very difficult decision and any input is greatly appreciated.</p>

<p>Thanks,<br>

Doug</p>

<p> </p>

[sattler123]

<p>Doug,</p>

<p>I think it is time for you to try digital - it will spark your enthusiasm again. I shoot both film and digital and love both. The quality with digital these days is just amazing and truely rivals MF film - esp. with a full frame digital body, like the Canon 5D.</p>

[doug elick]

<p>Bear in mind that my MF gear usually is used for B&W photography. I see getting a Pentax digital body to compliment my modest selection of Pentax glass at some point. I see digital as a no-brainer replacement for color 35mm photography. My love affair with MF is far more complicated, however.</p>

<p>Doug</p>

[mike_earussi1]

<p> To duplicate the quality of MF, especially 6x7 or 6x9, in digital today would set you back a lot of money. A good dslr (12mp+) can come close to 645/6x6 but it would take the new 21/24mp cameras to equal anything larger. And large format? forget it unless you've got $30,000 to drop on a MF digital back. So film still provides the best quality for the money for the forseeable future. But it really depends on what you actually want to do with your images. If you're just making 8x10s then switch to a dslr, but if you love making those 16x20s and up then medium or large format is still the best way to go quality wise. Or if you just love working in the darkroom then just stick to what you've got and have fun.</p>

[d_purdy]

<p>If I was you I would perhaps spend the money to get the Rolleicord overhauled and start using it. If you fall back in love with shooting MF film, then think about what you might invest in. As far as investments, if you buy used in good condition your money is probably safer than it is in the stock market. You can always re sell for not much loss.</p>

[jack_welsh]

<p>There is nothing wrong with not going digital. Agree with Mike. The C330F is a great camera. Had one when they were new years ago. Recently, just bought an Ex. condition Mamiya 645 Pro, 80 2.8N lens, non-metered prism finder and one back from Keh for $265.00. The whole thing looks and acts like new. Also bought a RB67 Pro-s body and back in EX+ condition for $165.00. In LF, bough a 4x5 Cambo SCII in EX. condtion for $215.00. You don't need a film scanner. Or, photo printer, either. Wish I didn't sell my old enlarger years, ago. That, basically does what the other two does combined. The enlarger doesn't print the photo. But, it does imprint the image on the paper, so it can be developed . If,I was to CLA any of what you have now. Then, have the 330F done first. (More versatile).</p>

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

<p>I shoot both film (35mm, MF, and LF) and digital. Digital is great for shooting indoor sports under poor lighting conditions. But I still really enjoy traditional black and white work. It needn't be expensive, and you already have good equipment.</p>

[ronald_moravec1]

<p>Scan film from MF wil get you into digital if you care. This means sending out a digi file for a lab to print or injet printing at home. A Nova slot processor is great fun for at home color and will rival any pro made print. </p>

<p>The 12MP full frame Nikons (D700) or Canon digis will compete nicely with MF to 11x14. The trick is you can not get a traditional darkroom print without some heroic efforts.</p>

<p>The choice is clear. Repair/replace the equipment you have. Personally I would buy a later model Hasselblad, ie CM or newer, and a few backs and lenses. I had a 330 and 220 and was never thrilled with that glass as the colors looked dull and flat. I think I had 55/80/135/180/250 mm lenses all with lens shades. Rent a `blad or Rollie and see what you are missing. The old tessar from 1950 will not show you. </p>

<p>A view camera is a whole different world as the working methods are totally different and you are tied to a tripod unless you use a speed graphic or such. If the subject matter holds still and you make 8x10 or bigger, you be totally thrilled. Even 4x5 tri x beats anything that can be done with 35mm at any size print. Lenses from 1960 will not please you either.</p>

<p>Besure to evaluate with good enlarging lenses. It makes a big difference. Cheapies level everything out so everything looks the same.</p>

 

[sfcole]

<p>Douglas,<br>

Just be wary of what has befallen others: 1. Fascination with digital. 2. Investing of lots of $$ in a new system. 3. spend 2 months playing with every setting and taking thousands of shots. 4. Tire of the gadgetry. 5. Notice that everywhere there are photographers out, even grandma and kid with nose ring are now sporting giant DSLRs with handgrips and lens with red rings. 6. rediscover the pleasure of using a fine precision machine in spite (or because of) the hassles of film 7. Digi-thing sits in closet, mostly used for ebay pics and birthdays as its value plunges. <br>

Scott</p>

[k5083]

The answers thus far have been oriented around gear. For me the interesting words in your post were "creative rebirth," which you say you are having even though your gear is all in the closet. This is the key. I take it that you are saying that you are seeing or imagining new images that you want to capture and work with. This is the one valid reason to invest further in the hobby, with the additional stipulation that you have decided honestly that you need new kit to obtain the images you want. If that is true, then get snarfing. Like many inmates of this forum I sometimes get tied up in gear for its own sake. Playing with the toys is not without its own rewards but for sustained satisfaction you need to be driven by the image. Maybe you want to see if old German glass looks different from new Japanese glass, or whether large format detail will really rock your world, or whatever. Then go for it. If you are a true hobbyist in search of great images, then no matter how archaic the technology, you will find ways around the financial and convenience obstacles.

[yuri_huta]

<p>Follow your heart. That is where you passion lies.<br>

In terms of getting gear fixed, skilled technicians exist. Maybe that will be the next thing to start getting outsourced in the coming decades? Or will people like myself get into the C&C school and train at home to repair gear. Or will there always be people to fix these MF cameras, with more and more spare parts by way of cannibalizing non functioning bodies/lenses? If there is a market/need there will likely be someone to address it.</p>

<p>I personally worry more about digital, as it is still an immature market. I can't believe new bodies are being released at 12-18 month cycles. I strongly suspect I will be able to fix my Pentax 645Ns well after I would be able to have a current Canon DSLR fixed. I just had a 645N into Pentax to replace the shutter and do a complete CLA for $30-ish (meter recalibrated etc.). Now I have a body that will serve me well for many years. Try and find someone, anyone to do this to the first Canon DSLR (the D2000) or even try and buy a backup body - same model (same tendencies etc.). I have no problem going out and picking up a 645N or 645N II as a third body. So, yes digital is the latest greatest, but the film classics endure and even the film no-classics endure. This won't go on forever, but I don't see the end on the horizon.</p>

<p>I am having a blast, buying some of the MF gear I have longed to own/use that I could not afford to think about a decade or two ago. Now, I get to pick and choose at times. I just picked up a Pentax SMC A 645 55mm f/2.8 in minty, minty condition for $125.00 !! I am like a kid in a candy store. I put together my Pentax 645N kit (2 bodies, 4 lenses etc.) for a little more than my first DSLR body cost (an I bought it used, quite beat up). I digitized this recently with a Nikon Coolscan 8000 with glass 120 holder, but don't see the need to 'upgrade' this aspect for years and years.</p>

<p>Regarding emulsion, well that is a bit of another matter, although, film is still being produced and from what I read, sales for pro emulsion seem to have stabilized somewhat.</p>

<p>Have fun, follow your heart.</p>

[tom_cheshire]

<p>Oops, reposted.</p>

[tom_cheshire]

<p>If everybody gets scared about medium format and quits using it then 120 film will go out of business as it gets used less and less. If everybody keeps using medium format as if digital didn't exist then 120 film will keep being produced. Simple. </p>

<p>As for buying into medium format, I am waiting to pick up a Hasselblad outfit. Already have the Rolleis and Mamiya C330s and Bronica and other misc. medium format. Oh, yes, putting in a plug for the not ofy mentioned Koni-Omega camera. </p>

<p>Not afraid here of film availability. As for the cameras keeping on working and finding someone to repair them, well, not worried. </p>

<p>I have old woodie cameras from 100 years ago or so and the shutters still work on them so no worry about the newer equipt. </p>

<p>I was raised on rollfilm. It just feels right to use it. Not like that pansy 35mm that doesn't even have a paper backing. </p>

<p>And digital. Sure, using it. Not going to buy the big stuff. The small point and shoots have so many features and are nearly disposable at these prices why bother go for the big time DSLR? Want to take pic.s, not impress anyone. </p>

[roseberry guitars]

<p>I also do both film (MF and 35mm) and digital. But I've gone a little different direction than most folks on this forum. I have a couple Minolta Autocords and a couple Zeiss Ikon Ikoflexes but never had much interest in the Rolleis, Hasselblads, Mamiyas or other "Pro" outfits.</p>

<p>My big love is the post WWII Zeiss ikon folders (Nettars and Ikontas). For me there is nothing like snapping that bellows open, figuring out the settings, guestimating the distance and pushing/pulling all the little levers to make the camera work. And the results are well worth it all. I've tried to duplicate, in Photoshop, the mystical/mythical look of a photograph taken with an old Novar or Tessar lens but no go. Maybe others can, not me.</p>

<p>I cannot say anything about the long term availability of film and the associated accessories that are needed to go with it but like others have said, "keep using it and makers will keep making it". The big bonus with the old folders is that there are plenty of people out there now that love to keep them going. And if you have a little patience, manual dexterity and time they are simple enough to work on oneself. </p>

<p>I know they are not everyones cup of tea but I guess my real point is as Yuri says "Follow your heart". If you love it then do it. If we stop worrying about the future of film and <strong><em>just use the stuff</em></strong> the future will be secure.</p>

<p> </p>

[jpo3136b]

<p>Doug, used Pentax Optio $50 at KEH. [The only gripe I can find with it is no apparent PC jack for off camera strobe.] </p>

<p>You can "go digital" with a cellphone. You cannot "go medium format" with something that's going to look like a plastic doorstop in a few years. Use what you've got. </p>

<p>I think you need to fire up the enlarger and get on with it. I'm not going to rehash the benefits of both thing; each has its advantages. Use the medium format stuff you've got. A Pentax Optio, or something like it, would be real good for some "before and after" home improvement pictures. You might want to also pop some with medium format. </p>

<p>One of the best things you can do when you get the doldrums is to reload another roll of film or go print something. And, how about mounting and framing some of those prints for the "new home" decorations? </p>

<p>I like the Pentax gear because of the interchangability of the lenses, the extensive history of innovations; and you can keep the risk of newer digital technologies down financially while still picking up gear that will work with your small format film stuff. Pentax 645 to K mount adapter. Rocks. An example of crossover equipment. </p>

<p>But, you do not actually have to choose. Many of us can drive cars and ride a bicycle. We can walk and swim. You don't need to "go" digital; but you can probably use a DSLR. At the rate that I've seen things going, there might be a good role for point and shoots out there. The DSLR innovation's negligible; it's just another chance to use some good lenses for the 645. I would definitely keep the entire investment in digital equipment; new body, software, all of it, under $1000. That stuff will be a doorstop in less than five years. Your medium formats will keep on cranking as long as you shoot and reload. Good luck. J.</p>

[jpo3136b]

<p>The used Optio is clearly not pro-grade equipment; but point is, for under $100 you can try it out and think about if you like it. When I bought my DSLR, for some reason, that route never occurred to me. I probably would have been 900X happier in the beginning if I had tried one of those smaller, cheaper used cameras than to face the shock of shelling out so much cash for something I knew little about. I was happy with my choice in the long run, but things really could have gone better if I had found a path where the change wasn't so harsh at first. Good luck. J.</p>

[chris_waller]

<p>Doug,<br>

I understand your 'love affair' with MF. I have an RB67, a C3, a C220 and a C330. I love using the TLRs. I love th ewhole process of handling film, the processing, handling negs, paper and so on. For me, digital just doesn't do it.</p>

[jay_moynihan]

<p>"(Verichrome Pan? I'm still looking for a film that grabs me like VP did)"<br>

Yes, a marvelous film. Talk about lattitude/dynamic range. Sigh............</p>

[doug elick]

<p>I think I'll order a few boxes of film and paper when the tax return arrives. BTW, is there anything even remotely close to ol' VP? Any dual layer emulsions?<br>

Given I already have a small stable of Pentax K mount "M" and "A" lenses, would a 67 II with a 90 or 105mm be a good foray into 6x7? I'm quite happy with my Rolleicord and C330 for 6x6 and don't imagine doing much in 6x7 off the tripod. Or would an RB be a better choice? I can put one together for a couple hundred bucks.<br>

Even even if there's no real point, I wouldn't mind producing a few 6x7 color slides. My 6x6s practically jump off the table; I can imagine 6x7s being as close to glorious and one can get with roll film.<br>

Thanks,<br>

Doug</p>

 

[mike_earussi1]

<p>Off the tripod the Pentax 67 is best, on the RB Pro/RZ, they also have better glass.</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>Doug,</p>

<p>As others have said, I can only say that if you love darkroom printing keep with it. Digital is great, allows on-site re-evaluation of shots, but can be quite expensive. I have no worry about the availability of B&W film, darkroom chemicals and paper. You may have to bring it in by mail, but it should remain there for the commited photographer. The question of enlarger lens is a good one - you may need a modern six element one to get best quality. Also, assure that your enlarger is not vibration prone (maybe a home-made wooden wall bracket with large hardware store U-bolt, wrapped in plastice tape, to secure the column).</p>

[jack_welsh]

<p>I have the RB. I saw on a website where a lady was talking about the RB and the Pentax67. She said that handheld,the Pentax, being like a large 35 SLR can be tiring in vertical mode.<br>

She mentions that under Interesting quirks about the rb.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?MamiyaRB67.html~mainFrame">http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?MamiyaRB67.html~mainFrame</a></p>

[Dave Luttmann]

<p>I'll echo the Mamiya RB67 recommendation. It's a superb system. Lenses are tack sharp. Films like Pan F 50 and Astia 100 can be scanned and enlarged with striking detail even at 24x30 and beyond. I've done drum scanned Astia film at 32x40 that holds up very well....ya, not as good as 4x5....but it was handheld at 1/400.</p>

<p>For me, I feel like I'm not taking the subject matter seriously unless I'm using MF or LF. Everyone and his uncle are carrying around DSLRs nowadays.....set yourself apart.</p>

[doug elick]

<p>I ordered the replacement for my C330, 55mm black lens. I was heartbroken when the shutter in mine bit the dust (twice); it might be the sharpest lens in the C3xx line. I also ordered a few rolls of Fomapan 100, Fomapan 400, Efke R100 and E100GX (why'd they discontinue E100S ?!?!) I'm pretty comfortable with Tri-X, Plus-X, etc. and thought I'd try something new. My Rodinal is a few years old, but it should be ok.<br>

I'm not worried about the B8 enlarger. I inherited it from my mentor; his results were fantastic (with a Kodak Medalist ) and I was quite pleased with mine using the 90mm Ektar it came with. Unfortunately, it appears the Ektar is growing fungus. I'll give it some time under a UV sterilizer lamp, but even if that doesn't help, I have a Rodenstock APO 80mm mounted and ready to go.<br>

I can get sucked into the gear at times, but to be fair, sometimes personal history I have with it can be a motivator in itself. Tens of thousands of K1000s were produced, but only one of them did I work my tail off for as an 11 year old to purchase, take through grade school, high school, college and beyond. I don't care how many times people lament all the features it lacks, it <em>just feels right </em> and has never failed me<em>.</em><br>

.....Now I'm waxing sentimental.<br>

I found an undeveloped roll of Plus-X I shot 2 years ago; maybe I'll soup it tonight.<br>

Batteries are an anathema to photography,<br>

Doug</p>

 

[jack_welsh]

<p>"Everyone and his uncle are carrying around DSLRs nowadays.....set yourself apart."<br>

Agree 100%. When I took my mf and LF to antique car shows and a railroad museum. Everyone thought I was the pro!</p>