Does ANYONE even shoot medium format anymore?

[w_t1]

<p>Darius, I never see those $300 hassy deals on Ebay...lol</p>

<p>I shoot mostlymed format BW on 4x5, horseman 6x12 RF back. I'm about 8 rolls behind on processing right now...it's nice stuff, i prefer printing in darkroom, i also hate scanning it. I've got about 30 rolls or 120 agfapan 100 in my stash right now :)...and in 4x5 also</p>

[william_livingston]

<p>deuce & 1/4 is all i shoot. really like those 2.25" negs, especially b&w.</p>

[steven_rasmussen]

<p>i shoot mostly medium format, a little 35mm, and i've been getting into 4x5. i have a digital, i use it, and i like it, but working with film, and printing from the negatives in a wet lab is what really got me hooked me on photography in the first place. i hope film is around forever.</p>

[charleseagan]

<p>I think there will always be a market for it, since it's a great format and there will always be a demand for it. However, I like the idea of having both film and digital backs, that way you have the best of both worlds (Hannah Montana song in mind). Also, consider that you can still get large format film.</p>

[User_4136860]

<p>Medium format will still be around when the digital craze has been long forgotten, like hula hoops, yoyos, and deely boppers.</p>

[leicaglow]

<p>Hey, hey, hey! Stop posting these pics! We're making the digital guys look bad.</p>

<p>I've been shooting Hasselblads for 20 years, now more than ever. For some reason, I've been shooting with EL/Ms and X's rather than my CMs. I guess because I like being able to click the mirror up with a single forward turn of the dial, and being able to plug in an electronic cable release in less than a second. Most of the images in my portfolio here are with a Hasselblad. I also shoot a fair amount of 6x9 in my 4x5 cameras.</p>

[greg_peterson3]

<p>A Mamiya ADF is my workhorse for architecture. I have an absurdly expensive digital back for it, but I often shoot Ektar 100 as well.</p><div></div>

[gene_woods]

<p>I shoot a Mamiya 330f also C3 when I'm not shooting Pentax LX and almost always slide film. If I what Digital I use a computer to make pictures I use film.</p>

[jdrose]

<p>Mamiya RZ67 user here. Mostly Velvia 50 and Pan F.</p>

[Uhooru]

<p>Yes, I shoot MF and film will be around.</p>

[lornahaddonphotography]

<p>I shoot film as much as I can, I'm a Photography degree student and I've just bought a Hasselblad 503cw - I love 120 film especially, I also shoot on my Holga for pleasure all the time.<br>

I want to ultimately pursue a career in fashion photography, and I know that there will be times where I have to shoot digitally, but there will also be times where I will have the freedom to continue to use film I hope - I love it, it adds so much more depth to the images. I also have a Canon 5d Mark II, but its just not quite as satisfying as a film camera, for me personally.</p>

[phillipmarcovallentin]

<p>I simply LOVE shooting medium format and film.</p>

<p>If I'm in the right mood, I sometimes shoot a model with three different cameras:<br>

1: a standard D-SLR (EOS40D or 5D or equiv...)<br>

2: an HB H3DII-31 ( + the 120/4 )<br>

3: an old Mamiya - either an RZ67Pro2, or the even older RB67S !</p>

<p>I tend to expose my films 1/3 to 1/2 stop over digital, and the only real operational hassel, is changing the flash trigger from camera to camera, but someday I'll get myself an extra pair of transmitters ... </p>

<p>Digital is cool for the fast workflow, etc, and I can find AWESOME details in the shadows of the 3FF files fom the HB: But to me the analog/digital dilemma is almost the same as comparing a valve audio amplifier with a transisitor amp; allthough the valves have far higher measurable distortion, they are the choice of the Connoisseurs ;-)</p>

<p>If you know your shit, shoot on 6x7 or 6x8, and have the film scanned by a drum, this - in my eyes - is on full par with the 50+ megapixel sensors from HB and LEAF. Perhaps not as fast to work with, but with a very "human" look. And using a D-SLR while fine-tuning my set, saves me [ - and the environment] from using too many polaroids ;-)</p>

<p>Hopefully film will never die.</p>

[stephen_asprey2]

<p>There's not much more that I can add to the comments made here, except that in our business film sales are up. Analyzed carefully, the resurgence started late last year and it was matched by an increase in sales of quality used film cameras.</p>

<p>My personal view is this: So long as digital MF is a $25k+ exercise there will be a market for MF film. The same can be said for 35mm, but less so because the entry point for quality full frame 35mm digital is 10% of that.</p>

<p>The thing to remember too is that many prosumer shooters who made the switch to digital, still have their film gear, because they were offered so little as a trade in on their new digital gear. There is also a lot of concern at the depreciation rate for digital 35mm cameras. This is a disturbing trend because pros were used to much higher investment retention wit their film gear and a much longer space between new models. Now obsolescence sits at two years, so coupled with a high purchase price for the gamera gear plus all the IT infrastructure required, and declining prices for services such as weddings and formal portraits, we see profits declining for most pro's.</p>

<p>I'm not sure where it will end. I do think that sensor technology growth will slow as camera companies stabilise the model replacement race. Just the same, the whole industry is very unstable at the moment.</p>

[adrian_byng_clarke]

<p>It's funny, I just bought 2 rolls of 120 film a couple of three days back for the first time in about 3 years. I've been shooting digital but found that I miss the 6X6 format and large physical negative/positive. Sadly it does look like things have changed in the arena of processing film. My favorite lab (Zona in Somerville, MA) shut down some time last year as well as a few other good local ones. Even where I bought the film, it just seemed that there were fewer choices of film (especially 120/220) available in the store although that's not a problem online. 35mm film can still be processed at just about any 1 hour photo joint -- but medium format seems to always be sent out further and further (and potentially lost).<br>

I agree that film will be around for a while but the decline is clear. Photograhers commited to the format will just need to be more flexible. More mail order (film/processing) and perhaps more at home processing/scanning. Those aren't necessarily bad things.</p>

[jack_welsh]

<p>While I do shoot some 4x5 with a Cambo and Speed Graphic. Most of my shooting is with a MF. Have the Mamiya C220. Universal, RB67 Pro-s, 645 Pro, also a 2x3 speed Graphic , 8 Yashica TLR's, and various folders. So, I will be buying the film as long as they make it.</p>

[diego_di_michele]

<p>yes i do, with mamiya 7ii and hasselblad 500</p>

[timothy_gray]

<p>I use MF film cameras exclusively for both personal work as well as commercial shooting.</p>

[dave wyman]

<p>I love my collection of Rolleiflex cameras. I pulled it out, here in Yosemite, just a few minutes ago. </p>

<p>But to answer your question, no, virtually no one uses medium format anymore, except for a few nerdy types found here and a few people in the advertising/marriage industries. For me, it's digital 99% of the time, while my Rolleis pine in the closet for their occasional resurrection.</p>

[peter_mann3]

<p>Well, these responses are mostly from people who use medium format, where film cameras are the only things affordable really. I used to use it, in Hasselblad and Rollei, but now am totally digital Leica M8.2. Gives same print quality up to 12x18, and I just don't print bigger than that. Scanning film is a time wasting expensive nuisance, film is expensive, darkroom printing is too much work. Times are changing, digital will soon prevail almost everywhere and I predict that in ten years, film be be a total niche affair in all formats. Tempus fugit.</p>

[sfcole]

<p>The original question is actually more relevant to 35mm--this is becoming the orphan medium of photography.</p>

<p>Peter, of course film scanning and darkroom work take time and money. That's why we call it a "hobby," right? And what else is a hobby for if not killing time and money? <br>

Scott</p>

[clark_yerrington]

<p><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3430/3932873099_dfa883b180.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="411" /><br>

mamiya 7, fujichrome pro 100</p>

[bogdan_nicolescu]

<p> </p><div></div>

[spanky]

<p>If film sales are up, I hope we can soon see a drop in prices. I was just at Freestyle in Hollywood today to pick up some Pan F+ in 120. As rumored, Ilford raised prices and now a roll of Pan F+ with sales tax is just a hair under $5.00 a roll. At almost $100 for two bricks, today was the first time I started thinking film is on it's way to becoming a luxury item lol! I was going to pick up some Delta 3200 as well but was afraid to see how much their prices went up. Unfortunately, my wages have not gone up so I'm about at the point where if prices go up again I may have to either simply cut back on the amount I shoot (which probably won't happen) or start learning to like the Freestyle re-branded 120 films which are a lot cheaper. I wish Ilford would consider making film again for the Freestyle brand. Likewise, Kodak and Fuji make film for Freestyle but only in 135. I shoot too much for prices to go higher so I'll either start shooting the off brands or start shooting 135 more and 120 less :(</p>

[brucecahn]

<p>Regarding Scott's comment about 35mm, I have just started shooting 35mm Tri-X again. It is so improved over what it was years ago, that the results in enlargements up to about 5 x 7 1/2 are great. What got me started was the lenses I was getting to shoot digital. I must confess I like the results better than digital. Not because of resolution or grain, but because when all things are considered, I prefer the look of film. I still shoot digital and large format film on a shoot as well. Unfortunately no 120 right now, but it is close enough in the future to regret the sale of some of my Hasselblad accessories. 120 has been around a long time. 50 years ago when 35mm film was new, 120 was considered a normal camera. 35 was a miniature. The film has gotten a lot better since then. Even so, real photography, for me, will always be large format. The fascination with small pieces of film is partly because it seems so novel at this time.</p>

[gerald_di_giampaolo]

<p>I use a Hasselblad and project my glass-mounted transparencies with a Hasselblad projector on a large screen in my living room. For me, there's no more enjoyable way to view my images.<br>

Jerry</p>